The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07.15.02 Council Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 A Proud Past - A Promising Future Committed to Providing High Quality, Timely and Responsive Service to All Of Our Customers AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING July 15, 2002 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS / COMMENDATIONS s. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (7/1/02 Regular) b) Adopt Resolution - Accepting Donation - Parks and Recreation c) Adopt Resolution - Set Assessment Hearing Date - 3rd Street Overlay Project - Engineering d) Goals Program - Administration e) Mission Statement - Administration f) School and Conference - Administration g) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Customer Service Response Report - Administration b) Building Permit Report - Community Development c) Adopt Resolution - Authorize Commencement of AUAR Process - Community Development d) Adopt Ordinance - Shoreland - Community Development e) Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment/Rezone Update for Properties Located at 213 8th Street, 301 Main Street, 305 Main Street - Community Development f) Aquila Communication - Administration Action Taken R61-02 Ord 002-478 Information Received g) NPDES Phase IT League of Minnesota Cities Guide Plan Participation- Engineering h) June 2002 Financial Report - Finance (Supplemental) 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat - Community Development 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 A Proud Past - A Promising Future Committed to Providing High Quality, Timely and Responsive Service to All Of Our Customers AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING July 15, 2002 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS / COMMENDATIONS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open/or Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (7/1/02 Regular) b) Adopt Resolution - Accepting Donation - Parks and Recreation c) Adopt Resolution - Set Assessment Hearing Date - 3rd Street Overlay Project - Engineering d) Goals Program - Administration e) Mission Statement - Administration t) School and Conference - Administration g) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Customer Service Response Report - Administration b) Building Permit Report - Community Development c) Adopt Resolution - Authorize Commencement of AUAR Process- Community Development d) Adopt Ordinance - Shoreland - Community Development e) Comprehensive Guide Plan AmendmentJRezone Update for Properties Located at 213 8th Street, 301 Main Street, 305 Main Street - Community Development t) Aquila Communication - Administration Action Taken Pages 1102-1105 Pages 1106-1107 Pages 1108..1109 Pales 11 JO-1 11 3 Pages 1114-1115 Page 1116 Page 1117 Pa~es 1118-1119 Pages 1120-1121 Pages 1122-1127 Pa,es 1128-1149 Pages 1150-1161 Page 1162 g) NPDES Phase IT League of Minnesota Cities Guide Plan Participation- Engineering h) June 2002 Financial Report - Finance (Supplemental) 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolution - Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat - Community Development 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN 7a-. COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR July 1, 2002 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, Soderberg, Strachan Cordes, Verch Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Ed Shukle, City Administrator; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Dan Siebenaler, Police Chief; Jim Bell, Parks and Recreation Director; Tim Gross, Assistant City Engineer; Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager; Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Manager; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Commissioner Joe Harris, Tim Larson, Inga Weierke, Russ Damlo 4. APPROVE AGENDA Councilmember Soderberg pulled Council Minutes 6/17/02 Regular to abstain from voting as he was absent from that meeting. Councilmember Strachan pulled Council Minutes 5/28/02 Special to abstain from voting as he was absent from that meeting. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Strachan to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Introduce New Employee - Parks and Recreation Mr. Tim Larson was introduced as the new Park Keeper effective July 1,2002. b) Introduce New Employee -Administration Ms. Inga Weierke was introduced as the new Receptionist effective June 24, 2002. c) Commissioner Joe Harris Commissioner Joe Harris discussed several county projects. 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Strachan, second by Ristow approving Council Minutes 6/17/02 Regular. Voting for: Ristow, Strachan. Abstain: Soderberg. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Ristow approving Council Minutes 5/28/02 Special. Voting for: Ristow, Soderberg. Abstain: Strachan. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Strachan, second by Soderberg to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: b) Adopted RESOLUTION R53-02 Approving Gambling Premises Permit- Administration JICb? Council Minutes (Regular) July 1, 2002 Page 2 c) d) Approved Traffic Control Change - Engineering Approved Joint Powers Agreement - Dakota County Wetland Health Education Program - Engineering e) Accepted Resignation - Senior Center Advisory Board - Administration f) Adopted RESOLUTION R54-02 Accepting Donation - Parks and Recreation g) Adopted RESOLUTION R55-02 TH3 Frontage Road Project - Engineering h) Approved Appointment Recommendation - Police - Administration i) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Adopt Resolution - Giles Hillside Addition Preliminary and Final Plat - Community Development The Giles Hillside Addition includes nine single-family lots along with a proposed City tot lot. The Planning Commission recommended a fence along the west side of the plat, separating the homes from Pilot Knob Road. The fence will be installed by the developer. Engineering has requested the developer provide a minimum of 10 feet of easement on both sides of all storm sewer lines. The Planning Commission also recommended a street light at the intersection of 190th Street W and English Avenue. The Parks and Recreation Commission recommended Outlot A as a City tot lot park. Utilities will be constructed within a portion of the boulevard on the west side of English Avenue, due to the existing location of the sanitary sewer and water service mains that followed the original Akin Road alignment. Contingencies on the Preliminary and Final Plat include: 1. The preparation and execution of the Development Contract and approval of the construction plans for grading, storm water and utilities by the Engineering Division. 2. The developer submit the letter of credit and certificate of insurance required under the terms of the Development Contract. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Strachan adopting RESOLUTION R56-02 approving the Giles Hillside Addition Preliminary and Final Plat with the above contingencies. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Resolution - Carr Corner Preliminary and Final Plat - Community Development Mr. Tim Carr proposes to plat 5 lots on 2.7 acres on the northwest intersection of 193m Street and Akin Road. Lot 1 was previously platted in December 2000. The Akin House exists on Lot 2. Lots 3-5 are proposed for subdivision as single- family lots. These lots will access 193m Street. Approval is contingent on the preparation and execution of the Development Contract and approval of the construction plans for grading, storm water and utilities by the engineering division. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Strachan adopting RESOLUTION 1/t!J3 Council Minutes (Regular) July 1, 2002 Page 3 R57-02 approving the Carr Comer Preliminary and Final Plat with the above contingency. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Goals Program - Administration The Management Team and City Council recently participated in a Leadership- Strategic Planning Retreat. During the retreat the following goals were agreed upon: External Goals 1. To manage the city's growth to insure high quality and diversified development. 2. To preserve the city's heritage and small town atmosphere. 3. To address the need for, and create, future transportation routes for the city. 4. To promote and increase the city's industrial and commercial development and redevelopment. 5. To replace the city's aging infrastructure. 6. To improve communication and collaboration with other public jurisdictions. 7. To increase the city's adult recreational opportunities and facilities. 8. To maintain good communication with the public. 9. To preserve and maintain the city's historical buildings. 10. To increase citizen involvement and volunteerism. 11. To improve the city's aesthetics. Internal Goals 1. To provide a positive work environment for employees. 2. To address the need to improve the city's aging municipal buildings. 3. To plan for future staff increases due to the city's growth and for staff replacements due to retirements. 4. To utilize new technologies when and where appropriate. 5. To adapt to the city's increasing diversity and other demographic changes. Council agreed with these goals, but tabled the adoption of the goals until the July 15,2002 Council Meeting so all council members could be present. d) Mission Statement - Administration As part of the strategic planning retreat, the City Council and Management Team worked on developing a mission statement and values statement for the City. Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. Values Statement Excellence and Quality in the Delivery of Services Fiscal Responsibility Ethics and Integrity /lof/ Council Minutes (Regular) July 1, 2002 Page 4 Open and Honest Communication Cooperation and Teamwork Visionary Leadership and Planning Positive Relations with the Community Professionalism Council agreed with the above statements, but tabled adoption of the statements until the July 15,2002 Council Meeting so all council members could be present. e) Metropolitan Council Population Estimates - Administration The following population estimates for Farmington were received from the Metropolitan Council: April 1, 2000 Census population 12,365 April 1, 2000 Census household 4,169 April 1, 2001 population 13,279 April 1, 2001 household 4,538 t) Charter Communications Channel Lineup - Administration Charter Communications will be changing their Music Choice channels as of July 24, 2002. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Strachan: The process for hiring an ALF Administrator is continuing. Councilmember Soderberg: Noticed the tile arches are installed in the Art Park and was very impressed with them. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Strachan, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 8:02 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, ~. /Y?~~ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant //05 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota 55024 (651) 463-7111 . (651) 463-2359 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7; TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator~ S. FROM: J ames Bell Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Accepting Donation - Parks and Recreation Department DATE: July 15,2002 INTRODUCTION A donation for Pollution Prevention Day has been received from Dakota Electric Association. DISCUSSION Dakota Electric Association has generously agreed to donate $1,000 and be a sponsor for Pollution Prevention Day, which will be held in Rambling River Park on Friday, September 13, 2002. Staff will communicate the City's appreciation on behalf of the Council to Dakota Electric Association for this generous donation. ACTION REOUESTED None Respectfully Submitted, -Jv--6~ James Bell Parks and Recreation Director / /C\:G RESOLUTION NO. R -02 ACCEPTING GRANT OF $1,000 FROM DAKOTA ELECTRIC 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 15th day of July 2002 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City has received a grant for $1,000 to be used for Pollution Prevention Day; and, WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to accept such grants. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Farmington hereby accepts the grant of $1 ,000 from Dakota Electric to be used to fund Pollution Prevention Day. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 15th day of July 2002. Mayor Attested to the day of 2002. City Administrator SEAL 110/ 7e, Oty of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.d.farmington.mn.us TO: c;: {J Mayor, Councilmembers, City Administrator FROM: Lee M. Mann, P .E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Consider Resolution - Third Street Overlay and Sliplining Project DATE: July 15, 2002 INTRODUCTION The City Council awarded the Third Street Overlay and Sliplining project at the August 6, 2001 City Council meeting. DISCUSSION The Third Street Overlay and Sliplining project has been completed. BUDGET IMPACT The final project costs will be allocated using the methodology presented at the project hearing. The final project costs and proposed assessment roll will be available prior to the assessment hearing for review. The Council would consider adoption of the final project assessment roll at the August 19th assessment hearing. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the attached resolution directing staff to prepare the assessment roll and setting the Third Street Overlay and Sliplining project assessment hearing for August 19,2002. Respectfully submitted, ~}V1~ Lee M. Mann, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file 1/CJ:6 RESOLUTION NO. R -02 CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PROJECT NO. 01-09- THIRD STREET OVERLAY & SANITARY SEWER SLIPLINING 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 of the 15th day of July, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Members absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution. WHEREAS, a contract has been let and costs have been determined for the following improvements: Project No. Descriotion 01-09 Bituminous Overlay and Sanitary Sewer Sliplining Location Third Street from Ash Street to Spruce Street ; and, WHEREAS, the improvements for the project are complete. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. Staff is hereby directed to prepare the proposed final assessment roll for the project. 2. A hearing shall be held in the Council Chambers in City Hall on the 19th day of August, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. to act upon such proposed assessment at such time and place and all persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and the clerk shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. The clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearings. Notice shall be provided in accordance with the requirements provided under M.S. section 429.061 subdivision 1. This resolution adopted by recorded vote ofthe Farmington City Council in open session on the 15th day of July, 2002. Mayor Attested to this _ day of , 2002. City Administrator SEAL 1107 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463~7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us 7d TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ed Shukle City Administrator SUBJECT: Goals Program DATE: July 15, 2002 INTRODUCTION At the July 1,2002 City Council meeting, I presented the proposed goals program as developed by the City Council and Management Team at the strategic planning retreat held in April of this year. Since that time, the Management Team has also been working on action plans for the carrying out of these goals. DISCUSSION The City Council decided to table these goals and action plans until the July 15, 2002 meeting. BUDGET IMPACT There is no immediate budget impact to approving the above recommendations but some of the goals do involve the use of financial resources to carry out the goal and subsequent action plan. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the goals as developed at the strategic planning retreat and approve the action plans as proposed. 1110 .- ~... 06/27/2002 Goal #1 Goal #2 Goal #3 Goal #4 City of Farmington External Goals Highest Priority To manage the city's growth to insure high quality and diversified development. 1. Establish design standards to complement each other. 2. Encourage a diversity of land uses. 3. Encourage regular discussions with advisory commissions. a. Annual meeting with all groups including mini-breakout sessions with each body b. Meetings with developers twice a year 4. Follow Comprehensive Plan, subject to periodic amendments. To preserve the city's heritage and small town atmosphere. 1. Focus on downtown as Farmington's commercial area. 2. Set design standards for commercial areas to facilitate small town feel. 3. Promote customer service to encourage "small town" attitude while maintaining progressive community goals. 4. Promote neighborhoods by getting people to talk to one another. 5. Continue front porch, sidewalk design in downtown neighborhoods. To address the need for, and create, future transportation routes for the city. 1. Promote transportation improvements jointly with Dakota County through regular and consistent communication. 2. Allocate financial resources for transportation improvements. 3. Encourage development along essential transportation corridors. 4. Continue to work with other jurisdictions in order to coordinate the city's goal of extending transportation corridors. To promote and increase the city's industrial and commercial development and redevelopment. 1. Use redevelopment financing tools. 2. Market commercial and industrial areas. 1/// Goal #5 Goal #6 Goal #7 Goal #8 Goal #9 Goal #10 Goal #11 1//01 To replace the city's aging infrastructure. 1. Analyze the existing conditions and create an infrastructure improvement plan. High Priority To improve communication and collaboration with other public jurisdictions. 1. Take the initiative to communicate openly and consistently. 2. Continue regular meetings with local government entities. To increase the city's adult recreational opportunities and facilities. 1. Study the recreational needs of the community and implement a plan to meet those needs. To maintain good communication with the public. 1. Utilize cable television and other media forms to convey information to the public. To preserve and maintain the city's historical buildings. 1. Foster historic preservation by identifying buildings and preparing for designations. 2. Research grant opportunities to assist in the acquisition or preservation of the city's historical buildings. To increase citizen involvement and volunteerism. 1. Encourage involvement of youth, adult, and senior organizations. 2. Recognize volunteers for their work within the community. To improve the city's aesthetics. 1. Continue existing programs that promote the beautification of the city. 2. Identify new opportunities to enhance the aesthetic character of the community. 2 Goal #1 Goal #2 Goal #3 Goal #4 Goal #5 Internal Goals Highest Priority To provide a positive work environment for employees. 1. Provide positive direction and leadership from city leaders. To address the need to improve the city's aging municipal buildings. 1. Continue to seek public input on future municipal buildings. To plan for future staff increases due to the city's growth and for staff replacements due to retirements. 1. Develop a long term staff and succession plan. To utilize new technologies when and where appropriate. 1. Continue to offer training and development in new technology. To adapt to the city's increasing diversity and other demographic changes. 1. Consider diversity when recruiting new employees and educating current employees. 3 /1/3 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7e. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ed Shukle City Administrator SUBJECT: Mission Statement/V alues Statement DATE: July 15, 2002 INTRODUCTION At the July 1, 2002 City Council meeting, I presented the proposed Mission Statement and Values Statement. These were worked on at the strategic planning retreat held in April with the City Council and Management Team. DISCUSSION The City Council decided to table the mission statement and values statement until the July 15, 2002 meeting. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REOUESTED Adopt the proposed mission statement and values statement. 1//'1 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. Values Statement Excellence and Quality in the Delivery of Services We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional and cost-effective manner. Fiscal Responsibility We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for citizen confidence in government. Ethics and Integrity We believe that ethics and integrity are the foundation blocks of public trust and confidence and that all meaningful relationships are built on these values. Open and Honest Communication We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees. Cooperation and Teamwork We believe that the public is best served when departments and employees work cooperatively as a team rather than at cross purposes. Visionary Leadership and Planning We believe that the very essence of leadership is to be visionary and to plan for the future. Positive Relations with the Community We believe that positive relations with the community and public we serve leads to positive, involved, and active citizens. Professionalism We believe that continuous improvement is the mark of professionalism and are committed to applying this principle to the services we offer and the development of our employees. ///5 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us 7~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and City Administrator f C FROM: Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR SUBJECT: School and Conference - Administration Department DATE: July 15,2002 INTRODUCTION The Minnesota Public Employer Labor Relations Association (MPELRA) Summer C9nference will be attended Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, August 21 - 23, 2002 in Alexandria, MN. DISCUSSION The MPELRA Summer Conference provides Human Resource professionals the opportunity to attend seminars on the latest developments in Labor Relations. The conference is designed to increase the skills and knowledge of the participants through continuing education. It is also an opportunity for attendees to participate in peer discussions about the challenges public employers face regarding labor relations. BUDGET IMP ACT The. cost of attendance is provided for in the 2002 budget. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, ~A 1 P I~ - J(ll1h ~7!-. YJZ~./c/(/,-~/d;:t,--/?tt-t ,. .": / Brenda Wendlandt, SPHR Human Resources Manager /I/~ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us I Cb-. \ f{. TO: Mayor, Council Members, City Administrator FROM: Karen Finstuen, Administrative Services Manager SUBJECT: Customer Service Response Report DATE: July 15,2002 INTRODUCTION In an effort to meet and understand our citizen's needs and concerns, the City has adopted a customer service satisfaction program. This program is designed to ascertain and measure the level of customer satisfaction during service-related interactions. All citizen contacts with the City are documented in terms of complaint type, referring department, priority of service request and service outcomes. Responses are typically anonymous ensuring that citizens with negative experiences are just as likely to respond as those with positive service experiences. Accordingly, it is the City's intent to use this information as a customer service tool to improve and promote the importance of excellence in customer service. DISCUSSION The table below reflects summary statistics generated by Customer Action Request forms over the months of January, February and March, 2002. Summary response percentages are generated through the analysis of monthly reports and include response data from all operating City departments. # of Service # of Surveys Prompt Personally Courteous Month Requests Returned Response Satisfied & Helpful I J aQ.~ua J\~brua. MaFch I Summary 50 21 29 100 29 14 12 55 96% 100% 100% 99% 100% 93% 100% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100% The percentages above reflect the number of actual surveys that indicated a response in any given category. Consequently calculations are based on the actual numbers of responses received which may differ from the number of surveys received as some respondents did not indicate answers to specific survey questions. 1/ /CO On average, ninety percent (90%) of citizen requests for service are handled and addressed within a 1-3 day period. Typically, from that point it requires approximately 90 days or more to receive, process, compile and analyze the survey response data into monthly reports. In terms of how "promptly the City reacted to citizen requests," the degree of "how personally satisfied citizens were with service outcomes," and was City staff "courteous and helpful" in responding to citizen requests, response data suggests a very high level of customer satisfaction in all three categories. In terms of core customer service skills, City staffhave achieved an impressive 100% rating in "courteous and helpful service" and 99% in "prompt service" regardless of how personally satisfied a resident was with service outcomes. This underscores the City's commitment to treat each resident contact as a highly valued customer service relations opportunity . In terms of how personally satisfied a resident is with a specific service outcome, staff responses are, in most cases, controlled by state statutes, City ordinances, available staff resources and/or service priorities. In some cases, responses are a function of a third party who must respond to a given situation. Overall, a summary rating of 98% over the three month period for how personally satisfied a resident was with a City service response is a very respectable response ratio given the wide range of resident concerns. In review of survey comments, residents commented both negatively and positively on a variety of concerns such as unkempt yards, sink holes in an alley, people burning garbage, sod, mailbox and fence damages by snowplows, and garbage can replacements along with staffs prompt and helpful responses. BUDGET IMPACT None. ACTION REQUESTED I Acknowledge the Customer Service Satisfaction reports from January through March, 2002. Staff will continue to present customer service satisfaction data to Council as it becomes available. Monthly report data with department breakdowns are available for Council review upon request. R. espectfully rt'mitted, cK~ ff~ Karen Finstuen Administrative Services Manager 11/9 lOb City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members" ;0 [) e.- City Administrator r r.. \ '-"'\' FROM: Michael Schultz Associate Planner SUBJECT: Second Quarter 2002 Building Report DATE: July 15, 2002 INTRODUCTION The following is a report summarizing the new construction permits issued during the second quarter of 2002 and year to date. DISCUSSION During the second quarter of the 2002 building construction season (April 1, 2002 to June 30, 2002) the City issued new residential building permits for 84 single-family homes and 88 owner-occupied townhouse units for a total of 172 new housing units. The City also issued 2 permits for new commercial construction. For the fIrst half of 2002 the City has issued permits for 145 new single-family homes and 140 owner occupied townhome units for a total of 285 new owner occupied housing units. This is up significantly from the total of 213 housing unit permits issued during the fIrst half of 2001. None of the housing permits issued during 2002 have included any new rental housing units. The average building valuation of the single-family homes during the fIrst half of 2002 was $164,009, up from $150,300 through the same period last year. The average building valuation of the townhome units for the fIrst half of the year was $111,633, up from $102,491 during the same period in 2001. (Note that the valuation averages do not represent the overall sale or market value of the home; since it does not include the value of the lot or any amenities added to the home that are not part of the building code formula). ACTION REQUIRED No action is required, for City Council information only. /1c?O ~ 5 o .- c. - N G)UC) .... ::J C) I.bN ~ en I 't:CLt) G)Ocn ~Ocn ca 3: T'" ::J G) Oz ~ .Q :::. ~! e ... ee ... e... ee ... ee ee e ...e e... N ee e z, r:! --= I) '2- e... ee... ee ...e ... ee eee ee eee ee ...e ... ...e ee... ee Ne N ee e -I ~ GI Zl1. - -i '~ ~ ~JI eN e...1') Ne e...1') e... ......1') ...e 00... CO eee ee eoe Ne eN'" eN N l1. - 1ii S~~ NN 00 I') It) a;~ "'0000 It) It) "';Xlt) N... NI')OO It) It) ...0>1') 0> It) C!1t)1') ...N ~~i I')N It) ~i:5 10;: o>,..~ ,..,..~ "'00 CD ~ ,..00 "'IO~ "'00 ,..~~ ,..~ ...1') ...e ...,.. ~ ......... ... ... ......... ... ... ~ - S~ c~ ~ ee eee ee eee ee eee ee oee ee oee e~ OO~ l:!e eel:! ee e ~ ,- z8 J: - ~,r ~~~ oe eee ee eee CO eee ee eee ee ONN ee ~e~ ee eee ee e ~~~ ...... :Z 'E J! - ~H o;! ~e:sl e~ NN~ o~~ ......00 ~~ elt)lt) ~;X ;2;;:~ ~i e CO oee ee ee ......N 1')...0> ;! l1. i- t) ::J_ ~I ee eee e oe ee ee ceo eN eN'" ee eee ON CON ee oee CO e ZGI l1. I- ~ ~~ NOO CD 1')0> ... :gN CD~ It) It) ;o;X~ NO> ~ ...j:! It) It)e 1')1') ,..0> Neoo ;0 OON :e~ ;0;2; It) ~dl CD 0> ,.. ,..e 00 ...'" "'1') "'00 ,..,.. It)N ... 00 CD oot;j CD'" I')e,.. ...... ;! I') ...N ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ B B .l:l r= .l:l I- B .l:l I- B B .. It) =1 0 ,.. 0 00 =S! 0 =~ ~~ !! ! '2 "2 =8: ! '2"2 1il 1:1 "2 =8: ! '2 "2 =8: ! '2"2 1il -g "2 ! '2"2 ! ~ "2=~ ~ C N I') ...... NI') ...... ... N I') ...... N .., ...... N.., ..,.... ... N .., ..,.N NI') ..,... It) 1 ,.. 00 0> ~ ~ ~ 0> ~ ~ ~ ~ ... N : i.....-2:: /I~I /O~ City of Farmington 325 Oak. Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members City Administratorf.'. ~L/ FROM: Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution - Authorize Commencement of AUAR Process DATE: July 15,2002 INTRODUCTION Newland Communities has informed the City that they are preparing to develop the Seed/Genstar Orderly Annexation Area located east of the City's boundary, south of the Lakeville and Empire Township, west of Trunk Highway 3 and north of the proposed 195th Street extension. The property consists of950 acres and is shown on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan as a mix of single-family, multi- family, and commercial land uses. DISCUSSION The Minnesota Environmental Policy Act recognizes that human activity has a profound and often adverse impact on the environment and therefore, requires that large-scale developments be analyzed to understand the potential of those environmental impacts. The scale of potential development in the Seed/Genstar Orderly Annexation Area is expansive. Therefore, City staff wants to take a proactive approach to the planning of this area. In doing so, staff proposes to initiate a comprehensive approach to analyzing the potential environmental impacts of development within the Seed/Genstar Orderly Annexation Area. The most commonly used forms of environmental review are the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) and the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB), the body that implements the rules for environmental review, has established an alternative form of environmental review that is better suited to the City's needs for the Seed/Genstar Orderly Annexation Area, and would substitute for an EA W or an EIS. The alternative form of environmental review is an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). The AUAR process was developed in order to conduct an environmental review of an entire geographical area in a timely, efficient manner and to consider overall development scenarios for larger areas rather than incremental impacts of individual projects over a period of time. The AUAR must address substantially the same issues as an EA W or an EIS and use procedures similar in effect to those of the EA W and EIS. The advantages of conducting an AUAR rather than an EA W or EIS include the following: /I~a 1. The environmental review procedure is incorporated into the planning process rather than reacting to individual development proposals. 2. The review of public infrastructure (water, sewer, roadways) is accomplished at the same time and thereby provides a comprehensive analysis of the infrastructure in a certain geographical area. 3. The land owners and/or developers benefit by eliminating the need for environmental reviews of individual projects and thereby provides a comprehensive planning approach in a certain geographical area. The AUAR is typically approved after a 6 to 12 month time period, depending upon the size of the development and information needed for the AUAR. The AUAR needs to include the following information: 1. A land use plan designating the existing and proposed location, intensity, and extent of use of the land and water for residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and other public and private purposes. 2. A public facilities plan describing the character, location, timing, sequence, function, use, and capacity of existing and future public facilities of the local governmental unit. The public facilities plan must include the following parts: a) A transportation plan. b) A sewage collection plan. 3. An implementation plan describing public programs, fiscal devices, and other actions to be undertaken to implement the comprehensive plan. 4. An analysis of the proposed development's impacts on the environment, including surface waters, natural resources, rare species, ground water, soils and erosion, traffic impacts (air and noise), historic resources, and other impacts. 5. A Mitigation Plan that describes specific strategies the developer and ROU will use to avoid, minimize, or mitigate for the environmental impacts identified in the AUAR analysis. The Mitigation Plan will be adopted by the City along with the final AUAR analysis. RGU Requirements The AUAR process requires a governing body to oversee the process. A responsible governmental unit (ROU) is required to verify the accuracy of the environmental documents and comply with the environmental review processes in a timely manner. Because the Seed/Oenstar Orderly Annexation Area is currently within Empire Township, the township would ordinarily have jurisdiction as the ROU. Since the property will be annexed into the City in the near future, the City of Farmington would like to be the ROU for the AUAR process. Before the AUAR goes out for public comment, 2 //d6 the City must have either a) completed the annexation of the area, or b) obtained a letter of agreement from Empire Township that the City may act as the ROU. Over the past months, numerous discussions have occurred concerning the ROU issue with Empire Township. The Empire Town Board planned to take formal action on the ROU issue at its meeting on July 9,2002. Information about the Town Board's action will be provided at the July 15, 2002 City Council meeting. Under the EQB's Environmental Review Program, the City is required to adopt an order for the review of the environmental impacts on the Seed/Oenstar Orderly Annexation Area. The order needs to specify the boundaries of the geographic area within which the review will apply and specify the intended nature, location, and intensity of the development. Since the 2020 Comprehensive Plan identifies this geographic area, these requirements have been met. Therefore, the attached resolution requests the ordering of the AUAR for the Seed/Oenstar Orderly Annexation Area. Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates will prepare information for the AUAR. Because Bonestroo has most of the base maps and information concerning this area, a large portion of the information has been gathered. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the attached resolution ordering the environmental review of the area known as the Seed/Oenstar Orderly Annexation Area consistent with the intents and purposes of the Rilles of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board under the provisions for Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). Respectfully Submitted, td Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Steve Juetten, Newland Communities 3 //c:lV RESOLUTION NO. ORDER FOR ENVIROMENTAL REVIEW FOR SEED/GENSTARORDERLY ANNEXATION AREA 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 15th day of July, 2002 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the current land uses in the Orderly Annexation Area depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A are predominately agricultural, and; WHEREAS, the City anticipates future development to evolve over the next 15 years in the SeedlGenstar Orderly Annexation Area, as reflected in the 2020 Land Use Map in the City's adopted 2020 Comprehensive Plan for the area, consisting of residential and commercial uses; and WHEREAS; the City wishes to comply in good faith with the requirements of the Rules of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB); and WHEREAS, the City has determined that the scale and intensity of anticipated development in the SeedlGenstar Orderly Annexation Area has the potential for significant environmental impacts, and; WHEREAS, because of the scale of future development and the sensitive environmental resources in the SeedlGenstar Orderly Annexation Area, the City has determined that it is most appropriate to plan for the area under the provisions of the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) process as described in Section 4410.3610 of the EQB Rules, and; WHEREAS, the City has an adopted comprehensive plan meeting the criteria of the EQB Rules allowing the City to proceed with the AUAR; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Farmington City Council hereby orders the environmental review of the area known as the SeedlGenstar Orderly Annexation Area consistent with the intents and purposes of the Rules of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board under the provisions for Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). The following conditions shall govern this review: 1. The specific boundaries of the SeedlGenstar Orderly Annexation Area for review under this order are depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A. Seed/Genstar Orderly Annexation Area. 2. The City Council orders that the scenario to be considered in this review is the proposed future land use as adopted in the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan, with the anticipated nature, location, and intensity of development as illustrated and tabulated on the attached map. 2020 Comprehensive Plan attached hereto as Exhibit B. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 15111 day of July, 2002. Mayor Attested to the _ day of July, 2002. City Administrator /1';;.5 /\ " City Boundary I~ L-J City Parcel Map ~ AUAR Study Area ~ ~ ~ ;:J n ~ C LU c c n ~ - r- -1 ~ ,~ ~ I ~ u I - - ~ Legend Source: Dakota County land & Survey Department 5102 EXHIBIT A Newland Communities AUAR Study Area ,. ~.,. :TI ~.~ =:J ~"~~ .'i //,/J A.UA~ Study Arel~./ {' I ~ ~~~~ %; ~ V v.~.~ 07 ~ ~~ ~ ~ I I ~:, ~ ~ "I LU. ~~ ~ l! r- 1~\1 1: ~ n ~ ~\ ~ ~ "f' T Lr in it\) LJ '1- 1affii\lll ~ ~ ~\ ~J r IE -t-"-L ~ c= E H ~ D~~ \L r- I C.S.A.H. 50 lJI n ~ ImiiItlliiHJffid =' I I u ~ '"( IlMJlIillJffiliiIffilllI ~ ~= 111I d....f I-! 6 a r-~ STAlEHWY50 -.-Lk ~ ~ ~ Ii .FJFTh~, ~~r HIlHlIID L d r--- : I I '--- en Scale 2500 0 2500 , 0.5 0 0.5 , 5000 Feet . , N W+E 1 Miles , s Created by the City of Farmington Planning Division. 7/02 / /0j'C::. EXHIBIT B City of Farmington 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan Newland Communities AUAR Study Area u 1U.:lj m w , ~: 't {\ :~ ~ ,"" ,; " E!; ll~ ~ !Ii! iii' ~~ ~ ~ '" ,~ i!t IIil ~ 'lIl W' ., iIill :{ !i:'" I!!\; ~ "If,;m ~ 'II: IF ~ <ll' I~.. ~ ii~ ~ A',I!#\. "'1 ~ ~ ~ ~ iIiI; :~ ~ <=> ~ u ~ Legend 2020 Comprehensive land Use Plan Commercial Industrial low Density low Medium Medium Density NA Park/OS Urban Reserve Restricted Development Public/Semi-public High Density Env Sen Under Business Park N W*E '\!I ;r, ;~.. 1/07 :/ lOci City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Me9?)::>ers, City Administrator Ci. (. Lee Smick, AICP ftf V Planning Coordinator FROM: SUBJECT: Ordinance Amending Section 10-6-18: Shoreland Ordinance, Section 10-6-18: Manufactured Homes, Section 10-6-19: Industrial Park Design Standards, Section 10-6-20: Spruce Street Commercial Design Standards, Section 10-6-21 Business Park Design Standards, Section 10-6-22: Site Plan Review, and Section 10-2-1: Definitions DATE: July 15,2002 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington proposes to amend Section 10-6-18 of the Farmington City Code: Shore land Ordinance, amend the numbering of Section 10-6-18: Manufactured Homes, Section 10-6-19: Industrial Park Design Standards, Section 10-6-20: Spruce Street Commercial Design Standards, Section 10-6-21 Business Park Design Standards, and Section 10-6-22: Site Plan Review, and add definitions to Section 10-2-1 pertaining to the Shoreland Ordinance. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Shore land Ordinance after review of the document on June 11, 2002. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) have required that the City prepare and adopt a Shore land Ordinance because the City is located within the Vermillion River Watershed. Before expansion of the Empire Treatment Plant begins, all communities within the watershed are required to provide a Shoreland Ordinance. The Shoreland Ordinance is a responsibility of the local government. The ordinance regulates the use and development of the shore lands on public waters and thus preserves and enhances the quality of surface waters, conserves the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provides for the wise use of waters and related resources. The Shore land Ordinance applies to any land within 300 feet from the top of the bank of a DNR-protected watercourse. Pat Lynch, Area Hydrologist, has submitted comments to the City concerning existing developments within the affected zone and they are as follows: "Existing development as of the date of enactment of the ordinance will be allowed to continue. Those developments not meeting the provisions of the shore land ordinance will be allowed to continue, Those not meeting the provisions of the shore land ordinance in effect at the time are //~? considered legal non-conformities. Additions, improvements, or redevelopment of these legal non-conformities must be done in conformance with the provisions of the new ordinance. Proposals not meeting the ordinance would then be subject to a variance or conditional use permit process, depending on the particular action proposed," With the Shoreland Ordinance in place, the DNR will review any notices for public hearings including plats, rezonings, variances, and conditional use permits. This procedure allows the DNR to assist the City in protecting the resource. Shorelands are categorized as agricultural or tributary. The Vermillion River is designated as agricultural and the remaining rivers/streams (North Creek, Middle Creek, South Creek) in the City are designated as tributaries. For the protection of these rivers/streams, lot widths are standardized depending on use and the designation of the river/stream. Any lot within the 300-foot affected zone needs to comply with the minimum lot width standards as follows: Agricultural Tributary Single 150 75 Duplex 225 115 Triplex 300 150 Quad 375 190 There is no minimum lot size requirement for rivers and streams. Setbacks are required along rivers and streams depending on sewered or unsewered property adjacent to the waters. The following are setback requirements from designated rivers/streams: Water Classification Structures Unsewered Sewered Sewage Treatment Systems Agricultural River Tributary 100 100 100 50 100 75 For the Vermillion River, there is currently a 100-foot setback from the center of the river for wetland protection. Therefore, the 100-foot setback was carried over to the Shoreland Ordinance requirements. Any impervious surface (including structures, buildings, and pavement) within the 300-foot affected area shall not exceed 25 percent of the lot area. Buffer areas are also required along the river or stream and are proposed to correspond with current wetland buffer requirements, Additional amendments to the ordinance include numbering revisions for Section 10-6-18: Manufactured Homes, Section 10-6-19: Industrial Park Design Standards, Section 10-6-20: Spruce Street Commercial Design Standards, Section 10-6-21 Business Park Design Standards, and Section 10-6-22: Site Plan Review. Each number will advance by one, Additionally, Section 10-2-1 needs to be amended to include definitions that apply to the Shoreland Ordinance. / /d?7' REOUESTED ACTION Consider adoption of an ordinance amending Section 10-6-18: Shore1and Ordinance, renumbering Section 10-6-18: Manufactured Homes, Section 10-6-19: Industrial Park Design Standards, Section 10- 6-20: Spruce Street Commercial Design Standards, Section 10-6-21 Business Park Design Standards, and Section 10-6-22: Site Plan Review, and adding definitions to Section 10-2-1 pertaining to the Shoreland Ordinance. R;Z~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator ~~o CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 CHAPTER 6 OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE CONCERNING SHORELAND MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 10-2-1 of the Farmington City Code is amended to add the following defInitions: BOATHOUSE: a structure designed and used solely for the storage of boats or boating equipment BUILDING LINE: a line parallel to a lot line or the ordinary high water level at the required setback, beyond which a structure may not extend toward the water. COMMISSIONER: the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources. DECK: a horizontal, unenclosed platform with or without attached railings, seats, trellises and other features, attached or functionally related to a principal use or site and at any point extending more than three feet above ground. DWELLING SITE: a designated location for residential use by one or more persons using temporary or movable shelter, including camping and recreational vehicle sites. EXTRACTIVE USE: the use of land for surface or subsurface removal of sand, gravel, rock, industrial materials, other nonmetallic minerals, and peat not regulated under Minnesota Statutes, sections 93.44 to 93.51. INTENSIVE VEGET A nON CLEARING: the complete removal of trees or shrubs ill a contiguous patch, strip, row or block. ORDINARY HIGH WATER LEVEL: the boundary of public waters and wetlands; an elevation delineating the highest water level which as been maintained for a suffIcient period of time to leave evidence upon the landscape, commonly that point where the natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic to predominantly terrestrial. For watercourses, the ordinary high water level is the elevation of the top of the bank of the channel. For reservoirs and flowages, the ordinary high water level is the operating elevation of the normal summer pool. ORDINARY HIGH WATER LEVEL SETBACK: the minimum horizontal distance between a structure, sewage treatment system, or other facility and an ordinary high water level, sewage treatment system, top of a bluff, road highway, property line, or other facility. //3/ PUBLIC WATERS: any waters as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 105.37, subdivisions 14 and 15. RESIDENTIAL PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT: a use where the nature of residency is non- transient and the major or primary focus of the development is not service-oriented. For example, residential apartments, manufactured home parks, time-share condominiums, townhouses, cooperatives, and full fee ownership residences would be considered as residential planned unit developments. To qualify as a residential planned unit development, a development must contain at least five dwelling units or sites. SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM: a septic tank and soil absorption system or other individual or cluster type sewage treatment. SEWER SYSTEM: sewer system means pipelines or conduits, pumping stations, and force main, and all other construction, devices, appliances, or appurtenances used for conducting sewage or industrial waste or other wastes to a point of ultimate disposal. SHORE IMP ACT ZONE: land located between the ordinary high water level of a public water and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50 percent of the structure setback. SHORELAND: land located within the following distances from public waters: 1,000 feet from the ordinary high water level of a lake, pond or flowage; and 300 feet from a river or stream, or the landward extent of a floodplain designed by ordinance on a river or stream, whichever is greater. The limits of shorelands may be reduced whenever the water involved are bounded by topographic divides which extend landward from the waters for lesser distances and when approved by the Commissioner. SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC SITE: any archaeological site, standing structure, or other property that meets the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places or is listed in the State Register of Historic Sites, or is determined to be an unplatted cemetery that falls under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, section 307.08. A historic site meets these criteria if it is presently listed on either register or if it is determined to meet the qualifications for listing after review by the Minnesota state archaeologist or the director of the Minnesota Historical Society. All unplatted cemeteries are automatically considered to be significant historic sites. STEEP SLOPE: land where agricultural activity or development is either not recommended or described as poorly suited due to slope steepness and the site's soil characteristics, as mapped and described in available county soil surveys or other technical reports, unless appropriate design and construction techniques and farming practices are used in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance. Where specific information is not available, steep slopes are lands having an average slope over 12 percent, as measured over horizontal distances of 50 feet or more that is not bluffs. SUBDIVISION: land that is divided for the purpose of sale, rent, or lease, including planned unit developments. TOE OF THE BLUFF: the lower point of a 50-foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. TOP OF THE BLUFF: the higher point of a 50-foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. 101247 2 //..3~ WATER-ORIENTED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OR FACILITY: a small, above ground building or other improvement, except stairways, fences, docks and retaining walls, which, because of the relationship of its use to a surface water feature, reasonably needs to be located closer to public waters than the normal structure setback. Examples of such structures and facilities include boathouses, gazebos, screen houses, fish houses, pump houses and detached decks. SECTION 2. Sections 10-6-18, 10-6-19, 10-6-20, 10-6-21, and 10-6-22 of the Farmington City Code shall be renumbered as Section 10-6-19, 10-6-20, 10-6-21, 10-6-22 and 10-6-23, respectively. SECTION 3. Title 10, Chapter 6 of the Farmington City Code is hereby amended by adding a new Section 18 to read as follows: 10-6-18: SHORELAND MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS (A) Purpose and Authorization: 1. Purpose. The uncontrolled use of shorelands affects the public health, safety and general welfare by contributing to the pollution of public waters, negative impacts on fish and wildlife habitat, and by impairing the local tax base. Therefore, it is in the best interests of the public health, safety and welfare to provide for the wise subdivision, use and development of shorelands of public waters. The Legislature of Minnesota has delegated responsibility to local governments of the state to regulate the subdivision, use and development of the shorelands of public waters and thus preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters, conserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provide for the wise use of waters and related resources. The City of Farmington hereby recognizes this responsibility. 2. Statutory Authorization. This Section is adopted pursuant to the authorization and policies contained in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 103F, Minnesota Regulations, Parts 6120.2500-6120.3900, and the planning and zoning enabling legislation in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462. (B) General Provisions: 1. Jurisdiction. The provisions of this Section shall apply to the shorelands of the public water bodies as identified in subsection (D) of this Section. Pursuant to Minnesota Regulations, Parts 6120.2500-6120.3900, flowage less than 10 acres in size is exempt from the requirements under this Section. 2. Application. This Section shall apply to any applicant for a subdivision approval, or permit for grading, excavation, or mining in shoreland areas issued after (date of ordinance approval). This Section applies to all land, public or private, located within the City. 101247 3 //.33 3. Abrogation and Greater Restriction. It is not intended by this Section to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this Section imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this Section shall prevail. All other Sections of the City Code inconsistent with this article are hereby repealed to the extent ofthe inconsistency only. 4. Compliance. The use of any shoreland of public waters; the size and shape of lots; the use, size, type and location of structures on lots; the installation and maintenance of water supply and waste treatment systems, the grading and filling of any shoreland area; the cutting of shoreland vegetation; and the subdivision of land shall be in full compliance with the terms of this Section and other applicable regulations. 5. Interpretation. In their interpretation and application, the provisions of this article shall be held to be minimum requirements and shall be liberally construed in favor of the City and shall not be deemed a limitation or repeal of any other powers granted by State Statutes. 6. Severability. If any section, clause, provision, or portion of this article is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this article shall not be affected thereby. (C) Administration: 1. Variances. The Planning Commission shall hear and decide requests for variances in accordance with the rules that it has adopted for the conduct of business. When a variance is approved after the Department of Natural Resources has formally recommended denial in the hearing record, the notification of the approved variance required in Paragraph 2 of this subsection shall also include the summary of the public record/testimony and the findings of fact and conclusions that support the issuance of the vanance. 2. Notifications to the Department of Natural Resources. Copies of all notices of any public hearings to consider variances, amendments, or conditional uses under local shore land management controls must be sent to the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources or the Commissioner's designated representative and postmarked at least ten days before the hearings. Notices of hearings to consider proposed subdivisions/plats must include copies of the subdivision/plat. A copy of approved amendments and subdivisions/plats, and final decisions granting variances or conditional uses under local shoreland management controls must be sent to the Commissioner ofthe Department of Natural Resources or the Commissioner's designated representative and postmarked within ten days of final action. (D) Shoreland Classification System and Land Use Districts: 1. Shoreland Classification System. The public waters of the City of Farmington have been classified below consistent with the criteria found in Minnesota 101247 4 //,3 Y Regulations, Part 6120.3300, and the Protected Waters Inventory Map for Dakota County, Minnesota. a. Agricultural Rivers Vermillion River b. Tributary Rivers/Streams North Creek Middle Creek South Creek Location T. 113N, R. 20W, Section 1 and T. 114 N, R. 19W, Sections 29, 30, and 31 And R. 20W, Section 36 T. 1 14N, R. 20W, Sections 3, 4,8,9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and T. 114N, R. 19W, Sections 18, 19, and 30 T. 114N, R. 19W, Section 30 and T. 114N, R. 20 W, Sections 15, 16, 17,21, 22, 25 and 26 T. 114N, R.20W, Sections 19,20,29,32, 33, 34, 35, and 36 * All protected watercourse in the City of Farmington shown on the Protected Waters Inventory Map for Dakota County, a copy of which is hereby adopted by reference, not given a classification above shall be considered "Tributary." The shore land area for these waterbodies shall be shown on the Official Zoning Map. 2. Land Use Districts for Rivers and Streams. The land use districts identified in Chapter 5, and the allowable land use therein for the given classifications of waterbodies, shall be properly delineated on the Official Zoning Map for the shorelands of Farmington. P = permitted use C = conditional use a. Residential District Single residential Semipublic Parkslhistoric sites Extractive use Duplex, triplex, quad res. Forest management b. High Density Residential 101247 Agricultural Tributary P C P C P P P C P C P P 5 //35 101247 Residential PUD Single residential Semipublic Parkslhistoric sites Duplex, triplex, quad res. Forest management C P C P P P C P C P P P c. General Use District Commercial Commercial PUD* Industrial Public/semi-public Extractive use Parkslhistoric sites Forestnnanagennent c C N C C P P C C C C C P P *Limited expansion of a commercial planned unit development involving up to six additional dwelling units or sites may be allowed as a permitted use provided the provisions of the City's PUD requirements are satisfied. 3. Uses and Upgrading of Inconsistent Land Use Districts. a. The land use districts adopted in Section 10-5-4, as they apply to shore land areas and their delineated boundaries on the Official Zoning Map, are not consistent with the land use district designation criteria specified above. These inconsistent land use district designations may continue until revisions are proposed to change either the land use district designation within an existing land use district boundary shown on the Official Zoning Map, or to modify the boundary of an existing land use district shown on the Official Zoning Map. b. When a revision to a land use district designation on a river or stream is proposed, the land use district boundaries and the use provisions therein for all shore land on both sides of the river or stream within the same classification within the jurisdiction of this Section must be revised to make them substantially compatible within the framework of this Section. If the same river classification is contiguous for more than a five-mile segment, only the shoreland for a distance of 2.5 miles upstream and downstream, or to the class boundary if closer, need be evaluated and revised. c. When an interpretation question arises about whether a specific land use fits within a given "use" category, the Planning Commission shall decide the issue. When a question arises as to whether a land use district's boundaries are properly delineated on the Official Zoning Map, this decision shall be made by the City Council. 6 //3~ d. When a revision is proposed to an inconsistent land use district provision by an individual party or landowner, this individual party or landowner will only be responsible to provide the supporting and/or substantiating information for the specific parcel in question. The City Council will direct the City Planner/Community Development Director to provide such additional information for this waterbody as is necessary to satisfy the requirements under subsections 1 and 2 above. e. The City Council shall make a detailed finding of fact and conclusion when taking final action establishing that the revision, and the upgrading of any inconsistent land use district designations on said waterbody, are consistent with the enumerated criteria and use provisions of this subsection. (E) Zoning and Water Supply/Sanitary Provisions: 1. Lot Area and Width Standards. a. Rivers/Stream Lot Width Standards. There is no minimum lot size requirement for rivers and streams. The lot width standards (in feet) for single, duplex, triplex, and quad residential lots created after the date of enactment of this Section for the river and stream classifications are the following: Agricultural Tributary Single 150 75 Duplex 225 115 Triplex 300 150 Quad 375 190 b. Additional Special Provisions. Residential subdivisions with dwelling unit densities exceeding those in the table above can only be allowed if designed and approved as residential planned unit developments. Lot width standards must be met at both the ordinary high water level and at the building line. These standards assume that publicly owned sewer system service is available to the property. 2. Placement, Design and Height of Structures a. Placement of Structures on Lots. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Where structures exist on the adjoining lots on both sides of a proposed building site, structure setbacks may be altered without a variance to conform to the adjoining setbacks from the ordinary high water level, provided the proposed building site is not located in a 101247 7 //3"/ 101247 shoreline buffer area. Structures and on-site sewage treatment systems shall be setback (in feet) from the Ordinary High Water Level as follows: Water Structures Sewage Treatment Classification Unsewered Sewered Systems Agricultural River 100 100 100 Tributary River/ 100 50 75 Stream Where averaging is allowed, structure setbacks cannot be less than 50 percent ofthe minimum setback. b. Design Criteria for Structures (1) Water-Oriented Accessory Structures. Each lot may have one water-oriented accessory structure not meeting the normal structure setback requirements of this Section if this water-oriented accessory structure complies with the following provisions: (a) The structure or facility must not exceed 10 feet in height, exclusive of safety rails, and cannot occupy an area greater than 250 square feet. Detached decks must not exceed eight feet above grade at any point. (b) The setback of the structure or facility from the ordinary high water level must be at least 10 feet. (c) The structure or facility must be treated to reduce visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shore lands by vegetation, topography, increased setbacks, or color, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. (d) The roof may be used as a deck with safety rails but must not be enclosed or used as a storage area. (e) The structure or facility must not be designed or used for human habitation and must not contain water supply or sewage treatment facilities. (2) High Water Elevations. Structures must be placed in accordance with any floodplain regulations applicable to the site. (3) Structures Without Water-Oriented Needs. Structures without water oriented needs must be placed on non-riparian lots, or be double the structure setback, or screened from view from 8 //3~ 101247 public waters by vegetation, topography, or both. 3. Shoreland Buffer Areas. a. Application. For lots of record created after (date of ordinance adoption), a buffer area shall be maintained abutting all rivers and streams. Buffer vegetation shall be established and maintained in accordance with the requirements that follow. b. Buffer Area Vegetation Requirements. Buffer area vegetation shall be considered adequate when the buffer has a continuous, dense layer of perennial grasses, flowers, trees, and/or shrubs that have been undisturbed for at least 10 consecutive years. Vegetation shall be considered unacceptable if: (1) It is composed of noxious weeds; (2) Topography or sparse vegetation tends to channelize the flow of surface water; (3) For some other reason the vegetation is unlikely to retain nutrients and sediment. c. Requirements for Replanting and Maintenance of Buffer Areas. Where buffer areas, or a portion thereof, are not vegetated, or have been cultivated or otherwise disturbed within the past 10 years of the permit application, such areas shall be re-planted and maintained according to each of the following standards: (1 ) Buffer areas shall be planted with a seed mix containing 100 percent perennial native plant species, except for a one-time planting of annual nurse or cover crop such as oats or rye. (2) The seed mix to be used shall consist of at least 15 pounds pure live seed (PLS) per acre of native grass seed and 1 pound PLS per acre of native forbs. Native grass and native forb mixes shall contain no fewer than four (4) and five (5) species respectively. (3) The annual nurse or cover crop shall be applied at a rate of 20 pounds per acre. (4) Native shrubs may be substituted for forbs. Such shrubs may be bare-root stock and shall be planted at a rate of 60 plants per acre. Shrubs shall be distributed so as to provide a natural appearance and shall not be planted in rows. 9 //3'7 101247 (5) Buffer plantings along the Vermillion River corridor or other areas along trout stream habitat shall follow planting guidelines included in the Farmington Surface Water Management Plan. (Approved tree species are listed on Figure 4-5 in the Farmington Surface Water Management Plan.) (6) Native grasses and forbs shall be planted by a qualified contractor by using a drill designed for native grass seeding or by broadcasting or hydro seeding at Minnesota Department of Transportation rates (MNDOT Standard Specifications for Construction). (7) All seeded areas shall be mulched immediately with clean straw at a rate of 1.5 tons per acre. Mulch shall be anchored with a disk or tackifier. (8) Buffer areas (both natural and seeded) shall be protected by erosion control measures as determined by the City. These must be employed during construction until permanent ground cover is established to prevent siltation of the buffer area and wetlands. (9) A walking trail may be established within a shoreland buffer area. The trail should be constructed to minimize erosion. An undisturbed area of vegetative buffer at least 10 feet in width should remain between the trail and the wetland edge or the top of the stream bank. (10) Applicants may obtain from the City a set of standard seeding and planting specifications for buffer areas, which meet all the City requirements. d. Buffer Identification. Buffer areas shall be identified by permanent monumentation acceptable to the City. In residential subdivisions, a monument is required for each lot. In other situations, a monument is required for each three hundred (300) feet of wetland edge. e. Vegetation Clearing or Removal. The clearing and removal of vegetation in the buffer area is prohibited, except for selective clearing and pruning of individual trees that are dead, diseased, noxious weeds, or hazards. Owners are encouraged to leave dead trees and branches in the buffer area, because they are part of the native natural environment and provide necessary habitat to may birds and native wildlife. f. Dumping in Buffer Areas. Dumping yard waste in buffer areas, including leaves and grass clippings, is prohibited by this Section. 10 //ra Stream type Trout stream Manage 1 Manage 2 Greenway Corridors 101247 g. Determination of Buffer Areas. All buffer areas are measured from the ordinary high water level as marked in the field. h. Minimum Buffer Areas. The following buffer sizes are minimum requirements. Classification of shoreland areas and buffer sizes are consistent with the City's Wetland Buffer Standards: Average Buffer Width Minimum Buffer Structure Setback from Outer Edge of Buffer 10 10 10 100 50 25 100 30 20 25 20 10 i. Buffer Averaging. The City may recommend buffer averaging for buffers in areas designated Manage 1, Manage 2 or Greenway Corridors in instances where it will provide resource protection to a valuable adjacent upland habitat, or allow for reasonable use of property, provided that the total buffer area on-site contained in the buffer area remains the same. No buffer averaging is allowed for trout stream buffers. j. Public Trail Exemption. Public trails that are routed through stream buffers for specific interpretive purposes shall be exempted from this requirement. k. Maximum Width. If the area of the buffer has a pre-construction slope of 12 percent or greater, the buffer shall be at the maximum width for the applicant's stream classification. The use of a meandering buffer area to maintain a natural appearance is encouraged, but not required in areas of flat topography. 1. Stream Buffer Area Mitigation. Where alteration of a stream buffer area is approved and mitigation is required, mitigation must result in equal or improved buffer function and value. Mitigation plans must address water quality protection and wildlife habitat. The following criteria shall be required for stream buffer area mitigation. (1) Buffer Replacement. Buffers must be required at a 1:1 ratio. The buffer requirement associated with the stream classification will be required for the replacement buffer, unless replacement is occurring adjacent to a stream with a higher classification. In this case, the buffer area requirement for the 11 //~I higher stream classification will apply. (2) Mitigation Goals. Mitigation shall be equal to or shall improve buffer function and value. The function and value will include protection of water quality and provision of wildlife habitat. (3) Wildlife Diversity. Mitigation involving the buffer area shall provide landscaping for nesting, food for wildlife, wildlife cover, and utilize a diversity of native flora (trees, shrubs, grasses, herbaceous plants) to encourage wildlife diversity. (4) Trout Streams. Mitigation in buffer areas along trout streams shall require landscaping that protects trout habitat, such as trees, shrubs, and tall native grasses that shade the stream. (5) Area of Mitigation. Stream buffer mitigation should be undertaken on site. If this is not feasible, mitigation should occur locally within the subwatershed. If this is not possible, mitigation should occur outside the subwatershed, elsewhere in the City. (6) Buffer Plantings. Stream buffer area plantings that are completed for mitigation shall meet the standards for plantings specified in subsection (E)(4). 4. Shoreland Alterations. Alterations of vegetation and topography will be regulated to prevent erosion into public waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve historic values, prevent bank slumping, and protect fish and wildlife habitat. a. Vegetation Alteration. (1) Standards. Removal or alteration of vegetation, except of agricultural uses as regulated in subsection (E)7 is allowed subject to the following standards: (a) Intensive vegetation clearing within the shore zone and on steep slopes is prohibited. (b) In shore impact zones and on steep slopes, limited clearing of trees and shrubs and cutting, pruning, and trimming of trees is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accommodate the placement of stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, livestock watering areas, beach and watercraft access areas, and permitted water-oriented accessory structures or 101247 12 //~~ 101247 facilities, provided that: (i) the screening of structures, vehicles, or other facilities as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions, is not substantially reduced; (ii) existing shading of water surfaces IS preserved along rivers; and (iii) the above provisions are not applicable to the removal of trees, limbs, or branches that are dead, diseased, or pose safety hazards. (2) Exemption. Vegetation alteration necessary for the construction of structures and sewage treatment systems and the construction of roads and parking areas regulated by subsection 5 of this Section are exempt from this subsection. b. Topographic Alterations/Grading and Filling (1) Grading and filling and excavations necessary for the construction of structures, sewage treatment systems, and driveways under validly issued construction permits for these facilities do not require the issuance of a separate grading and filling permit. However, the grading and filling standards in this Section must be incorporated into the issuance of permits for construction of structures, sewage treatment systems, and driveways. (2) Public roads and parking areas are regulated by subsection (E)4 of this Section. (3) Notwithstanding Items (1) and (2) above, a grading and filling permit will be required for: (a) the movement of more than ten (10) cubic yards of material on steep slopes or within shore or bluff impact zones; and (b) the movement of more than 50 cubic yards of material outside of steep slopes and shore and bluff impact zones. Excavations where the intended purpose is connection to a public water, such as boat slips, canals, lagoons, and harbors, must be controlled by local shoreland controls. Permission for excavations 13 //~3 may be given only after the Commissioner has approved the proposed connection to public waters. (4) Conditions for Approval. The following considerations and conditions must be adhered to during the issuance of construction permits, grading and filling permits, conditional use permits, variances and subdivision approvals: (a) Grading or filling in any type 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 wetland must be evaluated to determine how extensively the proposed activity would affect the following functional qualities of the wetland*: (i) sediment and pollutant trapping and retention; (ii) storage of surface runoff to prevent or reduce flood damage; (iii) fish and wildlife habitat; (iv) recreational use; (v) shoreline or bank stabilization; and (vi) noteworthiness, including special qualities such as historic significance, critical habitat for endangered plants and animals, or others. *This evaluation must also include a determination of whether the wetland alteration being proposed requires permits, reviews, or approvals by other local, state, or federal agencies such as a watershed district, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, or the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant will be so advised. (b) Alterations must be designed and conducted in a manner that ensures only the smallest amount of bare ground is exposed for the shortest time possible; (c) Mulches or similar materials must be used, where necessary, for temporary bare soil coverage, and a permanent vegetation cover must be established as soon as possible; (d) Methods to mlll1mlZe soil erosion and to trap sediments before they reach any surface water feature must 101247 14 //r'l 101247 be used; (e) Altered areas must be stabilized to acceptable erosion control standards consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation districts and the United States Soil Conservation Service; (f) Fill or excavated material must not be placed in a manner that creates an unstable slope; (g) Plans to place fill or excavated material on steep slopes must be reviewed by qualified professionals for continued slope stability and must not create finished slopes of 30 percent or greater; (h) Fill or excavated material must not be placed in bluff impact zones; (i) Any alterations below the ordinary high water level of public waters must first be authorized by the Commissioner under Minnesota Statutes, section 105.42; CD Alterations of topography must only be allowed if they are accessory to permitted or conditional uses and do not adversely affect adjacent or nearby properties; (k) Placement of natural rock riprap, including associated grading of the shoreline and placement of a filter blanket, is permitted if the finished slope does not exceed three feet horizontal to one foot vertical, the landward extent of the riprap is within ten feet of the ordinary high water level, and the height of the riprap above the ordinary high water level does not exceed three feet. 5. Placement of Roads, Driveways, and Parking Areas. a. Design Requirements. Public and private roads and parking areas shall be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography to achieve maximum screening from view from public waters. Applicants shall provide documentation by a qualified engineer establishing that all roads and parking areas are designed and constructed to minimize and control erosion to public waters consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation district, or other applicable technical materials. b. Setbacks. Roads, driveways, and parking areas must meet 15 l/y5 101247 structure setbacks and must not be placed within bluff and shore impact zonest when other reasonable and feasible placement alternatives exist. If no alternatives exist, they may be placed within these areas, and must be designed to minimize adverse impacts. c. Shore Impact Zones. Public and private watercraft access ramps, approach roads, and access-related parking areas may be placed within the shore impact zones provided the vegetative screening and erosion control conditions of this subpart are met. For private facilities, the grading and filling provisions of this Section must be met. 6. Stormwater Management a. Natural Drainageways. When possible, existing natural drainageways, wetland, and vegetated soil surfaces must be used to convey, store, filter, and retain stormwater runoff before discharge to public waters. b. Reduction of Runoff Volumes. Development must be planned and conducted in a manner that will minimize the extent of disturbed areas, runoff, velocities, erosion potential, and reduce the delay runoff volumes. Disturbed areas must be stabilized and protected as soon as possible and facilities or methods used to retain sediment on the site. c. Design Criteria. When development density, topographic featurest and soil and vegetation conditions are not sufficient to adequately handle stormwater runoff using natural features and vegetation, various types of constructed facilities, such as diversion, settling basinst skimming devicest dikes, waterways, and ponds may be used. Preference must be given to designs using surface drainage, vegetation, and infiltration rather than buried pipes and man-made materials and facilities. d. Impervious Surface Coverage. Impervious surface coverage of lots must not exceed 25 percent of the lot area. e. Documentation Required. When constructed facilities are used for stormwater management, documentation must be provided by a qualified engineer that they are designed and installed consistent with the field office technical guide of the local soil and water conservation district. f. Stormwater Outfalls. New constructed stormwater outfalls to public waters must provide for filtering or settling of suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before discharge. 7. Agricultural Use Standards. 16 //</~ a. General Requirements. General cultivation fanning, grazing, nurseries, horticulture, truck fanning, sod fanning, and wild crop harvesting are permitted uses if steep slopes and shore impact zones are maintained in permanent vegetation or operated under an approved conservation plan (Resource Management Systems) consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation districts or the United States Soil Conservation Service, as provided by a qualified engineer or agency. The shore impact zone for parcels with permitted agricultural land uses is equal to a line parallel to and 50 feet from the ordinary high water level. b. Animal Feedlot Standards. Animal feedlots must meet the following standards: (1) new feedlots must not be located in the shoreland or watercourses or in bluff impact zones, and must meet a minimum setback of 300 feet from the ordinary high water level of all public water basins; and (2) modifications or expansions to existing feedlots that are located within 300 feet of the ordinary high water level or within a bluff impact zone are allowed if they do not further encroach into the existing ordinary high water level setback or encroach on bluff impact zones. (F) Nonconformities: All legally established nonconformities as of the date of this Section may continue, but they will be managed according to applicable state statutes and other regulations of this community for the subjects of alterations and additions, repairs after damage, discontinuance of use and intensification of use. 1. Construction on nonconforming lots of record. a. Lots of record in the office of the county recorder on the date of enactment of local shoreland controls that do not meet the requirements of subsection (E)(l) of this Section may be allowed as building sites without variance from lot size requirements provided the use is permitted in the zoning district, the lot has been in separate ownership from abutting lands at all times since it became substandard, was created compliant with official controls in effect at the time, and sewage treatment and setback requirements of subsection E 1 of this Section are met. b. A variance from setback requirements must be obtained before any use, sewage treatment system, or building permit is issued for a lot. In evaluating the variance, the board of adjustment shall consider sewage treatment and water supply capabilities or constraints of the lot, and shall deny the variance if adequate facilities cannot be provided. 101247 17 //'1 '7 101247 c. If, in a group of two or more contiguous lots under the same ownership, any individual lot does not meet the requirements of subsection (E) 1 of this Section, the lot must not be considered as a separate parcel of and for the purposes of sale or development. The lot must be combined with one or more contiguous lots so they equal one or more parcels of land, each meeting the requirements of subsection (E) 1 of this Section as much as possible. 2. Additions/Expansions to nonconforming structures. a. All additions or expansions to the outside dimensions of an existing nonconforming structure must meet the setback, height and other requirements of subsection (E) of this Section. Any deviation from these requirements must be authorized by a variance. b. Deck Additions. Deck additions may be allowed without a variance to a structure not meeting the required setback from the ordinary high water level if all of the following criteria and standards are met: (1) The structure existed on the date the structure setbacks were established; (2) A thorough evaluation of the property and structure reveals no reasonable location for a deck meeting or exceeding the existing ordinary high water level setback of the structure; (3) The deck encroachment toward the ordinary high water level does not exceed 15 percent of the existing setback of the structure from the ordinary high water level or does not encroach closer than 30 feet, whichever is more restrictive; and (4) The deck is constructed primarily of wood, and IS not roofed or screened. 18 1/</9: SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage and publication according to law. ADOPTED this _day of July, 2002, by the City Council of the City of Farmington. CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor ATTEST: By: City Administrator SEAL By: City Attorney Published in the Farmington Independent the _ day of ,2002. 101247 19 / /yt~ IOe, City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us FROM: Mayor and Council ~embers, _ City Administrator S J. \vfV Michael Schultz, Associate Planner TO: SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Rezone of Properties Located at 213 8th Street, 301 Main Street and 305 Main Street DATE: July 15, 2002 INTRODUCTION On April 23rd, City Staff recommended amendments to the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan and the rezoning of certain properties as a result of the adoption of the City's new Zoning Code. The City Council at its May 6, 2002 meeting decided to table any action with regard to the properties located at 213 8th Street, 301 Main Street and 305 Main Street to allow staff to have follow-up discussions with the homeowners concerning the proposed rezoning of their respective properties. DISCUSSION Staff mailed to each of the property owners a proposed "Letter of Understanding" and an explanatory cover letter that outlined the proposed rezoning of each respective property and the potential impacts (i.e., maintenance of the property, property taxes, etc.). The letter also invited the property owners to contact city staff with any questions or concerns that they might have. After reviewing the letter and having some discussions with staff, each of the three property owners either decided they would not be in favor of the rezoning of their respective properties or declined to take a position on the issue. The City Council at its June 6, 2002 meeting directed staff to take the appropriate actions to amend the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and/or rezone the properties in accordance with the expressed or presumed wishes of the property owners. After having reviewed the recently approved Zoning Map with respect to the surrounding zoning districts of each respective property, City staff recommended the following amendments to the Planning Commission at its July 9th meeting: 213 8th Street Staff recommends amending the 2020 Comprehensive Plan from Institutional to Low/Medium Residential; this is consistent with the land use designations located to the south and east of the property. Staff also recommends that the property be rezoned from R-l (Low Density) to R-2 (Low/Medium Density Residential), which would also be consistent with the surrounding residential zoning districts (see attached zoning maps). //50 301 & 305 Main Street Staff recommends rezoning both properties from the existing R-2 (Low/Medium) Zoning District to the R-T (Residential Transition) District, which would be consistent with the south half of Block 29, Town of Farmington and also would be consistent with the City's 2020 Land Use Designation of High Density. The proposed R-T designation would allow single-family uses to continue as a permitted use, but would also allow multi-family uses with conditional permit approval. The Planning Commission reviewed the recommended amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City Council for each of the properties. ACTION REQUESTED Staff recommends the following actions: Consider adopting the attached resolution amending the 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Map for the property located at 213 8th Street from Institutional to Low/Medium Residential. Consider adopting the attached ordinance rezoning the following properties: 213 8th Street from R-I to R-2 (Low/Medium Density Residential); 301 Main Street from R-2 to R-T (Downtown Transitional); 305 Main Street from R-2 to R-T (Downtown Transitional) ;a:~~ Michael Schultz - Associate Planner Cc: Hazel Bunde, 213 8th Street Craig Gott, 301 Main Street Roger Thorn, 305 Main Street //5/ RESOLUTION NO. AMENDING THE 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED 213 8TH STREET 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 15th day of July, 2002 at 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Member introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, the City of Farnlington has initiated a Comprehensive Land Use amendment for the property located at 213 8th street within the City of Farnlington from Institutional to Low/Medium Density; and WHEREAS; the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the 9th day of July, 2002 after notice of the same was published in the official newspaper of the City and proper notice sent to surrounding property owners, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission accepted public comments at the public hearing and recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City Council, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Farmington hereby amends the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for the property located 213 8th Street within the City of Farmington from Institutional to Low/Medium Density contingent upon the following: I. Subject to Metropolitan Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment application. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farnlington City Council in open session on the 15th day of July, 2002. Mayor Attested to the _ day of July, 2002. City Administrator I/~ ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE, THE FARMINGTON ZONING ORDINANCE, REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTIES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. The zoning map of the City of Farmington established by the City Code, Section 10-5-1, is amended by rezoning the property legally described on attached Exhibit 'A' from R-l (Low Density Residential) to R-2 (Low/Medium Density Residential). SECTION 2. The zoning map of the City of Farmington established by the City Code, Section 10-5-1, is amended by rezoning the property legally described on attached Exhibit 'B' from R-2 (Low/Medium Density Residential) to R-T (Downtown Transitional). SECTION 3. The Zoning Map of the City of Farmington shall not be republished to show the aforesaid zoning, but the City Planner shall appropriately mark the Zoning Map on file in the City Hall for the purposes of indicating the rezoning provided for in this ordinance. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage. ADOPTED this _ day of Farmington. , by the City Council of the City of CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor ATTEST: //.53 EXHIBIT A Legal description of property rezoned from R-l to R-2: 213th Street legally described as: the South 140 feet of the West 190 feet of the North of the southwest ~ of the northwest ~ except for that part for State Trunk Highway 3. (Property Tax Number 14-03200-020-27) EXHIBIT B Legal description of property rezoned from R-2 to R- T: 301 Main Street legally described as Lot 7, Block 29, Town of Farmington except for that part of the former railroad right-of-way. (Property Tax Number 14-77000-080-29) 305 Main Street legally described as Lot 8, Block 29, Town of Farmington except for that part of the former railroad right-of-way. (Property Tax Number 14-77000-081-29) //55 c co - C- O) en ::> -0 c co --.J 0) > -- en c 0) ..c 0) L- a. E o o o N o N +-' C 0) L- L- ~ o E "' ~ ~ C z.~ 'en I- l1l e l1l in ~ c: C/) < e (j; ~ F!: ., '0 < c: . '0 Ql '0 ~~=~ ~ c: 0. Ql ("') ; ~.QQ. >oJ: 0 :J Qi~.Q t::1-C)al ..J ~ ?: Ql g! 8. &.SP~ N ~ 0 Ql .~.5 -g eo e m III a.a::UJ: - ::;;3=> C: ~ .5 :fj ~ ., l1l a. e e '0<< ~ ~ ~ Ql ~~~~ C ~ ~~ Ql 'iij ~ c: c: U) E c: ,_ Ql Ql => 0. Ql ~~~"C >- ~8.2 en 2:'~~7ij~ ~ ~a[%!4)~ ns(J)cc..J>-EC:~- cu..l.(J)eD2:,f9 ~bQ)mC:~.~~~~~Ec:O~~ ~-EE~c:"C c:~-~m4)"C4)E oSc: c:a..Q)CDEQ)Q).~<lJU)~Ba::c: co ~ .g .g 0.0 ~ .= C E u; ~ :g 0 .g c: 0 ~E> >EJJ'O~E~~~~~~i ua~~8~~~~8~~~~~~~ '~D f; MH HNn~ 1 <] Ii ~ DDllllllllfill. ~ ------- / I-- f-- - - I--- 1S HlL - I--- l- T I 1 ,--- C/) '" I I--- 3:: :J '-- I-- 0 ~ ..J - I-- ..J ~ - - ~ 0 =j I-- T I I I-- 1S Hl9 I--- T I--- I--- I =r I - I--- I--- ~ 1S HlS - I . l- I- l- I--- en en l- I- en W en en w z z <e :::i: ~ u ii: ..J ::> :::i: w 0 0:: 0- en 1:: Gl 1S HlP 1S a~E .",. IT I-- 1/6~ +-' C 0) E -0 C Q) E <( C co - C- O) en ::> -c~ c~ COo.. ....Jo Q) L- >c- -- en Q) C-c Q) C ..c~ ~cc a. E o o o N o N -0 Q) en o a. o L- C- >- ..... 'w c ~ ~ .....J € MH ~Nn~lL S I- .en I I- M ~ ('oJ I I I ~ - - ..., I-- "'0 Q) I-- ~ '> 1-3 >- +-' 'en c (]) o E ::l "'0 (]) ~ ~ o ....J ~ ~- ---.-,.... / - - "' z.~ ~ I l1l ~ l1l < ~ ., '0 < '0 Ql '0 c: 0. Ql ~ ~ ~ ?: ~ g! ~ 0 '" .~.s -g ::!: 3::> C ~ .5 12 rJ ~ Q. ~ e '0 < < .8 ~ ~ Q) u.. ;2. :e en C ~ cD~~~ ~ .~ ~~~~ gQ)g- ~ ~~~-g ~ .g~~Q)~ ~"'l1ll1ll1l ., ~0.0.~C:l1l co(/) C 1: -J >-E c:~_ m..!..U)c mE -g~~~~~~~'~~-~~~i~~ 5 19 c: c: a. Q) Q) E Q) Q).~ en ~ Q. ti a:: c: m c: e e 0.0 ~ .2 0 E 1ii ~ .~ 0 'C c: e ~Q)'5'5E -~~E~~~~~(Q'5 ~~c:c:o~~Q).~o~~~(QQ)€c UoWWU~~::;;J:u~m~a.a::::>w <~DI~DDIIIIIII.~I in (j; c:. Ql ~~=-g e-~~c5 ~ 8,.2l~ eo e co a.a::UJ: - ,.; i-- ~~ - - - ..LS H..LO ~ I-- - - l- i-- ~; - - <i - - r I--- - I-- - - ..LS H..L6 - =:I 1--- - - I--- - I--- 1--- .is H.lL c :::l ~ ~ ~ ~ q I--- sEJ EJ .is H.l9 SR g //5' en .... u C"C .800 0)"- cO "c: 0) c "- c o ,+-N 0.... ~a5 .- s..... Os..... ::J o Q) (Y 18 t:j tj D I:!~ ! II I I~ B B B ~~ ~ \ITIJDID B B B ~ ~ ,\DIIill B ~ ~ ,\ \ rn:m B I t. e,\ \ I I I B I : t::3 \ ('I') B I nc~ R : w B ~ I R~ ~ l B rnrrm I rnrrm : ~ UillJlJ _i S' ...... I ~ . ":-c ,,'c,'C" , T"- N I:';,' '. ' ,'.' f~ ., ~ :::~:tl ~ ~I"'. ! ...... ". ".' ! ~"".'" .:",;: " . .' .". ':' rz '.' --: :[ ) " ',., ,~,' ....' .:' ,', " . '., ~-: '", L _ . " ' ',' I I. "'( ~- :-.... ., , ' "', .. I. ' '.' .' .... I . " '. '. ....' --:: ;.J::. ..... ..'.0: .' " II I, . . . . :. . , N I ~ ~ ~~ ~~ t--.... ->- lilt:: :C~'J ~e Ula. "\ \ ~ I ...... (/)1 .. ~.'.'.'., --.J I'''' ';.,... w ..' .".. :.+ ",U . , , "' z.~ ~ 'C c: ~ j j Q) :::- j ~t --l ,5 _"'il:.- . ]~~~]",- ~ L5 i i HiHH ~ .. l=.~i() _=" -l!f~~!i i ~ 1! ~ .d..p,,~u "~e i"'~;:~ ~ ,,~. !.S.aa.a:ai::ll~Q.", Q.il.i!of"ilii .:. ~~~~ ~ ~"3~li:~li! :~~ ~lAs!i ~ ~~I ~ j ~hlaH~~~~HlHUl~ ~.o~ ~ f h~:i;:i::i:;1;~di;f~;U:i~~~~ <<'-Il+llI_... II IIlt:I':1 1 - f----- I--- - - - - - - - f----- - I--- 1S H11. ;..' 4@~ """". .....:-4 , ','. ;--..,..'.'.,.,. . ,.~ --:- I V" ' - , 1S H19 . .;.. .:," " " I t. .;:~ .' .; ...:..-." . I , ., .' .. . " '1' , .. . . ' .,' .... ,.. ' . " . .' " .. .: //6?? +-' U .C Coo 0.- +-'0 0> cO> .- c E"c CO 0 LLN '+- -0 o (J) ~cn ~O Og- s..... a.. ....... CJ) .t= ....... co ('I') ~ C\l ....... I 11 [j tj tj 0 ~ T Q) Q) "- IIII ~ "' . 1 z.~ 1 ~ III ~ 1 "0 c: >- ~ Q) - '" 1 1 OJ ii : I I I .3 j ii~ 1 · -] t.- ii ttj...... C ~ ~ i ~ i~. b~~i C') 1 i ~~i-O t ~~~].~. .' ~ " Jt:.;:1;O......=- -&!c!f ~i~ i i~i ~ :!!!~lDl1&iu~f,~~l.f~~ ~ I 1 H~~ !~!hJ~H~HHp~JI i ~ ca ~".!! O~:g !t.I:lt",,EU)';; i:J 1~ .~ 0::: 1 ( ~ a; i ~ J '!~;; ~_t!! ~ ~ ~ ~~a.~l_8 i.~ 5.G~ ~ ~ !~~~j;~;b~~Jt~;f~~~~~~~~ ~ 1 <<~+~fi.".11 l1Ift1H111 ~~([[J ~ 1 LL. I ~ 1 lllllll JI 1 - OT I UJJ I i--- 1 - nllWJ I _I - S ~ I r- r ~ -~ r (J ~ - 01:: ~fJ - - N en a. \ I N ,_.1,_ " I a:: -..-- ......"'-..-'. "".- ",,--' ':'..,' I .,. l? ',,' I.....".. ':'i>"":' l{iJ< .Dtl ."i":) ". .'. : ;,. "'.., ,. .',. "",,<>,}~ ~ J- .is H.iL ~*,:" V "'Co';;; W,./ "".'I/'ctl !}:t"'':i'.: I:""":",'i ~-,- ....". .,...,....,..:;,.:. -,- ~ " .. '., ... ~ ...:..........i '.' ...J "h: I' . """'." " ( "",., -- .. W --- ...J .' .,i I' ".: ',iT '.' ".' ... ,.. .,.., ~ '. ,/.. ---'T i!.'.'. )1 '.'..; ... . = ....,. . L I 'o' '. ....'. '. '..:... "i,..:i,.::. ..... ".,. .'. . ,'. '., ".i) .: .iii ..,.,. I.. I .\ I'.,.........:i:...,.........'h: /..,',. i,} .....}".;, . ..... ...,........... ! I ....... .........': . ....' , k I i.;': ,/1;1 , '," " ., .., 11: .'...,'.....,~ .is H.i9 I. 11 '.,.../f':1 I';i'c~ I..'i:" ;;;.....'.'.;i.1 I . "1 '..".::"'; t Q) c.. o "- a.. //57' (/) +oJ () c.c Q+oJ +oJ(/) 0).- cO .- 0) E c '-- .- ,~ O+oJ ~~ .- '-- 0:; o +-' Q.) Q.) S- +-' CI) C "' ~.~ ~ "0 c: ~ j j Q) ~ i 'ii~ -l 1 i~l&i-- - - ~ E .~.~.lj ~ Dw!..~ t f~~!l~ i .-. 6 ~=._ __ _~~.~~~i : i:' ;;- t" -.i~.PH 'hElij~....~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~~i~~~wO~.2dz.ii ~ 'iH ~ dHi~Hr~HHH~h i ~~ i~ ~ ~:t~~81f:<i':~!~I~f88..!. ~~] g ! S:;:Q:;:;;T!;.I~:;;;T;;--!~ ::EOlL Q. Z ~<Q.lDlDCDa:d!::..!.u)lDa:a:lXa:a:a:i3Ca: "l""" o M en Q.) :e Q.) C- O S- a.. //~o Q) <J.) ... +-' C/) C 'co ~ LO o ('f) oes -+oJ U .C -+oJ C W 0.- -+oJO 0>0> C .- c E.c L- 0 LfN '+- "'C o Q) >oW -+oJ 0 .- Q.. Uo L- a.. "' z.~ ~ \i : '2_i ::- -~~~1i_ ~ H~~~H ~ iz:oiii .g~ .. G i ~ t ~ ~~~l~~ >: u u___o . "'00:: ,,-a II i ~=~=u__ ?<<~~j~~~ ~ 6 . ~~i!l~~u~i'~r~ji 1 ~ f {. p~ j ~.8 q: i H H ~ i ~ ~ Ho g !. h~1 iH~i~;~HhMJ~ dlHg ~ ~~~;.h~!;.l~:;;;i~~a~<< HH ~ ~~~:i;d::i:h~ "<<rl II.HI I ~~+~~.... /0+ 2665 145th Street West PO Box 455 Rosemount, MN 55068-0455 Tel 800-303-0752 Fax 651-423-3306 June 28, 2002 Dear Public Official: In today's fast-changing world, Aquila is also changing to deliver more up-to-date, modem service options to meet our customers' needs. We continue to expand our 24-hour-a-day, 7-days-per-week payment options and customer service center capabilities. As a result, the local office facility has become less of a necessity for payment processing and customer service transactions. With these new options in place, effective August 3, we will discontinue accepting walk-in customer transactions at our Rosemount office. We now offer many new, convenient options for customers to do business with us. They can pay their bill, request service and transact other services such as turn service on or off, by phone or on the Internet. Enclosed for your information is a list of the customer payment options that we now provide. As the company begins to promote these new options, use of mail-in payments, telephone and Internet has grown. Year-to-date through May, transactions via these options have increased by approximately 96,000. We will continue to maintain our local facility in Rosemount for service personnel and certain field operations support functions. As a result of discontinuing accepting walk-in ClEtomer transactions, up to two customer service positions in Rosemount would be affected. However, the affected associates will have the opportunity to apply for other job openings within the company. You can continue to rely on Aquila to deliver prompt, reliable service to our customers. We are committed to Rosemount, and will continue to support the community through our civic involvement. If you have questions or would like to discuss these changes or any other aspect of our service, please don't hesitate to contact me at (507) 529-5117. Sincerely, ~.._~~~ Rory Lenton Community Relations Director //~of City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 . .e. - www.cI.J.armmgton.mn.us /~ TO: M C 'I b C' Adm" 1: S. ayor, OunCl mem ers, Ity Imstrator FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: NPDES Phase II - League of Minnesota Cities Guide Plan Participation DATE: July 15, 2002 INTRODUCTION The City of Farmington, along with many other cities in the state, is required to submit a permit application as part of the implementation of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, Phase II. The League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) is proposing that the cities involved get together to fund the creation of a guide plan that would be used as a base for the permit that needs to be submitted (see attached letter from the LMC). DISCUSSION The requirements set forth under NPDES Phase II are part of the implementation of the Federal Clean Water Act. Several info sheets summarizing the background of the program and the required elements of the permit the City will need to submit is attached after the LMC's letter. The permit applications are due from each city by March 10,2003. In summary, Farmington will need to submit a permit application that outlines a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) addressing the reduction or elimination of pollutant discharges to the City's storm water system. The program will include implementation of various "Best Management Practices", ordinance controls, monitoring, and community education. There are several compelling reasons for the City to participate in the preparation of the League's Guide Plan: Efficiency - The creation of a guide plan would eliminate a duplication of effort for those parts of the permit that would be the same for all cities, Cost savings - Some cities have estimated their total NPDES Phase II Permit development cost at $50,000 or more. Using the Guide Plan at a cost of only $5,000, a city could complete half or more of the Permit and SWPPP using in-house resources. 11~3 Support from the MN Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) - The MPCA strongly supports this effort by the League. MPCA staff will review and "pre-approve" the Guide Plan. The MPCA considers the Guide a significant step in moving this entire program forward quickly and effectively. Consistency - This is a new program with a tight schedule. The cities need to submit their permit applications by March 10, 2003, The Guide Plan will help make the Permit Applications and SWPPP's more consistent. This will facilitate review by the MPCA and provide a degree of security for the MPCA and the cities in the event of review by the United State Environmental Protection Agency (USEP A). Strength in Numbers - If there is some unforeseen glitch in the program that makes it difficult or impossible to meet the program deadlines, all the participating cities will be in the same situation, working toward the same goal of meeting the requirements, It would be more difficult for the MPCA or USEP A to take enforcement action against an entire group of cities working in good faith to accomplish the requirements than against a single City, BUDGET IMPACT The cost to participate in the preparation of the guide plan is estimated to be $5000 (see attached letter), Funds in this amount are available in the City's storm water fund for this purpose. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the participation of the City of Farmington in the League of Minnesota Cities Guide Plan preparation to be used in preparing the City's permit application for the NPDES Phase II requirement. Respectfully Submitted, ~)n~ Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file //~sI LMC 145 University Avenue West, St. Paul MN 55103-2044 Phone: (651) 281-1200 (800) 925-1122 Fax: (651) 281-1299 TDD (651) 281-1290 League 0/ Minnesota Cities Cities promoting excellence June 7, 2002 Dear Mayor, City Engineer and City Administrator/Clerk: Your NPDES Phase II Permit Application will be due on March 10.2003. Will you be ready? The League of Minnesota Cities can help. A group of League members concerned about this stormwater regulation has met and decided to explore the possibility of developing a Permit "Guide Plan", This Guide Plan would be designed to help MS4 cities complete 50% to 65% of their NPDES Phase II Permit Application and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) using in-house resources. A rough estimate ofthe cost to develop the Guide Plan is $250,000. This cost would need to be split between 50 or more permitees to make it affordable and cost-effective - $5,000 per city. If more cities join this effort, the cost for each city will be lower, If enough cities express an interest in the project, a steering committee will be formed to direct the project. The steering committee would be involved in selecting a consultant and providing assistance to the League in managing the endeavor, The reasons to develop the Guide Plan are: . Efficiency Instead of every city struggling to start from the beginning, the League could develop the Guide Plan and distribute it to many MS4 cities, . Cost savings Some cities have estimated their total NPDES Phase II Permit development cost at $50,000 or more. Using the Guide Plan at a cost of only $5,000, a city could complete half or more of the Permit and SWPPP using in-house resources, . Support from the MN Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) The MPCA strongly supports this effort by the League. MPCA staffwill review and "pre-approve" the Guide Plan, The MPCA considers the Guide a significant step in moving this entire program forward quickly and effectively. . Consistency This is a new program with a tight schedule. The Guide Plan will help make the Permit Applications and SWPPP's more consistent. This will facilitate AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER 1/~5 review by the MPCA and provide a degree of security for the MPCA and the cities in the event of review by the USEP A. The first step in developing the Guide Plan is to assemble a Steering Committee to determine what elements should be in the Guide, Our first pass at defining these components is: Guide Plan Elements Permit task checklist . Required tasks . When they need to be done Checklist for existing city programs . Extensive list of possible existing programs . Cover full range of city departments . Match programs with: o Minimum Control Measures o Measurable Goals List of acceptable BMP's . Extensive list of possible BMP's . Match programs with: o Minimum Control Measures o Measurable Goals Ordinances . List required ordinances o Include recommended provisions Employee training, educational materials & programs, state & county programs . List of sources and descriptions of available materials and programs . Match materials and programs with: o Minimum Control Measures o Measurable Goals . Provide contact information . Provide forms letters and agreements for outside providers Funding options . Provide details and options for funding mechanisms The tasks remaining after a city completes its work with the Guide Plan might be: . Fill in the gaps . Write the Application & the SWPPP . Public meetings . Respond to comments . Implement SWPPP . Prepare Annual Reports AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER I/~~ What do we need from your city? If the Guide is to be useful, we need to move ahead quickly, We need funding to pay for the development of the Guide Plan, We need representatives from cities to join the Steering Committee, Most importantly, we need responses quickly from the cities regulated under this program to the following questions: 1, Is your city interested in joining with other cities to develop the Guide Plan? 2, Will your city contribute approximately $5,000 to the development of the Guide Plan? 3. Will a representative from your city participate on the Steering Committee? Please respond to Remi Stone at the League of Minnesota Cities before June 28, 2002 at 651-281-1256 or rstone@lmnc,org, The Steering Committee will meet during July, For additional information about NPDES Phase II and the Guide Plan, please attend the session on these subjects at the LMC Annual Conference - June 19,2002, 10:45 AM to 12:00 noon, Sincerely, r';:fY/~ Jim Miller Executive Director Cc: Commissioner Karen Studders, MPCA Don Jakes, MPCA Gene Ranieri, AMM Christopher Hood, Flaherty & Hood Janette Brimmer, MCEA AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER //~7 NPDES Phase II Storm-Water Program Background: . To meet the requirements of Section 402 of the federal Clean Water Act, NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System), Minnesota developed a State Storm-Water Discharge Permit Program, These requirements were known as Phase I. . Phase I required effected parties (landfills, airports, garages, mining operations, and manufacturing, cities of 100,000 or greater, MPLS and St. Paul) to be permitted and to develop storm-water Management Plans. Phase I also required permitting of all construction sites that disturbed 5 or more acres ofland and required implementation ofBMP's, Best Management Practices, to eliminate discharge of sediment off site. . Phase II is intended to further reduce adverse impacts to water quality and aquatic habitat by instituting the use of controls on the still unregulated sources of storm water discharges that have the greatest likelihood of causing continued environmental degradation. WHY? "Urban Runoff" . When rain falls or snows melt, the runoff washes pollutants off our streets, parking lots, industrial storage yards, and lawns. Urban runoff carries a mixture of pollutants from our cars and trucks, outdoor storage piles, lawn fertilizers, and pesticide spills, Efficient systems of ditches, gutters and storm sewers carry the polluted runoff to nearby lakes, wetlands, and streams, bypassing wastewater treatment systems, "Construction Runoff" . Soil excavation and grading operations loosen large amounts of soil that can flow or blow into storm drains if handled improperly, Soil erodes due to a combination of decreasing soil stability, increased runoff, and increased flow velocity. These factors create a sediment load within the runoff that is carried to nearby lakes, wetlands, and streams, WHAT'S NEW ABOUT PHASE II? Cities/Municipalities . Municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4's) in urban areas with populations over 10,000 and fewer than 100,000 will be required to obtain a NPDES permit. . MS4' s are defined as a conveyance or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains), . Communities under 10,000 may be added if: . Located in areas with discharges to sensitive waters. . Local water quality does not meet water quality standards, . Areas of expected high growth. . Located near an urban area. . Populations will be based on the 2000 census, the deadline for issuance of general permits for MS4's and construction activity is December of2002, and by March 2003 all communities must obtain permit coverage, plan implementation within first term (5 years). //~~ What will the City/Municipality programs need to cover? (A listing ofthe Communities and Counties effected by phase II is available.) . Phase II takes a "Best Management Practice" (BMP) approach, providing the community the flexibility to decide what the local program should include, . Programs will need to establish measurable goals, BMP's, required to meet these goals, and measures to track their performance and progress, i,e. 1 Illicit discharge detection and elimination, i.e, outfall and system mapping, identification of "hot spots", ordinance and enforcement program, detection and elimination program, dumping control program, educational programs for local workers and the public, 2 Pollution prevention or "Good Housekeeping BMP's" for municipal operations. Programs that will reduce municipal pollution, for example maintenance operations, street and highway pollution, floatables, waste disposal, salt/sand use and storage, and employee training programs. 3 Construction site storm-water runoff control/regulation, 4 Post construction storm-water management/regulation, 5 Public education and outreach programs/BMP's, A community could use brochures and fact sheets, educational aids, storm-water hotlines, or watershed cleanup days. 6 Public involvement and participation, . Community must develop ordinance control. . Communitymust develop program for plan review, site inspection, and dealing with complaints. . Reduce sediment discharge from "active" sites. Construction Industry . Construction sites disturbing 1 acre or greater will require permit coverage. . This can be smaller if the project is located in a sensitive area or is considered a sensitive site . Sites without discharge can be exempted from these rules. What will the Owner/Contractor be responsible for? . Reduce or eliminate sediment discharge from sites. . Implementation of "post construction" BMP's that reduce the amount of pollutants and the physical impact of new development. Post construction BMP's include both structural and non-structural practices, . Structural; ponds, wetlands, infiltration, filtering devices, vegetated channels, detention structures, and/or special devices. . Non-structural; advanced site design, economic incentives, educational programs, recovery programs, fertilizer and pesticide control programs, and/or litter control programs. SO HOW WILL ALL OF THIS WORK? . MPCA will establish requirements for each of the six minimum controls and a set ofBMP "menus" . Municipalities will develop a "Notice OfIntent" (NOI) that will identify the BMP's that will be used and develop a "yardstick" by which to measure performance, . MPCA will review and issue the permits. . Program implementation will occur within 5 years. J/~9 NOI Submittal Requirements . Community will be developing a management plan to improve storm water quality and quantity. . Identify BMP's to be implemented. . Develop measurable goals. . Develop schedule or frequency for all BMP's. . Designation of responsibility for the program, who is the community liaison, AN EXAMPLE OF HOW NPDES PHASE II WILL WORK IN "SMALL VILLE" Smallville is a fictitious town in central Minnesota, This is a "bedroom" community of about 10,000 people, Smallville has a small city staff with few resources and no current storm water program. Essentially there are 6 fundamental issues and objectives that Smallville needs to address. 1. "Active" Construction Site Runoff . Adopt a city ordinance, . Develop inspection program and train personnel to receive complaints. . Modify plan and review inspection procedures. . Advertise complaint hotline number in monthly newsletter. 2. "Post" Construction Storm Water Management . Modify and adopt city ordinance. . Train Inspector. . Advertise new procedures. 3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination . Develop basic outfall map. . Modify and enforce city ordinance. 4. Pollution Prevention and Housekeeping . Review existing procedures, and make changes as needed to existing procedures. . Distribute free information. 5. Public Involvement and Participation . Organize citizens group to set up program. . Join neighboring city, "Midtown", in their programs. 6. Public Education and Outreach . Public domain brochures. . Individual stakeholder meetings, . Newspaper articles. AN EXAMPLE OF HOW NPDES PHASE II WILL WORK IN "MIDTOWN" "Midtown" is a fictitious town in central Minnesota right next to "Smallville". Midtown has a population of about 50,000 people and it is a self-contained community. The city offices in Midtown are adequately staffed with sufficient resources. Midtown however, already has an existing storm-water program, Midtown faces the same 6 fundamental issues and objectives that Smallville needs to address only to a greater extent. 1. "Active" Construction Site Runoff . Modify existing ordinance. . Add BMP section to design manual. . Conduct training for developers and contractors. . Develop storm-water hotline number, . Upgrade plan review, inspection, and enforcement programs. //'70 2. "Post" Construction Storm Water Management . Change development policies, . Offer developers design guidance. . Adopt comprehensive storm-water ordinance, . Water quantity and quality master planning . Map environmentally sensitive areas. . Develop BMP inspection and maintenance program, . Develop BMP monitoring program. . Develop BMP demonstration projects, . Fully support local watershed groups. 3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination . GIS-Based inventory, . Develop advanced ordinance, . Targeted dry weather screening. . Develop inspection/enforcement program. . Develop urban "hot spot" program, . Publicize used oil turn in sites. . Educate public and city staff. 4. Pollution Prevention and Housekeeping . Hire consultant to review current procedures. . Develop procedure manual. . Implement recommended changes. . Develop "Adopt a Storm-Drain" program to remove floatables, . Build containment dike around, and cover, salt/sand piles. . Provide staff training, 5. Public Involvement and Participation . Establish citizen task force, . Hold annual water festival for elementary students. . Citizen monitoring "Adopt a Stream". . High School student wet weather monitoring of storm-water outlets, . Civic group storm drain stenciling. . Fully support watershed groups. 6. Public Education and Outreach . Public domain brochures. . Develop database of stakeholders, . Offer elementary school educational programs, . Develop complaint "hotline", . Develop press information, . Develop local slide show and speakers bureau. Things to Keep in Mind . This is not a one-size fit all permit. . This is both a challenge and an opportunity. . There will need to be great flexibility within the program, . There is plenty of room for innovation. 01/20/2000, MPCA, jrnljsldm 1/7/ ~ ~JP~ Storm Water Phase II Final Rule MS4 Storm Water Program Overview Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Policy and Planning Division Regular Facilities and Site Remediation Section Water/Storm Water #1.04, January 2001 located in "urbanized areas" as defined by the Bureau of the Census, and on a case-by-case basis those MS4s located outside of urbanized areas that the NPDES permitting authority desibtflates. What Are the Phase II MS4 Program Requirements? Operators of regulated MS4s are required to design their programs to: . Reduce the discharge of pollutants to the "maximum extent practicable" (MEP); . Protect water quality; and . Satisfy the appropriate water quality requirements of the Clean Water Act, Implementation of the MEP standard will require the development and implementation of BMPs and the achievement of measurable goals to satisfy each of the six minimum control measures. Polluted Storm water runoff is often transported to municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) and ultimately discharged into local rivers and streams without treatment. EPA's Storm Water Phase II Rule establishes an MS4 storm water management program that is intended to improve waterways by reducing the quantity of pollutants that storm water picks up and carries into storm sewer systems during storm events, Common pollutants include oil and grease from roadways, pesticides from lawns, sediment from construction sites, and carelessly discarded trash, such as cigarette butts, paper wrappers, and plastic botdes. \X-'hen deposited into nearby waterways through MS4 discharges, these pollutants can impair the waterways, thereby discouraging recreational use of the resource, contaminating drinking water supplies, and interfering with the habitat for fish, other aquatic or!,>anisms, and wildlife. In 1990, EP A promulgate rules establishing Phase I of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) storm water program, The Phase I program for MS4s requires operators of "large" MS4s, that is, those that generally serve populations of 100,000 or greater, to implement a storm water management program as a means to control polluted discharges from these MS4s. The l\finneapolis and St. Paul Storm Water Phase II Rule extends coverage of the NPDES storm water program to certain "small" MS4s but takes a slightly different approach to how the storm water management program is developed and implemented, What Is a Phase II MS4? An MS4 if any MS4 not already covered by the Phase I program as a large MS4, The Phase II Rule automatically covers MS4s Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 (651) 296-6300, toll-free (800) 657-3864, TTY (651) 282-5332 or (800) 657-3864 This material can be made available in alternative formats for people with disabilities, The Phase II Rule defmes a MS4 storm water management program as a program compnslOg six elements that, when implemented in concert, are expected to result in significant reductions of pollutants discharged into receiving waterbodies. The six MS4 program elements, termed "minimum control measures," are outlined below. 1. Public Education and Outreach Distributing educational materials and performing outreach to inform citizens about the impacts polluted storm water runoff discharges can have on water quality, Wq-sw1-04 //?d _ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency -- Policy and Planning Division Regular Facilities and Site Remediation Section 2. Public Participation/Involvement Providing opportunities for citizens to partiCIpate in program development and implementation, including effectively publicizing public hearings and/ or encouraging citizen representatives on a storm water management panel. 3, Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Developing and implementing a plan to detect and eliminate illicit discharges to the storm sewer system (includes developing a system map and informing the community about hazards associated with illegal discharges and improper disposal of waste). 4. Construction Site Runoff Control Developing, implementing, and enforcing an erosion and sediment control program for construction activities that disturb 1 or more acres of land (controls could include silt fences and temporary storm water detention ponds). 5, Post Construction Runoff Control Developing, implementing, and enforcing a program to address discharges of post-construction storm water runoff from new development and redevelopment areas, Applicable controls could include preventative actions such as protecting sensitive areas (e.g., wetlands) or the use of structural BMPs such as grassed swales or porous pavement, 6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping Developing and implementing a program with the goal of preventing or reducing pollutant runoff from municipal operations, The program must include municipal staff training on pollution prevention measures and techniques (e.g" regular street sweeping, reduction in the use of pesticides or street salt, or frequent catch-basin cleaning). Water/Storm Water #1.04, January 2001 What Information Must the NPDES Permit Application Include? The Phase II program for MS4s is designed to accommodate a general permit approach using a permit application. The operator of a regulated MS4 must include in its permit application, its chosen BMPs and measurable goals for each minimum control measure. To help permittees identify the most appropriate BMPs for their programs, there will be a "menu," of BJ'vfPs to serve as guidance, What are the Implementation Options? The rule identifies a number of implementation options for regulated small MS4 operators. These include sharing responsibility for program development with a nearby regulated small MS4, taking advantage of existing local or State programs, or participating in the implementation of an existing Phase I MS4's storm water program as a co- permittee. These options are intended to promote a regional approach to storm water management coordinated on a watershed basis. What Kind of Program Evaluation/ Assessment Is Required? Permittees need to evaluate the effectiveness of their chosen BMPs to determine whether the BMPs are reducing the discharge of pollutants from their systems to the "maximum extent practicable" and to determine if the BMP mix is satisfying the water quality requirements of the Clean Water Act. Permittees also are required to assess their progress in achieving their program's measurable goals, If there is an indication of a need for improved controls, permittees can revise their mix of BMPs to create a more effective program, MS4 STORM WATER PROGRAM OVERVIEW PAGE 2 1/73 &EPA Storm Water Phase II Final Rule Fact Sheet Series Overview 1,0 - Storm Water Phase II Final Rule: An Overview Small MS4 Program 2,0 - Small MS4 Storm Water Program Overview 2,1 - Who's Covered? Designation and Waivers of Regulated 5mall MS4s 2,2 - Urbanized Areas: Definition and Description Minimum Control Measures 2,3 - Public Education and OUtreach 2,4 - Public Participation! Involvement 2,5 - Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination 2,6 - Construction Site Runoff Control 2,7 - Post-Construction Runoff Control 2,8 - Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping 2.9 - Permitting and Reporting: The Process and Requirements 2,10 - Federal and State.Operated MS4s: Program Implementation Construction Program 3,0 - Construction Program Overview 3,' - Construction Rainfall Erosivity Waiver Industrial "No Exposure" 4,0 - Conditional No Exposure Exclusion for Industrial Activity United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water (4203) EPA 833-F-Ol 1 January 2000 Fact Sheet 2,9 Storm Water Phase II Final Rule Permitting and Reporting: The Process and Requirements The Stonn Water Phase II Final Rule requires operators of certain small municipal separate stonn sewer systems (MS4s) to obtain National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit coverage because their stonn water discharges are considered "point sources" of pollution, All point source discharges, unlike nonpoint sources such as agricultural runoff, are required under the Clean Water Act (CW A) to be covered by federally enforceable NPDES permits. Those systems already pennitted under the NPDES Phase I stonn water program, even systems serving less than 100,000 people, are not required to be pennitted under the Phase II stonn water program, NPDES stonn water pennits are issued by an NPDES pennitting authority, which may be a NPDES- authorized State or a U.S. EPA Region in non-authorized States (see the For Additional Information section for a list ofU.S, EPA regional contacts). Once a permit application is submitted by the operator of a regulated small MS4 and a permit is obtained, the conditions of the pennit must be satisfied (i.e., development and implementation of a stonn water management program) and periodic reports must be submitted on the status and effectiveness of the program, This fact sheet explains the various permit options that are available for operators of regulated small MS4s and details the pennit application and reporting requirements, Important compliance deadlines also are higWighted. Program coverage and requirements for regulated small MS4s are explained in Fact Sheets 2,0 through 2,8, What Permitting Options Are Available to Operators of Regulated Small MS4s? Unlike the Phase I program that primarily utilizes individual permits for medium and large MS4s, the Phase II approach allows operators of regulated small MS4s to choose from as many as three permitting options as listed below. The NPDES pennitting authority reserves the authority to detennine, however, which options are available to the regulated small MS4s. o General Permits General permits are strongly encouraged by EP A. The Phase II program has been designed specifically to accommodate a general pennit approach, General permits prescribe one set of requirements for all applicable permittees, General permits are drafted by the NPDES permitting authority, then published for public comment before being finalized and issued. A Notice of Intent (NOl) serves as the application for the general pennit. The permittee complies with the pennit requirements by submitting an NOl to the NPDES permitting authority that describes the stonn water management plan, including best management practices (BMPs) and measurable goals. A Phase II pennittee has the flexibility to develop an individualized stonn water program that addresses the particular characteristics and needs of its system, provided the basic requirements of the general pennit are satisfied, //7'1 The Process and Re uirements Pa e2 Permittees also can choose to share responsibilities for meeting the Phase II program requirements, Those entities choosing to do so may submit jointly with the other municipalities or governmental entities an Nor that identifies who will implement which minimum measures within the area served by the MS4, The permittee then follows the Phase II permit application requirements (see discussion in next question below). Minimize Duolication of Effort Two permitting options tailored to minimize duplication of effort can be incorporated into the general permit by the NPDES permitting authority. First, the permitting authority can recognize in the permit that another governmental entity is responsible under an NPDES permit for implementing any or all minimum measures, Responsibility for implementation of the measure(s) would rest with the other governmental entity, thereby relieving the permittee of its responsibility to implement that particular measure(s). For example, the NPDES permitting authority could recognize a county erosion and sediment control program for construction sites that was developed to comply with a Phase I permit. As long as the Phase II MS4s in the county comply with the county's construction program, they would not need to develop and implement their own construction programs because such activity would already be addressed by the county, Second, the NPDES permitting authority can include conditions in a general permit that direct a permittee to follow the requirements of an existing qualifying local program rather than the requirements of a minimum measure, A qualifying local program is defined as a local, State or Tribal municipal storm water program that imposes requirements that are equivalent to those of the Phase II MS4 minimum measures. The permittee remains responsible for the implementation of the minimum measure through compliance with the qualifying local program. o Individual Permits Individual permits are required for Phase I "medium" and "large" MS4s, but not recommended by EP A for Phase II program implementation, The permittee can either submit an individual application for coverage by the Phase It MS4 program (see ~ 122.34) or the Phase I MS4 program (see ~ 1 22.26( d)). For individual coverage under Phase II, the permittee must follow Phase II permit application requirements and provide an estimate of square mileage served by the system and any additional information requested by the NPDES permitting authority. A permittee electing to apply for coverage under the Phase I program must follow the permit application requirements detailed at *122,26(d), The NPDES permitting authority may allow more than one regulated entity to jointly apply for an individual permit. The NPDES permitting authority could incorporate in the individual permit either of the two permitting options explained above in the Minimize Duplication of Effort section. o Modification of a Phase I Individual Permit - A Co-Permittee Option The operator of a regulated small MS4 could participate as a limited co-permittee in a neighboring Phase I MS4's storm water management program by seeking a modification of the existing Phase I individual permit. A list of Phase I medium and large MS4s can be obtained from the EP A Office of Wastewater Management (OWM) or downloaded from the OWM web site, The permittee must follow Phase I permit application requirements (with some exclusions). The permittee must comply with the applicable terms of the Phase I individual permit rather than the minimum control measures in the Phase II Final Rule, What Does the Permit Application Require? Operators of regulated small MS4s are required to submit in their Nor or individual permit application the following information: o Best management practices (BMPs) are required for each ofthe six minimum control measures: o Public education and outreach on storm water impacts 8 Public participation/involvement 49 Illicit discharge detection and elimination o Construction site storm water runoff control ~ Post-construction storm water management in new development/redevelopment <D Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations (See Fact Sheets 2.3 through 2.8 for full descriptions of each measure, including examples of BMPs and measurable goals) o Measurable goals for each minimum control measure (i.e, narrative or numeric standards used to gauge program effectiveness); ///5' Fact Sheet 2.9 - Permittin2 and Reportin2: The .Process and Requirements Pa'ii Q Estimated months and years in which actions to implement each measure will be undertaken, including interim milestones and frequency; and o The person or persons responsible for implementing or coordinating the storm water program, Relvinf! on Another Entitv The Phase II permittee has the option of relying on other entities already performing one or more of the minimum control measures, provided that the existing control measure, or component thereof, is at least as stringent as the Phase II rule requirements, For example, a county already may have an illicit discharge detection and elimination program in place and may allow an operator of a regulated small MS4 within the county's jurisdiction to rely on the county program instead of formulating and implementing a new program, In such a case, the permittee would not need to implement the particular measure, but would still be ultimately responsible for its effective implementation. For this reason, EPA recorrunends that the permittee enter into a legally binding agreement with the other entity. If the permittee chooses to rely on another entity, they must note this in their permit application and subsequent reports. A Phase II permittee may even rely on another governmental entity regulated under the NPDES storm water program to satisfy all of the permittee's permit obligations. Should this option be chosen, the permittee must note this in its NOI, but does not need to file periodic reports, What Does the Permit Require? The operator of a regulated small MS4 has the flexibility to determine the BMPs and measurable goals, for each minimum control measure, that are most appropriate for the system. The chosen BMPs and measurable goals, submitted in the permit application, become the required storm water management program; however, the NPDES permitting authority can require changes in the mix of chosen BMPs and measurable goals if all or some of them are found to be inconsistent with the provisions of the Phase II Final Rule. Likewise, the permittee can change its mix of BMPs if it determines that the program is not as effective as it could be Fact Sheets 2.3 through 2,8 further describe each of the minimum control measures, while the permit requirements for evaluation/assessment and recordkeeping activities are described in separate sections below, Menu of BMPs The BMPs for minimum measures 3 through 6 (as listed in the permit application requirements section, above) are not enforceable until the NPDES permitting authority provides a list, or "menu," of BMPs to assist permittees in the design and implementation oftheir storm water management programs. The NPDES permitting authority is required to provide this menu as an aid for those operators that are unsure of the most appropriate and effective BMPs to use, Since the menu is intended to serve as guidance only, the operators can either select from the menu or identify other BMPs to meet the permit requirements, EP A is scheduled to develop a menu of BMPs by October 27,2000. What Standards Apply? APhase II small MS4 operator is required to design its program so that it: Q Reduces the discharge of pollutants to the "maximum extent practicable" (MEP); o Protects water quality; and o Satisfies the appropriate water quality requirements of the Clean Water Act. Compliance with the technical standard ofMEP requires the successful implementation of approved BMPs. The Phase II Final Rule considers narrative effluent limitations that require the implementation of BMPs and the achievement of measurable goals as the most appropriate form of effluent limitations to achieve the protection of water quality, rather than requiring that storm water discharges meet numeric effluent limitations. EPA intends to issue Phase II NPDES permits consistent with its August I, 1996, Interim Permitting Approach policy, which calls for BMPs in first-round storm water permits and expanded or better tailored BMPs in subsequent permits, where necessary, to provide for the attainment of water quality standards. In cases where infonnation exists to develop more specific conditions or limitations to meet water quality standards, these conditions or limitations should be incorporated into the storm water permit. Monitoring is not required under the Phase II Rule, but the NPDES permitting authority has the discretion to require monitoring if deemed necessary, What Evaluation/Reporting Efforts Are Required? Freauencv of ReDorts Reports must be submitted annually during the first permit term. For subsequent permit terms, reports must be submitted in years 2 and 4 only, unless the NPDES permitting authority requests more frequent reports. 1/ /&, Fact Sheet 2.9 - Permitting and Reporting: The Process and Requirements Page 4 Reauired Reoort Content The reports must include the following: o The status of compliance with permit conditions, including an assessment of the appropriateness of the selected BMPs and progress toward achieving the selected measurable goals for each minimum measure; o Results of any information collected and analyzed, including monitoring data, if any; o A summary ofthe stonn water activities planned for the next reporting cycle; o A change in any identified best management practices or measurable goals for any minimum measure; and o Notice of relying on another governmental entity to satisfy some ofthe pennit obligations (if applicable), A Chanfe in Selected BMPs If, upon evaluation of the program, improved controls are identified as necessary, pennittees should revise their mix of BMPs to provide for a more effective program, Such a change, and an explanation of the change, must be noted in a report to the NPDES pennitting authority. What are the Recordkeeping Requirements? Records required by the NPDES pennitting authority must be kept for at least 3 years and made accessible to the public at reasonable times during regular business hours. Records need not be submitted to the NPDES pennitting authority unless the pennittee is requested to do so, What Are the Deadlines for Compliance? o The NPDES pennitting authority issues general pennits for regulated small MS4s by December 9, 2002, o Operators of "automatically designated" regulated small MS4s in urbanized areas submit their pennit applications within 90 days of pennit issuance, no later than March 10,2003. o Operators of regulated small MS4s designated by the pennitting authority submit their pennit applications within 180 days of notice. o Regulated small MS4 stonn water management programs fully developed and implemented by the end of the first pennit tenn, typically a 5-year period What are the Penalties for Noncompliance? The NPDES pennit that the operator of a regulated small MS4 is required to obtain is federally enforceable, thus subjecting the pennittee to potential enforcement actions and penalties by the NPDES pennitting authority if the pennittee does not fully comply with application or pennit requirements, This federal enforceability also includes the right for interested parties to sue under the citizen suit provision (section 405) of the CWA. For Additional Information Contacts B' U,S. EPA Regional Stonn Water Coordinators I Region 1 {ME2, NW, VT, MA2, RI, CT}: Region 2 {NY, NJ, PR2, VI}: Region 3 {PA, DE, DC2, MD, VA, WV}: Region 4 {KY, TN, NC, SC, MS, AL, GA, FL}: Region 5 {MN, WI, IL, MI, IN, OH}: Region 6 {NM2, TX, OK, AR, LA}: Region 7 {NE, KS, lA, MO}: Region 8 {MT, ND, WY, SD, UT, CO}: Region 9 {CA, NV, AZ}, HI}: Region 10 {WA, OR, 102, AK2}: Thelma Murphy Karen O'Brien Mary Letzkus Michael Mitchell Peter Swenson Brent Larsen Ralph Summers Vemon Berry Eugene Bromley Bob Robichaud 617918-1615 212637-3717 215814-2087 404 562-9303 312 886-0236 214665-7523 913 551-7416 303312-6234 415744-1906 206553-1448 I The U.S. EPA is the NPDES permitting authority for all federally recognized Indian Country Lands, and for Federal facilities in AI<. American Samoa, AZ, CO, DE, DC, FL, Guam, !D, Johnston Atoll, ME, MA, Midway & Wake Islands, NH, NM, PR. VT, VI, and W A. 2 Denotes a non-authorized State for the NPDES storm water program. For these States only, the U,S. EP A Region is the NPDES permitting authority. All other States serve as NPDES permitting authorities for the storm water program. B' U.S. EPA Office of Wastewater Management . Phone: 202260-5816 . E-mail: SW2@epa.gov . Internet: www.epa,gov/owmlsw/phase2 1/7/ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor & Councilmembers FROM: Ed Shukle, City Administrator SUBJECT: Supplemental Agenda DATE: July 15,2002 It is requested that the July 15, 2002 agenda be amended as follows: PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 10 (h) June 2002 Financial Report - Finance Attached is a summary of revenues and expenditures as of June 30,2002. Respectfully submitted, CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF REVENUES AS OF JUNE 30, 2002 50,00 % Year Complete GENERAL FUND Property Taxes 2,600,079 940,000 945,521 36.37 5,650 0.31 Licenses/Permits 809,175 203,176 724,545 89.54 497,617 52.65 Fines 75,000 7,399 29,917 39.89 40,798 54.40 Intergovernment Revenue 784,517 104 78,832 10.05 66,809 5.91 Charges for Service 272,500 16,255 120,845 44.35 39,846 16.39 Miscellaneous 330,500 25,520 150,849 45.64 100,607 43,65 Transfers 344,500 28,708 172,250 50.00 187,500 49,41 Total General Fund 5,216,271 1,221,162 2,222,759 42,61 938,827 19,56 SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating Fund 17,000 1,000 8,240 48.47 2,813 1.75 Police Forfeitures Fund 9,050 1,610 3,755 41.49 0 0.00 Recreation Operating Fund 213,350 19,289 39,547 18.54 89,806 28,17 Park Improvement Fund 117,000 5,688 84,423 72.16 76,062 42.97 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena 229,900 3,525 109,176 47,49 96,696 45.00 Liquor Operations 2,810,500 235,735 1,114,344 39.65 1 ,104,620 46.88 Sewer 1 ,224,675 7,500 746,348 60.94 1 ,024,709 91.31 Solid Waste 1,216,600 3,033 321,592 26,43 291,127 25.43 Storm Water 320,300 4,167 80,921 25.26 142,252 46.64 Water 1,572,000 69,597 602,623 38.33 509,906 35.91 Total Revenues 9,806,796 1,330,794 5,333,728 54.39 4,276,818 45.70 CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES AS OF JUNE 30, 2002 GENERAL FUND $ $ $ $ % Legislative 90,439 5,053 28,525 31.54 29,508 35.74 Administration 325,On 24,225 158,315 48.70 171,895 59.99 Personnel 129,725 20,139 53,615 41.33 54,310 41.69 MIS 55,833 12,410 24,716 44.27 19,367 45,07 Elections 22,657 3 16 0.07 2,563 37,83 Communications 67,8n 5,015 27,414 40,39 27,910 48.40 Finance 364,160 38,321 198,621 54.54 168,929 49,44 Planning/Zoning 139,785 9,601 70,990 50.79 63,777 49,22 Building Inspection 262,781 14,828 120,519 45,86 112,012 49,73 Community Development 86,474 5,903 35,878 41.49 42,183 47.43 Police Administration 371,591 23,442 167,198 45,00 143,885 46,29 Patrol Services 960,870 67,159 442,305 46,03 420,074 42,80 Investigation Services 150,728 6,309 36,504 24.22 39,028 47.97 School Liason OffiCI 67,059 5,570 35,851 53.46 34,862 56.63 Emergency Management 1,400 17 85 6.07 68 0,60 Fire 333,888 21,545 112,939 33.83 89,232 29,01 Rescue 37,547 5,208 14,611 38.91 21,876 53.04 Engineering 233,788 15,855 115,170 49.26 105,768 44,17 G.I,S. 10,423 21 296 2.84 3,109 22.99 Streets 367,823 45,139 158,547 43.10 141,476 44.47 Snow Removal 84,994 278 37,344 43,94 60,612 68.90 Signal Maint 85,600 281 37,478 43,78 33,492 38.85 Fleet Maint 118,031 8,948 53,On 44,97 28,nO 39,48 Park Maint 197,792 24,803 129,494 65.47 123,292 52,34 Forestry 102,904 1,255 13,193 12,82 7,242 10.83 Building Maint 105,517 7,623 44,686 42.35 47,176 45,56 Recreation Programs 285,633 25,213 106,765 37.38 60,965 40.36 Outdoor Ice 25,875 748 6,004 23.20 8,439 42.39 Transfers Out 130 000 0 0,00 21 948 19,83 Total General Fund 5,216271 394 912 2230 156 42.75 2 083 568 44,40 SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating 46,852 3,028 25,819 55.11 29,662 40.57 Police Forfeitures Fund 9,813 6,521 66,45 0,00 Senior Center 110,543 8,290 45,790 41.42 Swinvning Pool 132,846 17,931 37,969 28.58 0,00 Park Improvement Fund 70,000 4997 21 522 30,75 18 937 27,05 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena 269,081 9,227 112,536 41.82 129,037 61,26 Liquor Operations 2,620,197 234,251 1,096,792 41.86 1,054,347 46,82 Sewer 898,610 61,224 555,434 61,81 491 ,898 49,87 Solid Waste 1,231,370 73,165 561,603 45.61 567,001 47,43 Storm Water 175,030 8,513 89,587 51.18 97,332 68.46 Water Utility 470 539 22 259 345 587 73.44 280 542 58,n Total Ex nditures 10,955,766 820,994 5,129,316 46,82 4,654,992 45,62 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /I~ TO: Mayor, Council Me!pb}rs, City Administrator ~ :-. . ~V Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator FROM: SUBJECT: Consider Resolution - Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat DATE: July 15,2002 INTRODUCTION The City Council tabled the preliminary plat at their meeting on May 20, 2002 because there were issues to be resolved. The issues included the width of the proposed 203rd Street not meeting City standards, The reason the road was proposed at a reduced width was because of the location of the McCarthy home within the City's roadway easement. The City Attorney has had several discussions with the parties over the last few weeks and it appears that a possible settlement concerning the 203rd Street roadway width has been identified, The broad outlines of the settlement would be for the Title Company, Developer and City to settle any and all potential claims with the McCarthy's for a specified dollar amount that would allow Mr. McCarthy to construct another residence on the property further away from the road easement, allow the immediate construction of a roadway meeting existing city standards to serve the development, and potentially broaden the road easement for future realignment/expansion. Further negotiations will be required to flesh out and solidify the terms of the settlement, and ultimately the settlement would become part of the development agreement that accompanies final plat approval. At this point, it is the City Attorney and City staff s opinion that allowing the development to proceed to preliminary plat approval stage conditioned on constructing 203rd Street to full city standards would foster the settlement and eventual resolution of this matter. At the July 9, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, the Commissioners were made aware of the recent discussions concerning a resolution to the issue. The Commissioners stated that if the parties worked towards a settlement of the issue and if the road was constructed to City standards, meaning a full width of the minor collector, the Planning Commission would not object to the City Council approving the Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat. DISCUSSION Plat Review DR Horton and Arcon Development Inc, jointly propose to plat 185 lots on 74,7 acres located east of CSAH 31 and Middle Creek 1 st, 3rd and 4th Additions, south of the proposed 203rd Street and DNR Protect wetland, west of the Pine Knoll subdivision and Middle Creek Estates, and north of Middle Creek and the Farmington Industrial Park. The property was rezoned to R-3 PUD High Density residential on February 7, 2000 with an 111<6' amendment to include 35 acres to the south of the project approved on April 3, 2000. A negative declaration, stating that the project does not have potential significant environmental effects that warrant the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement was accepted by the City Council on July 17, 2000, The property was recently rezoned to PUD Ord. #000-448 on May 6, 2002 during the Zoning Map Update process, The Zoning Map identifies the property as Medium Density. The Medium Density classification allows for townhomes at 8,5 units/acre. The plat shows a density of 5.1 units/acre, Planning Commission Review - May 14, 2002 The Planning Commission reviewed the final plat at their May 14,2002 meeting. They recommended denial of the plat based upon the attached findings of fact. The denial was based upon the Planning Commission's beliefthat the proposed width (15 feet) of the eastbound lane of203rd Street was unsafe, At the meeting, residents asked questions concerning the development. Daniel McCarthy inquired about the grading that would occur 2-3 feet from his house comer and questioned if the oak trees west of his house near the road would be placed in a tree trust setting aside funds to replace trees that may not survive the construction, Both of these issues deal with the City's 80-foot wide easement. The grading is within the easement and any trees located within the easement would be the City's responsibility to replace. Mr. McCarthy also asked if the sidewalk proposed near his house would be closed in the winter because of snowplowing issues. As with any sidewalk fronting a property, the City Code requires that the sidewalk be kept clear of snow, Therefore, the clearing of the sidewalk is the homeowner's responsibility. Finally, Mr. McCarthy questioned whether his well would be reconnected, The City Code requires that City water service needs to be supplied to properties if the water line is within close proximity to the property in question. Therefore, Mr, McCarthy's property needs to be serviced with City water. Mr. Michael McClain (20390 Eaves Way) questioned if DR Horton and Arcon Development would prepare a restoration plan, landscape plan and elevations concerning any disruption of his property if it was affected by the development. Arcon Development assured Mr. McClain that he would receive the requested items in advance of any development near his property. DR Horton and Arcon Development objected to the contingency requiring a resolution for the connection of Eastview Avenue with 208th Street. Outlots The Developer proposes multi-family development on the preliminary plat and is identified by the following categories: Multi-Family Residential Outlot A OutlotB Outlot C Outlot D OutlotE Outlot F Outlot G Outlot H Outlot I Outlot J 185 Lots 10.3 5 acres 0,94 acres 10,2 acres 6.7 acres 1.4 acres 4,19 acres 3,6 acres 3 s,f, 0.5 acres 1974 s.f, Wetland Pond Wetland Wetland Pond Future Development Future Development Right-of-way Pond Monument Sign //77 Plat Requirements The Developer proposes to plat 185 multi-family units in 48 buildings on a 79.2-acre site within the Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat. The Developer has "ghost" platted an additional building that includes 4 of the 185 lots on the south side of the plat in anticipation of constructing the building if or when the access to the park is relocated from the Middle Creek East development. The Developer proposes a O,8-acre park area on the southern portion of the Middle Creek East plat. This park will allow access to the 6.7-acre park dedicated in the Middle Creek Estates project. The Parks and Recreation Director, Jim Bell, has submitted a memo dated May 8, 2002 stating requirements for the park area in the Middle Creek East development. If and when development occurs to the south of Middle Creek East, the Parks and Recreation Commission will review that development to determine if a more feasible access to the park south of Middle Creek East is possible, The 0.8-acre park area shown on the Middle Creek East plat should remain vacant until development occurs south of the plat. At that time, staff will evaluate if access to the 6.7 -acre park south of Middle Creek East is feasible, If the access to the park is relocated from the Middle Creek East plat, an additional building may be constructed in the park's location. An access easement needs to be granted to the City in this location, This easement will be documented separately from the development contract. Transportation Analysis The preliminary plat shows two accesses from the project with a third access to the south in the future. The first access is 203rd Street to the east and west. 203f Street to the west will intersect with Pilot Knob Road and Akin Road to the east providing an east/west corridor meeting the requirements of the 2020 Thoroughfare Plan, 203fd Street is considered a minor collector street and is proposed with a 70-foot right-of-way width with a 40- foot roadway measured from the back of curb to the back of curb, With the settlement agreement discussed above, the road would be built to City standards if the McCarthy home were removed from within the City's easement. A sidewalk is shown on the south side and a trail is shown on the north side of203fd Street. The second access is 206th Street that connects with Pilot Knob Road to the west. This access is considered a local street and is proposed with a 6O-foot right-of-way width with a 30-foot roadway measured from the back of curb to the back of curb, City standards require that a sidewalk be located on one side of this local street. A sidewalk is shown on the south side of 206th Street. The third access to the south of Middle Creek East is Eastview Avenue. As stated previously, DR Horton and Arcon Development have objected to the requirement to resolve the connection of Eastview Avenue with 208th Street before the final plat is approved. Eastview A venue connects with 203rd Street on the north and is proposed to connect in the future with 20gth Street on the south. The roadway is considered a minor collector and is proposed with a 70-foot right-of-way and 40-foot roadway measured from the back of curb to the back of curb, The connection to the south will eventually allow access through the Farmington Industrial Park to CSAH 50, Future plans for 208th Street include the connection with Pilot Knob Road on the west and Akin Road on the east providing an additional east/west corridor, A temporary cul-de-sac is shown on the Middle Creek East plat at the southerly end of Eastview Avenue with the opportunity of a future extension of Eastview Avenue when the property south of the cul-de-sac is developed. Negotiations concerning the acquisition of a right-of-way easement for Eastview Avenue are in progress between the City and Mr. Murphy. I /~CJ Roadways associated with the multi-family areas will be private streets shown at 24 feet back to back and will be maintained by a homeowners association, Housing Characteristics The developer proposes 2, 3, and 4 unit buildings that are single level with a basement. A total of 185 units are proposed within the preliminary plat, with 181 units proposed for construction. The units are proposed to start at $180,000, Agency Analysis The letter submitted by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources dated February 4,2002 stated that the EA W approved in July of 2000 is slightly different than the submitted plans showing 48 structures rather than the 40 approved in the EAW, However, the preliminary plat shows 185 units where the EAW showed 194 units. Erik Peters of Bonestroo stated that the impacts of impervious surface on runoff rates, volumes, and pollutant loading would be mitigated for in the same way and extent as discussed in the EA W. Therefore, any additional impervious surface will be accounted for in the preliminary and final design phases of the project. The DNR also stated that the preliminary plat now shows a crossing of Middle Creek that wasn't proposed in the EA W. Therefore, a DNR Protected Waters Permit needs to be applied for in order for the bridge crossing on Eastview Avenue to occur, Additionally, Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) permits need to be obtained for the existing wetlands. The wetland on the easterly portion of the site is identified as a protect wetland. The Protect wetland classification requires that structures shall be placed a minimum of 85 feet from the wetland. These wetlands exist in a largely unaltered state and have special and unusual qualities that call for a high level of protection, The wetlands along the westerly edge of the site are not classified. The Wetland Classification Map identifies this area as the pond boundary for the 100-year storm event. A floodplain exists on the westerly portion of the site, The City's engineer has conducted a floodplain study and the 100-year floodplain has been re-delineated to show a reduction in the floodplain limit to the north, Engineering Requirements The Engineering Division recommends the approval of the preliminary plat contingent upon any minor engineering issues, ACTION REQUESTED Approve the resolution for the Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat contingent upon the following: a) Constructing 20300 Street to full-width in accordance with city standards provided a settlement agreement is reached concerning the McCarthy house/easement. b) Complying with the requirements stated in the May 8, 2002 memo from Jim Bell, Parks and Recreation Director, //~I R~S~ Lee Smick, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: D R Horton, Don Patton Arcon Development, Larry Frank I/~~ RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT MIDDLE CREEK EAST 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 15th day of July, 2002 at 7:00 P.M, Members Present: Members Absent: Member _ introduced and Member _ seconded the following: WHEREAS, an application meeting City requirements has been filed seeking preliminary plat review and approval of Middle Creek East; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for the preliminary plat on the 14th day of May, 2002 preceded by 10 days' published and mailed notice, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended to deny the Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat at its meeting held on the 14th day of May, 2002; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the preliminary plat; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has rendered an opinion that the preliminary plat can be feasibly served by municipal service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the above final plat be approved and that the requisite signatures are authorized and directed to be affixed to the final plat with the following conditions: a) Constructing 203rd Street to full-width in accordance with city standards provided a settlement agreement is reached concerning the McCarthy house/easement. b) Complying with the requirements stated in the May 8, 2002 memo from Jim Bell, Parks and Recreation Director, This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 15th day of July, 2002, Gerald Ristow, Mayor Attested to the _ day of_, Ed Shukle, City Administrator I/<Tt 3 CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA INRE: Application DR Horton and Arcon Development For the Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION On May 14, 2002, the Farmington Planning Commission met to consider the application of DR Horton and Arcon Development for the Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat. The applicant was present and the Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I, The property is located west of the Pine Knoll subdivision. 2, The property is identified as PUD #000-448 and is shown as Medium Density, 3. The Developers propose 185 units on 74.7 acres. 4, The density is 5,1 units/acre, 5, The City's 2020 Thoroughfare Plan identifies 203rd Street as a mmor collector, 6. The eastbound lane on 203rd Street is proposed to be 15 feet in width, the westbound lane is proposed to be 20 feet in width. 7. The reduction on the lane width for the eastbound lane is determined to be unsafe because the road curves and inclines downward in the reduction area. DECISION Applicant's request for approval of the Middle Creek East Preliminary Plat is denied. 61335 //~Y ATTEST: Its Administrator 61335 CITY OF FARMINGTON BY: 2 J/~5 Location Map - \---, I - --"I /i ~: I " \, ~ "" ---------. '~,/~ ~((<\. ,/ /~~. r ~! '-J~ / ,~~/ ~" · ,~r~Jy~ \, (y~~ li:---; J:n-, .,______, i ,-'il!,' <j I~ _', ,! \7\. i.~ '.^' ~i.', ~\ "'~.. \. '.' ~\ ..,";------.------~! / : \(" U0 \~ "/' \ts d.' / ,~\\(j:2'(5\ ~ '0,', v, \/x\ i _ r-; \,.....--/\. ,/~',/\ ~ \, \\ ' aJ -.J \r'.A,~\/ \, "'-, ! 0 r---c '..,./'" -:- /.>0 : ~ ' ' i i Mrfld/e/~~\ h .' ,<,;::~&? o --- /,j ,;-.'__/'~ ...J ___ /' / '/ --0: _~~ -~---~-- ~\'~ ,\ \ '~. \ " \ '. ", \ \, '...----......., ~ \ ,,\ --~ \ \ ." --' \ \ \ ~/ ,~--', ,/ ", ~'\".----'\ ,----, :'~" \'~ " '~.."~.!Y\~ \~ \~ ,-\\,,\ \. \ \~\y~\ '.. 'e--.. j\\~. "". "-\:\ '\ ~~.,..,'\, 'cScJd'~\\ \, ,i--.' -~. :----, .........--.. \.. \. '___" ',\, '.\ "~ I ~~! ----',' ". i' \ \\~', i" ~,-'--'~t\'\'Rn -.s:r::w:-\'\, ' , ~ _ ~v~ . '__"\\ i ~ ~, '.--J',. . \ \ i) i "---' "~y\'\\ //~! / "\\ ~ ------,--' PineKirol/'-'-.; 1\ \~ . /~~ .il' ,...' ---. /"./ \ ' ---"../" ), \\, ~', _'-,,/' V\, ~A!."-.~' ~ - - /r-, \,/ <~ '~1;;" ~ . '< . //' /'. '--./ \ ,/ 'rEAVESJNA'f" "~A '., ~ ", -.---- ./ -- Middle Creek East Location // )..\ \ / \\\ )<',', ./ \, \ ,/ /\ \\ , / )<'> / /' ,</ /-/ ./ I ,,/----1 ~ ,..../-/ ,/ x' ,/ .....- .....-/ /X' _ _n.-/=----.-'-- 208IH-SLW / /' , r-i ! I , ! i : ,~ L------- ~ ,~~ i . ~I h----i ---+---J I '~_.~ +E S :----r--- ~\ .--- ! I ~---- . "--- I ! - 1/<f3'~ ~w I. I M , 'hI ! . I . ill~ ill' I ~ ~~ ~1 E~ ~ p !~ ~i a ~. '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ i\ Ii! l!!% e: e ~~ % '" g " ; Ii ~ % P " e . > ~~ ~ ii~ -'''11. ~o:r ~; ~ f;:Il:i ~i ~ E i~ ~ i ~~~ ~~ ~.,. 10 l!g i!i t \l -~I aol& ~ ;i J~i I;' II! ~~I h:: lI)iit~ g I I I , I ' I I : , I I a: \ t. ~_-~~~ __, I I- I I \ I I I I I I \ I I' I , I I I I I I I I I I I I " ," I I t-'- --- I I I w d th 'II ~II iil i,l ,Ii n. 'I~ f' ." )> ::::O-O~ ::::0":;:0- ~ 0 zrrlo G')rr --i~rrl OZo z)>::::o .. ::::0 rrl ~-<rrl z-o^ zrrrl rrl)>)> z(f) O(f)--i --i )> ;~;~~~ ~~~ i ~ r-K:CIlK:K:K:K:ZK: CIlZC:ZZZZC)Z!j! ?U~?U?U?U?U8~1:I -<:<-<-<-<-<z~~ ~ ~~~3~~ " ~~~3~'" !!l ZZZ"'CIl ~ C)C)C)CIl '" n I i iili iii ~.6 di '1 · i i s i i I'r I T ~ i - . ~ ~ ~ g I ~ 5 CIl ~ a i ~ I~: , ~ II . , i I J ;0 00 ~;o o:r ~~ 5d 'll~ -=- "'z Zo ;-i' zR' f> III !!:ll II III :n~:n ~~~~~ ~jsaa- a~iii~ lln~c;ii '"rn -,"~i !9~ I ~ I -= a " f;; <0 ~ = I'" o ;0 '" '" ^ '" ,. VI -j ~~:':' ____.-I" ~~ r o o ,. :::l o Z -= - ,. '0 ~ - o ~ ~ ~ ~ , I , I , ,.(}::j' _u_~_.J /ofo\ -~]~iH~W!il~ __" J ~ ! / /?; ? ".... ~,: i IpiUiPUP ~ l~ -~llIrPH~ Ii, I~~!l!l~!! i ~ I I r l~ ~ h i i I .1 ... -tj i I I \ ! I '" \ \ \ ! -, ;li ----, ,- "" _~t~ f" it} " / \'\ I~ i i/ (/< \~~o;a., po ,. "n I nO' -H ~ll i~ .., .... i -;;:"~ ~" l1ujjt "I' .., o . ~e~ i '01 " d~q iii~~ i " -il ,,\;:; 0 ... \\ i ~- H \ \ i ~' f~ ,eo l!l 204m S~T WEST It P I ! I , i . \ \ \ I " //) I . !" ( i I '" \ J: \ 0 ^' \ d , z <.1 \ ~ ! !!:.~ C o f;i n ^' l"1 l"1 ^ l"1 )> Ul -i ...- ----" / I i I \ \ !~ 1\ I I > , . I I mIll III " illlP~ ~ ",:1 II ;\lil a ~ ~ hi II H ~ III I' ~ ~ ~ I~l I l!! !lI I'l J ~ i . r ~ ~ II f ~ " I ~ !, I I " " ~ ~ -0 :>J l"1 r ~ Z )> ^' -< '1J r )> -i tI ... ~J D v S T R : A t. A r\ f""\ I ""T" I " '" nLlUIIIV.... ,.. A R .. , ~ J ,. T " ~ J ,. n 'VI I " , v p ;.. R K :2 t ~ r\ U i.I, "'.,;,, ?~ ft1l.:9.~';'.' ~ ~ o ! " II-=6'CO Q , -: !~: e I . i I t T ill 1,1 f;i "I ~!I 1'1 ii, 'Ii , II I ,~ ~~~ i?\ "i; i' / J " ,I. I \ i' , 1\" \' \ " , .. t ' \.;\ \ i' t,' ,'\ I" ,',' )'\ \~ I I, ' ' \ '\ \:\ it-i\ \. \ ~l '~, \..:~" l '\ ;;>~ ii\ \ ,\ "0- ~\\ \, \',' \,\, '-:,~ ~ 1\!~'\ " i, ~ \ \\ '\ t ~, i\ ;J \, .~\ '\" -_\ '\ '~ --.\... ~~,>l.,. -- · .::--- , , n I i ~~'f M~ ~ /' I ! H' Z . l-< 0 ~! ~ d i !i ~. "q i it ~ ~ ~ l~ t ! & !t . i ! ~i g 0"2- ~ [ H- i I ~.~~ 0" g- - ~ g ! g ~ q :rt I i ~~ ~ a ( I ti o t i~ i ll. r > z"tJ 0:<1 Ill'" Or ~~ ",z > "tJ:<I !j;:-< Z a > :<I 00 ~;u 0:1: "'~ rli-< ~~ l:: ~~ z~ " G> 0. @ l:: a o f;i o :<I '" ~ '" > ~ ~ I "t"."'f'\ IEII i;ii; III \ ) ~ ;!'o ~8 ~~ ~~ E~ / /C07' APPLICATION FOR PLAT -SVIEW DATE I - ? - 0 -z.. PLL\T NAME \v\ '\ j ~ \ c:.- Q, reel Eo. ~ ~ LOCATION 1)0 \-l c ~ -r M \ d J k C,r~~ l- AREA BOUNDED BY fV\ \ dol tc. Cf't:c:: k.. A-lJ~ \"\v.,\ , tfl 4.:; ~.\..r\(\J I . '-'. (' 1:.. z J.).o I J...l ~ \~ ~ TOTAL GRaS s.ARE...<\ 4L-.=; ..,C(. t.. ZONING DISTRICT(S) D. /!, rI cr ~Q ,..... ,"'''- NAi.'1ES & ADDRES SES OF ALL OWNERS l U W D u,'d:>^ I "'1 -t C)- LCA. L....,: "11. M /I 5S cA.~ AN-c.,,- O~"o!./~...,<..\L 1&lCi Metre f5iiJJ tiJ.35c E: d il1c.. M /1 5'54' '5 '=1 PHONE: P R. ~C^~,.:\ - q&:;i? ... C?tn;-7P,Z:1 4':(0:"':' 61l- B3'5 -. (i'18/ NAl.'1E & ~WDRESS OF L~m StI"RVEYOR!ENGINEER -PC,1'U'- H-<.-'" J..:) l-. 1J.-t LLllJ.~ !-'L, ~ 51 z. c E-"'v;p'1U (' 1"""1 z4z.z. F-1kr(ll'b~O,- ) ~ PHONE G'7( - GS \- t <=1 \ 4 NAJ.'1ES & ADDRESSES OF ALL ADJOINING PROPERTY Ow"NERS AVAILABLE n,OM: ~ ~ \-\ \\ \..L~ ~-'-\9 0..""'1 ,\&:, 'Z - ,\?,::i . 1 ~;1 '5 ON: r - t 4 - b 7 PLAT REVIEW OPTION: PRELI~INARY & FINAL TOGETHER: PRE PLAT ADMINISTR.'\.TIVE FEE: IN SEQUENCE: X PRE PLAT SURETY: I HERE3Y CERTIFY TE-U I AM C,.,"E A...~) T:-iE FEE Ow"NER(S) OF 'L-iE ABOVE L~.ND, THAT THE PERSON PREPARING THE PLAT ~~S RECEIVED A COPY OF TITLE 11, CE-.L\PTERS 1 THRU 5, ENTITLED "SUBDIVISIONS" A.J.\TD TITLE 10, CH.A?TERS 1 THRU 12 ENTITLED "ZONING" OF THE F.\RMINGTON CITY CODE ~~ WILL PREP.L\RE TdE PL<\T IN ACCORDAi.~CE WITH THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN. /lt~ N SIGNATURE OF Ow"NER f- 5 - 0'- DATE ~~~~~~;,:,/;- JAN 8 ?C02 ,: I ADVISORY MEETING: 1 . SKETCH PL.A.:.~ 2. STAFF Ai.~D DEVELOPER CONSENSUS /, i; { -" '- '-- -......- ----- //90 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.cLfarmington.mn.us TO: Lee Smick, Planning Coordinator FROM: James Bell, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Middle Creek East Plat DATE: May 8, 2002 After reviewing the Middle Creek East Plat for the park requirements as requested by the Parks and Recreation Commission (P ARAC), it has been noted that the requirements have not been fulfilled. The P ARAC has indicated a desire to have street access for the parkland that was dedicated during the acceptance of Middle Creek Estates. The following is recommended to meet the park requirements: . The most southerly multiple housing unit on the east side of East Oaks Drive should be eliminated to allow street access to the parkland, . A trail should be shown from Eastview Ave. to the ballfield area to tie into the trail that will be constructed from the Middle Creek Estates area, . The land should remain vacant on the plat until staff can determine what is going to happen with the land to the south of the plat along Eastview Ave, ~b5J James Bell Parks and Recreation Director CC: PARAC //9/ i 2:O.b {y~, "<'~ i~;It<~~.~ "'<\. \'!i ",,~..""'..... '\ ' ': .... ..,:.... -- _ _ _ ' ~- J .... '-____n__. - - ~ \., '''''''' '1"1-' - - , ........... -\ ~lii i '" - -~, \ -.. .... ) {,l!l, \\ \ I' i ti " " \ \, " ' \ \ "- ~\ \ I ~ ) I I I IlU '-..J , , '--...... x r- ii: =i :E VI :>> r- r- r t ~ i "'''' C)~ IlIl -<::I ~5 "'~ >z -<-< '" i!1 z '" D N~ o~ "'~ Xl' oi: ;!; :r Cl :>> ;0 :>> Cl /'TI , Vl =< /'TI :>> ;0 /'TI :>> b ~ :>>~ ;0 ~~ O:r: /'TIC p:1 !i5_~ ;::::- /'TIz z() .-<' -"" z " / / / / / ~ / \ 'II :~ / \ ~ ~ ~ I~ / ;r; ~ . J~ / \ ~~~_.Jj-~ ~ n \ ~;\ (t~ ~ \ .. \ ..J \ ~~----- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ > a ;:::: 6 CJ r /'TI () ;0 /'TI /'TI i ^ /'TI :>> ~ Vl -< i --- --- --- -----, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _J -- \ i : ~ ~ ~ ~ u . M~~.~ ~~ ;;; ~~ r----, , I I I I I I I - I --J J J , J '~ / / / / / / J I \ \ \ \ !~ _ Z ~ ~n~ ~ a ~ .J/ ; 'G"'D~~~~ s....' ~~oS~g. i! !~~:lI~K!l! x~ ~ ~ ~~ ; c a 8~ ~ ~ llli'r'\l r rnrrl/ r,., rT Y/9d