Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003-13 Clerk's File• Welcome to the Rosemount City Council �y Public Hearing Purpose of Public Hearing The purpose of the public hearing is to obtain comments related to how the issue affects the City and the residents. As designated by the City Council, the Rosemount Planning Commission conducts Public hearings on all land use applications. And, makes recommendations to the City Council and then Council makes the final decisions. Notifications have been posted at the site and previously been published and/or mailed to all property owners within 350 feet, or one-quarter of a mile if the property is zoned Agriculture, of a proposed project. Public Hearing Process In order to provide the greatest opportunity for informed comments, the process at public hearings is generally as follows: 1. The Developer and/or Applicant introduces himself/herself and the proposed project including major improvements and unique features of the project. 2. City Staff will provide a detailed review of the proposal and how it relates to the Comprehensive Plan and existing ordinances. Staff does not promote or advocate for the project. Staff identifies issues and proposed solutions as well as recommends stipulations related to existing City Ordinances and the Coy^, rc.hclr-Siv N _. ��f+� cr��..t�alYG I' 1,17i, 3. City Counciimembers will discuss and ask questions to clarify issues regarding the proposed project and/or staff report. 4. Public Hearing Comments.. We want you to feel comfortable in providing informed comments to the City Council and your comments are appreciated. Please state your name and address at the podium and sign in at the "sign in" list in the rear of the room. After your comments are received or heard, the City Council will ask the Developer and/or City Staff to address the questions raised and respond to your comments. 5. Discussion/Responses. 6. City Councilmembers will discuss a motion for action on the issue if desired. Thank you for your interest in the Rosemount City Council and City activities. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Municipal State Aid Mileage Amendments AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, PE City Engineer AGE M #6 S ATTACHMENTS: Resolution for Revoking State Aid Streets, APPROVED BY: Resolution Establishing State Aid Streets, Map Each year, based on development and the addition of streets, the City updates the mileage of the entire street system and certifies this information to the Municipal State Aid District Engineer. This is done as part of the City's Municipal State Aid (MSA) system. Through a formula, City's are allocated a certain number of miles to designate as Municipal State Aid Streets, which makes that street eligible for receiving MSA funds for construction and maintenance. Adoption of the attached resolution by Council will allow the City of Rosemount to begin collecting MSA needs funding in 2003. This year we will be revoking or removing some existing and non -existing streets from the system due to development and reprioritization of the need for collector streets. Some of the streets being removed are Biscayne Avenue, north of future Connemara Trail to Bonaire Path and Bacardi Avenue (non -existing), CSAH 42 to future Connemara Trail. The mileage that is proposed to be revoked (4.18) plus additional mileage (1.35) we have received .credit for this year will be added on to the MSAS system. The additions of the non -existing streets are in line with some of the proposed streets as outlined in the Highway 52/42/55 Interchange and Highway 55 Regional Corridor Study dated May 2002. With Council's authorization, Staff will submit to MnDOT for approval the new streets as shown on the attached map. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution revoking State Aid Streets and adopt a resolution establishing State Aid Streets. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1.) MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION REVOKING STATE AID STREETS AND 2.) MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING STATE AID STREETS COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003 - A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MUNICIPAL STATE -AID STREETS WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of Rosemount that the streets hereinafter described should be designated Municipal State -Aid Streets under the provisions of Minnesota Law. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount that the roadways described as follows, to -wit: • Extension of MSAS 115 140" St. — Akron Ave. to Blaine Ave. (1.51 miles) • Extension of MSAS 117 Conley Ave. — 140" St. E. to 138" St. byway (0.24 miles) • MSAS 122 138`h St. byway — 0.61 miles E. of Blaine Ave. on 140`h St. E. to 0.60 miles E. of Conley Ave on 140" St. E. (1.20 miles) • MSAS 123 145`h St. E. N. Frontage Rd. — Conley Ave. to 145" St. E. (0.85 miles) • MSAS 124 Elgin Ave. — 145`h St. E. (CSAH 42) to TH 55 (0.68 miles) • MSAS 125 Audrey Ave. — 145`" St. E. (CSAH 42) to 135`" St. E. (1.01 miles) be, and hereby is established, located, and designated as Municipal State -Aid Streets of said City, subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his consideration, and that upon his approval of the designation of said streets or portions thereof, that same be constructed, improved and maintained as Municipal State -Aid Streets of the City of Rosemount, to be numbered and known as the following Municipal State -Aid Streets: • Extension of MSAS 115 140" St. — Akron Ave. to Blaine Ave. (1.51 miles) • Extension of MSAS 117 Conley Ave. — 140" St. E. to 138`h St. byway (0.24 miles) • MSAS 122 138`h St. byway — 0.61 miles E. of Blaine Ave. on 140`' St. E. to 0.60 miles E. of Conley Ave on 140`h St. E. (1.20 miles) • MSAS 123 145" St. E. N. Frontage Rd. — Conley Ave. to 145`h St. E. (0.85 miles) • MSAS 124 Elgin Ave. — 145" St. E. (CSAH 42) to TH 55 (0.68 miles) • MSAS 125 Audrey Ave. — 145`h St. E. (CSAH 42) to 135`h St. E. (1.01 miles) ADOPTED this 3' day of April, 2003. William H. Droste, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Seconded by: Resolution 2003 - CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003 - A RESOLUTION REVOKING MUNICIPAL STATE -AID STREETS WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of Rosemount that the roads hereinafter described as Municipal State -Aid Streets under the provisions of Minnesota Law; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount that the roadways described as follows, to -wit: • Part of MSAS 104 Connemara Trl. — Shannon Pkwy. To TH 3 (1.14 miles) • Part of MSAS 108 Biscayne Ave. — Connemara Tr. To Bonaire Path (0.39 miles) • Part of MSAS 111 Bacardi Ave. —145"' St. (CSAR 42) to Connemara Trl. (0.80 miles) • Part of MSAS 113 Dodd Blvd. — Connemara Trl. To 132°d St. (0.65 miles) • Part of MSAS 113 Dodd Blvd. — McAndrews Rd. (CSAR 38) to 1201h St. (0.61 miles) • MSAS 114 120" St. — Dodd Blvd. to TH 3 (0.2.5 miles) • MSAS 115 140`' St. — new alignment of Clark Rd. to Conley Ave. (0.34 miles) be, and hereby is, revoked as Municipal State -Aid Streets of said City subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his consideration. ADOPTED this 3`d day of April, 2003. ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against: William H. Droste, Mayor Seconded by: 0 C) N CO N m f0 N W C) 7 11 t0 � �M CL LL CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 3, 2003 AGENDA: SCHEDULE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING — APRIL 12, 2003 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT PREPARED BY: JAMIE VERBRUGGE, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AGENDN EM r6 J ATTACHMENTS: NONE APPROVED BY: / The City Council held a goal -setting workshop March 14-15, 2003. The Council agreed at that meeting to schedule a follow-up meeting for more discussion of City Council goals and staff -initiated issues. The best date to include all Council members and most department directors without further delay is Saturday, April 12, 2003. The special meeting will be held 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon in the City Hall Council Chambers. Upon approval by the Council, notice of the special meeting will be posted. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO SCHEDULE A SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON SATURDAY, APRIL 12, 2003 AT 8:00 A.M. TO BE HELD IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Receive Bids/Award Contract — Bloomfield 5" Addition Street & Utility Improvements, City Project #364 AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer AGEP4ft #6 U ATTACHMENTS: Map APPROVED BY: AO On Friday, March 28, 2003, bids for the referenced project will be received and read aloud publicly. This project includes the construction of streets and utilities within the Bloomfield 5"' Addition development. All costs associated with this project will be paid by the developer, Centex Homes. The tabulation of bidders, resolution and letter of recommendation to award will be provided at the Council meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECEIVING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE BLOOMFIELD 5TH ADDITION STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT #364. COUNCIL ACTION: FSP\'Yo 'G. Pooc' P�\ANO X R \t o. w Qq'c't�77 pG P- �\ lF �OP10Dp i"� • �� ,r�\ '. 0 200 400 WSB Project No. 02012-501 Date: Feb 25 , 2003 - 4150 Olson MemodalHighway BLOOMFIELD 5TH ADDITION City ProjectNo.364 Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55422 B Street &Utility Construction Figure Number A��763-541-4800 and Appurtenant Work & Aaso wwa , /n FAX 763541-1700 and P � - Rosemount, Minnesota CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Change Order #3 — Rosewood Estates/Village Street AGENDA SECTION: & Utility Improvements, City Project 4350 Consent PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer -W AGEIM `96 ATTACHMENTS: Change Order #3 APPROVED BY: Change Order #3, Rosewood Estates/Village Street & Utility Improvements includes an amendment to the contract completion date for the project. This change in contract date reflects delays to the contractor's schedule due to the status of grading being completed by the developer, Progress Land Company. This Change Order does not include a change in Contract price. Staff requests Council approval of this item. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #3 TO ROSEWOOD ESTATES/VILLAGE STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT #350 AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY SIGNATURES. COUNCIL ACTION: 2 20 . d Od101 r - & Associates, Inc. Suite Uinnea 0+5;;'. Minneso.ta l 55422. 763.54148bd '. 763.54.7_klfl0 FAX 20'd March 27, 2003 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Rosemount 2875 145`E' Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 Re: Change Order No. 3 Rosewood Estates and Rosewood Village City of Rosemount Project No. 350 WSB Project No. 1466-00 Dear Mayor and Council: Please find attached Change Order No. 3 on the above -referenced project for your review and approval. This change order has been brought forward to extend the completion date for Rosewood Village, which is the north half of the entire Rosewood Development. The extended completion date is August 30, 2003, a two month extension. This extension is necessary to allow the developer, Progress Land Company, to resolve issues with Canadian Pacific Rail and complete the grading. These need to be completed before our contractor, Erickson Construction, can begin the construction in Rosewood Village. Please contact me at (763) 287-7163 if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Mark A. Erichson, P.E. lh cc: Andy Brotzler F:1 WPWIM/966-004032703-hmcc.doc Minneapolis - St. Cloud • Equal Opportunity Employer 002,M7S29L =UI00SSd '8 HSM ev:80 2002-LZ-duw ROSEWOOD ESTATES AND ROSEWOOD VILLAGE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT CITY PROJECT NO. 350 OWNER: City of Rosemount 2875 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 March 26, 2003 WSB PROJECT NO. 1466-00 CONTRACTOR: Erickson Construction 13616 Pleasant Lane Burnsville, MN 55337 YOU ARE DIRECTED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: THE COMPLETION DATE FOR ROSEWOOD VILLAGE HAS BEEN REVISED TO AUGUST 30, 2003. THE COMPLETION DATE FOR ROSEWOOD ESTATES REMAINS JUNE 30, 2003. THE FOLLOWING ITEM IS ADDED TO THE CONTRACT, AS ATTACHED: REMOBILIZATION It is understood that this change order includes all additinal costs and time extensions which are in any way, shape, or form assoicated with the work elements described above. CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE: ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICE: PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS: NOS. 1-2 CONTRACT PRICE PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE ORDER: NET INCREASE OF THIS CHANGE ORDER: CONTRACT PRICE WITH ALL APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS: RECOMMENDED BY: APPROVED BY: Mark A. Erichson, P.E. WSB & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEER CITY ENGINEER DATE OF COUNCIL ACTION CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIME: $1,692,660.20 ORIGINAL CONTRACT TIME: 6/30/03 -$30,432.60 NET CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS: NONE $1,662,227.60 CONTRACT TIME PRIOR TO THIS CHANGE ORDER: 6/30/03 $5,400.00 NET INCREASE OF CHANGE ORDER: 60 Days $1,667,627.60 CONTRACT TIME WITH APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS 8/30/03 APPROVED BY: ERICKSON CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR CITY ADMINISTRATOR F: I WPWIN1146& OOIExcell Co -31C0-3 ROSEWOOD ESTATES AND ROSEWOOD VILLAGE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT CITY PROJECT NO. 350 Added Item: Extended Item No. Description Qty Unit Price Amount 117 REMOBILIZATION 1 LUMP SUM $5,400.00 $5,400.00 Total Added Items $5,400.00 Total Change Order No. 3 $5,400.00 F.1WPW/NI1466-001ExcellCo-31CO3 Detail CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Authorize Distribution and Publication of Vesterra LLC Mining EAW AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer AGEN"6 fM W ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum and EAW APPROVED BY: /y, Please find attached a memorandum and Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) that has been prepared for Vesterra LLC, whom is proposing to conduct a mining operation in the City of Rosemount. Due to the size of the proposed mining operation, the completion of an EAW for the project is mandatory based on Minnesota Rules 4410.4300. Staff is requesting Council authorization for public distribution of the EAW for a 30 -day public comment period. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO AUTHORIZE PUBIC DISTRIBUTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) FOR THE VESTERRA, LLC SAND AND GRAVEL MINE FOR A 30 -DAY PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. COUNCIL ACTION: 3 Memorandum To: Honorahle Mayor and City Council, City of Rosemount From: Andi Moffatt, WSB & Associates, Inc. Date: March 24, 2003 Re. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Vesterra, LLCSand and Gravel Mine WSB Project No. 1005-70 Attached, please find a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine for, your consideration at the April 3, 2003 City Council Meeting. Based on Minnesota Rules 4410.4300, the EAW for this project is mandatory due to the size of the proposed mining operation. The EAW process needs to be completed prior to the City issuing any permits for this project. The purpose of this EAW is to identify potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed mining site. WSB Staff has reviewed the information provided by Vesterra, LLC for the EAW and made revisions as necessary. This information is reflected in the attached EAW. The City Council is asked to authorize public distribution of the EAW as required by Minnesota Rules 4410. Upon authorization, the EAW will be distributed for a 30 -day public comment period. At the end of the comment period, responses to comments will be developed and a recommendation as to the need for an Environmental Impact Statement will be made to the City Council for consideration. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (763)287-7196. C. Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator Rick Pearson, City Planner Andy Brotzler, City Engineer Jonathan Wilmshurst Minneapolis • St. Cloud • Equal Opportunity Employer Vesterra, LL Sand and Gravel City of Rosemount Rick Pearson 2875 145th St. W Rosemount, MN 55068 & Associates, Inc. WSB Project No. 1005-70 Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine EQB Publication Date: April 14, 2003 EAW Comment Deadline: May 14, 2003 RGU: City of Rosemount Rick Pearson 2875 145th St. W Rosemount, MN 55068 WSB & Associates, Inc. WSB Project No. 1005-70 WSB &'Associates, Inc. 4150 Olson MemorW Highway Suite 300 Minneapolis Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Council, City of Rosemount From: Andi Moffatt, WSB & Associates, Inc. ,h -- Date: Date: March 24, 2003 Re: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA K9 Vesterra, LLCSand and Gravel Mine WSB Project No. 1005-70 Attached, please find a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine for your consideration at the April 3, 2003 City Council Meeting. Based on Minnesota Rules 4410.4300, the EAW for this project is mandatory due to the size of the proposed mining operation. The EAW process needs to be completed prior to the City issuing any permits for this project. The purpose of this EAW is to identify potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed mining site. WSB Staff has reviewed the information provided by Vesterra, LLC for the EAW and made revisions as necessary. This information is reflected in the attached EAW. The City Council is asked to authorize public distribution of the EAW as required by Minnesota Rules 4410. Upon authorization, the EAW will be distributed for a 30 -day public comment period. At the end of the comment period, responses to comments will be developed and a recommendation as to the need for an Environmental Impact Statement will be made to the City Council for consideration. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (763)287-7196. C. Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator Rick Pearson, City Planner Andy Brotzler, City Engineer Jonathan Wilmshurst Minneapolis • St. Cloud • Equal Opportunity Employer 7 J 'I I� 1 I� ENVIRONMENTALAsSESSMENT WORKSHEET Note to preparers: This form is available at www.mnplan.state.mn.us. EAW Guidelines will be available in Spring 1999 at the web site. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit or its agents to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement should be prepared. The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data for — but should not complete — the final worksheet. If a complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. The complete question as well as the answer must be included if the EAW is prepared electronically. Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30 -day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS. 1. Project title Vesterra, LLC sand and gravel mine in the City of Rosemount 2.Proposer Contact person Jonathan J. Wilmshurst Title Vice President Address 12741 Shannon Parkway City, state, ZIP Rosemount, MN 55068 Phone 651-322-2603 Fax 651-322-2603 E-mail ionathanwilms(ai,,aol.com 3.RGU City of Rosemount Contact person Rick Pearson Title City Planner Address City Hall, 2875 145`s St W City Rosemount, MN 55068-4997 Phone 651-423-4411 Fax 651-423-5203 E-mail rick.pearson c�,ci.rosemount.mn.us 4. Reason for EAW preparation (check one) EIS scoping Mandatory EAW x Citizen petition RGU discretion Proposer volunteered If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number 4410.4300 Subpart 12 : Non-metallic mineral mining of more than 40 acres but less than 160 acres to a depth of 10 feet or greater. 5. Project location County - Dakota City/Township - Rosemount NEV4 of SW'/ (except the north 736 feet of the west 300 feet) and NW'/ of SE '/, Section 23, Township 115 N Range 19 W Attach, each of the following to the EAW: • County map showing the general location of the project; • U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy acceptable); • Site plan showing all significant project and natural features. These items are attached as Appendix A, Exhibits 1 - 7. Page 1 of 15 March 25, 2003 I!� 1 6 Description a. Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. ' Vesterra LLC intends to operate a sand and gravel mine with a crushing, washing and screening plant to provide construction aggregates for the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The facility will be located in an agricultural area immediately south and west of the Flint Hills refinery in Rosemount. ' b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal or remodeling of ' existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. Vesterra is proposing to mine gravel and sand from a 75 -acre area located immediately south of County Road 38 and 0.25 miles west of CSAH 71/131aine Avenue in Rosemount, MN. The ' purpose of this mining facility is to provide an additional source of construction sand and gravel aggregates in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. ' The land is currently being used for agricultural purposes. The mine will remove up to fifty feet of material from the higher ground covering all but the east end of the property. This will bring the higher ground down to approximately the same elevation as the east end of the property, and the contiguous parcel to the north. Finished grades will be sloped gently to the east, which will ' not significantly change current surface water drainage patterns. Mining will commence more or less at the center of the property and will hollow out the bluff to the west. Mining will then proceed in an orderly fashion to the west end of the property. Owing to the site contours, very little of the mine face will be exposed to public view at any given time. No more than 15 acres of open floor will be left un -reclaimed at any time. Much of the area to be mined has the underlying deposit showing at the surface, so the amount of stripping to be done will be minimal. Those areas that do need to be stripped will provide the source of material for berms, and this is also where the topsoil will be stored that will be used for ' reclamation at the completion of each phase of the mine. Additional topsoil may need to be brought in to complete the reclamation process. Equipment to be used in the mining process is expected to be front-end loaders, conveyors, ' screens, and crushing and washing equipment. No blasting will take place at the site. In order to comply with Minnesota weights and measures statutes, a weigh -scale will be installed along with a small temporary office for the scale operator and site manager. Some small concrete pads will be used to anchor the processing equipment, but these will be easily removed once mining is complete. It is likely that first year of mining will employ fully portable equipment supplied by a contract processor. This will enable proper preparation of the site for the fixed installation. iThe washing operation will require the use of a well and a two-stage settling pond system. It is intended that all water used for the operations will be recycled, or infiltrate back into the ground, or evaporate. No chemicals of any kind will be used in the processing of the sand and gravel, with the exception of surfactants if a wet suppression system is needed. Hours of operation will be consistent with the City of Rosemount ordinance. J Page 2 of 15 March 25, 2003 fl ' Natural contours will be used as far as possible to screen activities from neighbors and the public. Berms will be constructed and planted to screen two neighboring residences in the northwest and ' southeast corners in conformance with established agreements with those residents. The Kraft property to the southeast will be screened in two different ways. First, three to six foot berms will be built along the property boundary in front of the farmhouse and planted with trees to ' thicken up the mature belt of trees that exists currently. In addition, the neighbor has an agreement with Vesterra that he will use his own machine this spring to improve drainage in the vicinity of his corn bins by doing some grading on Vesterra's property. Second, the toe of the ' existing hill on Vesteira's property will be extended out further into the fifteen -acre field and seeded so as to provide a secondary screen of the operations from the farmhouse. The Darsow property to the northwest will be screened in accordance with the agreement in ' Appendix E. This was negotiated and attached to the original purchase agreement for the Vesterra property. This calls for a 100ft setback from the property, and construction of a berm inside the setback. This berm will be not less than four feet high and thirty-two feet wide. The berm will be ' planted with 3 -foot high evergreens at eight feet intervals. Vesterra will work closely with both neighbors before, during and after the screening project to ensure that screening is to their satisfaction. There are no other residents within a quarter mile of the property boundaries. There are approximately 7 homes within 0.5 miles of the site. The City's ordinance requires screening ' provisions for homes within 0.25 miles of the mining operation. Berms will be created and planted at the east end of the property to screen the processing plant and the opening into the active face. ' The duration of the operation is expected to be approximately ten years, assuming a production rate of approximately five hundred thousand tons annually. The eastern fifteen acres will continue to be farmed as at present. The fifteen acres is currently ' leased on a year-to-year basis, but is not fully utilized. It is assumed that these activities can be accommodated within the available space remaining. If this is not the case, then the area will be ' seeded with an appropriate grass mix. The original farmhouse, barn and outbuildings, together with the established trees, will remain during the mining process and will help to screen operations. The buildings and some of the trees will be removed at the. end of the mine life so that the land can be graded level with the rest of the site. ' As mining proceeds in phases of approximately five acres per annum, the property will be sloped on the western and southern boundaries at grades of no more than four to one and be completed to meet the requirements of the City. Topsoil will be spread at a depth of no less than four inches and seeded with an appropriate mix in the event that it is not returned to an agricultural use in the interim. Ultimately, the end-use plan for this property will depend on zoning in the area as determined by ' the City, but the mine floor will be left in a condition suitable either for agriculture or for development. ' c. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. ' This project will be carried out by a private company. There are two primary purposes for this project: 1. To remove sand and gravel resources from this area. 2. To grade the property so that its ultimate end-use potential for either agriculture or development is maximized. Page 3 of 15 March 25, 2003 r F7 I' L_ d. Are future stages of this development including development on any outlots planned or likely to happen? _Yes x No If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for environmental review. Subsequent uses of this property will depend entirely on end-use plans that are yet to be developed by the City of Rosemount. Current designation is Agricultural within the twenty-year Rosemount Comprehensive Plan, so the current plan would be to restore the property for agricultural use. e. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? _Yes x No If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review. 7. Project magnitude data Total project acreage 75 acres Number of residential units: unattached n/a attached n/a maximum units per building Commercial, industrial or institutional building area (gross floor space): total square feet n/a Indicate areas of specific uses (in square feet): Office n/a Manufacturing n/a Retail n/a Other industrial n/a Warehouse n/a Institutional n/a Light industrial n/a Agricultural n/a Other commercial (specify) n/a Building height Stockpiles and plant may be as high as thirty feet, but will still be significantly lower than the prevailing land height to the west, south and north. Viewed from Co 71 to the east these will be nearly one half mile away and will not break the skyline. The location of the anticipated six stockpiles is shown on Exhibit 2 in Appendix A. These stockpiles will be at their largest at the end of the production season, and at the smallest in the spring. The pile that will grow to be the largest is the coarse sand, simply because it represents the bulk of the deposit. The footprint of the sand pile will be approximately 30ft high x 300ft long by 150ft wide, for approximately 75,000 tons of storage. Total inventory in the fall of all products would be unlikely to exceed 100,000 tons. 8. Permits and approvals required. List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. Unit of government City of Rosemount City of Rosemount MPCA MPCA MN DNR Dakota County Highway Department Mine Safety and Health Administration Page 4 of 15 March 25, 2003 Type of application Status Mine permit Pending WCA Permit If needed NPDES storm water permit Needed Air permit Needed Water appropriation Needed Posting ruling on Co. 71 Pending Register the mine Needed 9. Land use. Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent ' lands. Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past site uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. The project is in an area that is currently and historically primarily agricultural. Current agricultural use is primarily row -crops, with some small market garden plots worked by the Hmong community. Only ' two residences lie within a quarter mile of the subject property. The farmhouse on the site contains a tank in the basement that holds heating oil. There are also two septic tanks on-site, one each side of the entrance driveway. The farmhouse will not be disturbed by ' this project and therefore, the oil and septic tanks are not anticipated to be impacted by this. project. The properties on the east and north side of the project area are owned by Flint Hills Resources and are currently used as part of the buffer zone for the Pine Bend Refinery. There are a number of pipelines criss-crossing the general area, but none that are directly affected by this proposal. The closest runs to the west of the western end of the project area. ' The project will take place on land that has been used exclusively for agriculture. Based on the soil boring information and anticipated depths for mining, the mining activity will take place entirely above the groundwater table. ' It is anticipated that there will be minimal fugitive dust since the operations will be contained in a small area and involve the mining of damp material, using a wet processing plant. Material will be picked up with a wheeled front-end loader at the mine face and deposited into a hopper, from where it will be conveyed to a surge (holding) pile, which is used to even out flow to the processing plant.Material is then pulled from the surge pile by a variable feeder and conveyed to a wash screen where pressurized water jets, together with an inclined double or triple deck screen are ' used to separate out the different components of gravel and sand. The sized gravel products are conveyed and discharged directly onto the stockpiles. The wet sand is conveyed or pumped to a sand ' classification system where the different sized sand particles are sorted out into fine sand, coarse sand, and probably a grit. All of this process is a wet process. The dirty water will be pumped or gravity - drained to the settling ponds. At the opposite end of the ponds, the clarified water will be reclaimed and used again, as much as possible. Additional water will be drawn from a new well that will be located near the wash plant. In addition to the process mentioned above, there will be a crusher located somewhere in the system, although the exact location has yet to be determined based on what the customers require and ' manufacturers recommend. It will either be between the pit -face hopper and the surge pile, of after the screen. The material will be fed damp into the crusher, and a mist sprayer will be used to wet down any dust coming out of the crusher. ' The largest impact on the surrounding community will be truck traffic. Assuming an average truck capacity of twenty tons and 200 working days, this would result in 125 trucks on a typical day, or 16 per hour over an eight-hour day. A more detailed analysis including estimated peak capacity is shown in Item 21. It is intended that the primary haul route will be via 135' St to County 71, and then along 117`h Street to the intersection with State Highway 55/52. It is estimated that 70% of products will take this route. It ' is estimated that 30% will proceed south on County 71 to County 42. Only deliveries to the immediate local community would go to the west. Page 5 of 15 ' March 25, 2003 0 11 10. Cover types. Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development: If Before and After totals are not equal, explain why. Before After 11. Fish, wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources Before After Types 1-8 wetlands 0 0 Lawn/landscapm 1 0 Wooded/forest 0 0 Impervious surfaces 1 0 Brush/Grassland 10 12 Other (describe) _Yes X No Cropland 63 63 survey of the resources has been conducted and describe the results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program has been contacted give the correspondence reference number: ' TOTAL 75 75 If Before and After totals are not equal, explain why. Wetland totals are pending spring verification. ' 11. Fish, wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources a. Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they ' would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts. There is little habitat for wildlife on the property with the exception of the large trees around the old farm buildings, which will be left as far as possible when final grading is done. The ten acres of brush and grassland is of low quality and is infested with exotics such as leafy spurge and knapweed. ' b. Are any state -listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat, colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities on or near the site? _Yes X No If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources has been conducted and describe the results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program has been contacted give the correspondence reference number: ' ERDB 20030453 is attached as Appendix B. Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. 12. Physical impacts on water resources. Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration — dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment — of any surface waters such as a lake, pond, wetland, stream or drainage ditch? _Yes x No If yes, identify water resource affected and give the DNR Protected Waters Inventory number(s) if the water resources affected are on the PWI: n/a Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. The proposal was reviewed by Bill Bleckwenn of Sanders, Wacker, Bergly, Inc. for potential impacts to surface water resources such as wetlands, ponds or watercourses. Data sources such as the National Wetland Inventory, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Protected Waters Inventory, City of ' Rosemount Wetland Inventory and the Dakota County Soil Survey were reviewed for indications of potential wetlands on the site. The National Wetland Inventory for the Coates, Minnesota and Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota quadrangles depicts one PEMC (Circular 39 Type 3) wetland on the Kraft parcel. The DNR Protected Waters Inventory for Dakota County did not depict and Public Waters or Water Courses within the proposed project site area. The City of Rosemount Wetland Inventory (1999) indicated that a (Circular 39) Type 1 wetland was located on the project site in an area to the south and southeast of the existing farmstead on the site. The City has assigned a "Utilize" management classification to this basin. This classification means that wetlands of this type should be considered for sequencing flexibility for use within the City's stormwater management system. This Page 6 of 15 ' March 25, 2003 11 �L� classification is typically assigned to wetlands of lesser natural integrity having low functions and values. The Dakota County Soil Survey did not depict zones of hydric soils within the project area. Soils were typically characterized as being well -drained, very well -drained, or excessively well - drained. A field review of the site was conducted in January 2003 for potential wetlands on the site. The entire site was assessed for the presence of wetland. No areas existed on the site that clearly met the criteria set forth in the 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual for jurisdictional wetland, even in areas indicated on the National Wetland Inventory and the City inventory. The site was fully cropped in corn, soybeans and non-native pasture grasses. One small area of bare soil was observed within a small cabbage field to the south of the existing farmstead. The area had a scattering of crabgrass (Digitaria sp.) and had no hydrophytic species present. Ponding of surface water was not observed. A confirmation of these findings will be performed during the Spring 2003 growing season when soil conditions will be fully assessed. Should the spring field verification determine that there is a wetland on the property, Vesterra will respond in one of two ways. Either the existing wetland will be ringed with silt fence at an appropriate setback and operations will work around it or, more likely, Vesterra will work with an approved environmental engineer to develop a wetland of the appropriate size and quality elsewhere on the property by way of mitigation. 13. Water use. Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water wells, connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of any ground or surface water (including dewatering)? x Yes _No If yes, as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; public supply affected, changes to be made, and water quantities to be used; the source, duration, quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and unique well numbers and DNR appropriation permit numbers, if known. Identify any existing and new wells on the site map. If there are no wells known on site, explain methodology used to determine. Currently a domestic well supplies the old farm buildings and this will continue to be used to supply renters during the life of the proposed project. When the farm buildings are removed at the end the project this well will be properly sealed and abandoned. The farmhouse is being rented out on a month-to-month basis, and it is envisioned that this will be the case throughout the duration of the mining operation. It is anticipated that the renter will continue to use the original domestic well. Separately, this well is used during the summer months on a limited basis by a Hmong family that rents the eastern fifteen acres of the property for vegetable growing. The project will involve the use of groundwater recovered through a well for the purpose of washing aggregates. The well will be located beside the processing plant, more or less in the center of the property. It is intended to re -circulate water from the settling ponds as much as possible, depending on the loss through infiltration and evaporation. An appropriation permit for a new well will be sought from MNDNR subject to equipment supplier recommendations as to the amount of water that will be needed to effectively operate the wash plant. The exact amount of water required will depend on the final plant configuration and the loss of water through evaporation and infiltration. Maximum water volume needed to operate the plant will be 2,500-3,000 gallons per hour, so the make-up water from the well will be something less than this. This well would be useful for irrigation if the property remains agricultural in use. Page 7 of 15 March 25, 2003 11 1 11 14. Water -related land use management district. Does any part of the project involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100 -year flood plain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? Yes X No If yes, identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions. 15. Water surface use. Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? a. Yes X No If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other uses. 16. Erosion and sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: Acres 75 Cubic yards 3.5 million Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction. Information from the Dakota County Soil Survey and Highly Erodible Soils Map Unit List indicate that the following soil are highly erodible or potentially highly erodible: Waukegan Silt Loam, 1 to 6 % slopes: Potentially Highly Erodible Hawick Coarse Sandy Loam, 6 to 12 % slopes: Potentially Highly Erodible Hawick Coarse Sandy Loam, 12 to 18 % slopes: Highly Erodible There is an existing steep slope that is of natural origin separating the high ground that will be mined from the low ground that will be left relatively unchanged in elevation. There is some minor evidence of washouts on the lower limits of the slope where plowing has encroached on the foot of the hill. It is this slope that will be dug into to commence the mining operation. The primary stockpiling locations for topsoil will be in the berms in front of the two neighboring homes, and along the eastern side of the operations. Any additional space needed will be on the north side of the toe of the bank that will screen the plant from the Darsows. These stockpiles will be landscaped and seeded with an appropriate grass mix, using silt fence while the grass becomes established. Once mining and grading of side-walls around the mine is completed in phases, the affected areas will be covered with topsoil and seeded. The maximum side slope allowed is 4:1 per the City requirements. Silt fences will be used as needed, but wherever possible any surface water will be directed into the floor of the pit, and then into the settling ponds. 17. Water quality: surface water runoff a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any stormwater pollution prevention plans. In the existing conditions, the site generates 5.2 acre-feet, 11.4 acre-feet, and 20.4 acre-feet of runoff for the 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year event, respectively. Water is generally directed from the west to the east and discharges to the Flint Hills Resources property along the site's eastern border. A small part of the far western portion of the site drains to the southeast to,the Kraft property. ' During mining activities, the site is anticipated to generate additional storm water runoff and increase Page 8 of 15 ' March 25, 2003 ' the rate of discharge from the site. However, a settling pond area will be constructed on the site and storm water will be directed to the pond for rate control and treatment. This pond will be designed to meet City standards for rate control and treatment. It is anticipated that some water will also infiltrate on the site due to the sandy soil conditions. 1 Not applicable. d. If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe disposal technique and location and discuss capacity to handle the volume and composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary. Describe any required setbacks for land disposal systems. Page 9 of 15 March 25, 2003 The settling ponds will be approximately 100' by 50', excavated 10' below the prevailing area and bermed three to five feet high around the edges using the excavated material. There will be.a weir separating the coarse (first) pond from the fine (second) pond, with further sectioning and weirs created within the ponds to slow down the water. A pump at the far end of the second pond will re- circulate water to the wash plant. On an as -needed basis, the accumulated fines will be dug out of the settling ponds using a front-end loader or backhoe, and stockpiled adjacent to the settling ponds until dry, whereupon they will likely be sold as fill material. This design will be further reviewed as part of the plan review process. b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters. Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters. Water is generally directed from the west to the east and discharges to the Flint Hills Resources property along the site's eastern border. A small part of the far western portion of the site drains to the southeast to the Kraft property. The wash water used to rinse the sand and gravel will contain fine sand and silt particles, but no other introduced chemicals or treatments. The settling ponds will be cleaned out periodically, and the most likely use of this material is that it will be allowed to dry out and then be sold as fill material. Alternatively, it may be mixed in as part of the reclamation activities to boost soil fines and nutrients. The City's Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan model identifies this area as having a large storm water storage area in the future. The end-use plan could incorporate this need for storm water storage. The end-use plan will also incorporate appropriate storm water ponding to meet the City's rate control and treatment requirements. 18. Water quality: wastewaters a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. On-site sanitary facilities will most likely involve one or two portable toilets serviced on a regular basis. b. Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including major downstream water bodies, and estimate the discharge impact on the quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems ' Not applicable. c. If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identify the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying any improvements necessary. 1 Not applicable. d. If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe disposal technique and location and discuss capacity to handle the volume and composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary. Describe any required setbacks for land disposal systems. Page 9 of 15 March 25, 2003 n t Not applicable. 19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions a. Approximate depth (in feet) To ground water: Minimum 25 feet average not known To bedrock: Minimum 25 feet average >60 feet Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards. Information from five drill holes on the west (higher) end of the property and the Dakota County Soil Survey indicate that only sand and gravel are present on site to a depth of fifty feet. The soil borings never encountered ground water or bedrock. One hole on the east (lower) end of the property encountered only sand and gravel to a depth of thirty feet, and never encountered ground water or bedrock. Thus, it is not believed that there are any geologic hazards to be aware of in terms of possible impact on ground water. Ground water was not encountered above approximately 850 feet, and the floor of the finished pit will be above 880 feet. b. Describe the soils on the site, giving MRCS (SCS) classifications, if known. Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination. Information from the Dakota County Soil Survey indicates that the following soils are present on the site: Hawick coarse sandy loam Waukegan sandy loam Kanaranzi loam Estherville sandy loam Wadena loam Kennebec sandy loam Lindstrom sandy loam The soils map with the NRCS classifications are shown in Appendix C. Soils on the site are generally thinner and sandier on the high ground. The best quality soils for the gravel mining operation are on the lower ground at the east end of the property, and in the swales on the higher ground. The soils and the underlying materials are very clean and granular in nature, theoretically resulting in a high potential for groundwater contamination in the event of waste or chemical spills. However, as noted above, the use and generation of such materials will be minimal, and operations will remain well above the water table. 20. Solid wastes, hazardous wastes, storage tanks a. Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how the project will be modified for recycling. If hazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous waste Page 10 of 15 March 25, 2003 Ireduction assessments. N/A c. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe any emergency response containment plans. There are no known underground storage tanks. The only existing tank with petroleum products is the one that holds heating oil that is located inside the basement of the farmhouse. The farmhouse will r not be disturbed by this project; therefore, the oil tank is not anticipated to be impacted. It is likely that the proposed operations would involve the use of a 500 -gallon, MPCA approved and certified, above ground storage tank. 21. Traffic. 1 Parking spaces added - six temporary for use of employees. Existing spaces (if project involves expansion) - none. There will be no solid or hazardous wastes generated on the site with the possible exception of a solvent based parts cleaner used in the maintenance of heavy vehicles. Disposal of such materials will be through an approved company such as Safety Kleen, Inc., and this would not involve classification as anything more than a Very Small Quantity Generator. In addition, the wash -water fines noted above consisting of fine sand and silt particles will be contained in settling ponds. These ponds will be dredged out as required and the dried fines will either be used in on-site reclamation activities or sold for use as fill. 1 b. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater. If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the waste, discharge or emission. N/A c. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe any emergency response containment plans. There are no known underground storage tanks. The only existing tank with petroleum products is the one that holds heating oil that is located inside the basement of the farmhouse. The farmhouse will r not be disturbed by this project; therefore, the oil tank is not anticipated to be impacted. It is likely that the proposed operations would involve the use of a 500 -gallon, MPCA approved and certified, above ground storage tank. 21. Traffic. 1 Parking spaces added - six temporary for use of employees. Existing spaces (if project involves expansion) - none. Estimated total average daily traffic generated. Assuming peak extraction of 500,000 tons per year and a seasonal distribution of demand, together with typical truck loads of 20 tons and two hundred ten-hour working days results in estimated traffic as follows: 500,000 tons = 25,000 trucks per annum Assume winter quarter of 50 working days will result in 5,000 loads. Assume construction season of 150 working days will result in remaining 20,000 loads = average of 133 trucks per day. Allowance for weather and demand variation results in an estimated peak daily traffic of 200 loads per day. Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and time of occurrence. Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. If the project is within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional transportation system. Assuming the peak daily traffic of 200 loads per day calculated above, and a daily demand pattern weighted toward mornings, the result is an estimate of 150 loads in the fust five hours, or 30 loads per ' hour. With the exception of deliveries into the immediate local community, which is expected to represent less than 10% of the total, all trucks will be required to exit onto 135`h Street and travel east to Co. 71. Page 11 of 15 March 25, 2003 LFrom Dust: there they will be required to travel either north on Co. 71, then via 117th Street to MN 52, or south onto County 42. r22. production of sand and gravel was assumed to be 500,000 tons. The deposit was assumed to have Vehicle -related air emissions. Estimate the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. Note: If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, ' consult EAW Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed. The only vehicles permanently on site will be two or three large front-end loaders. Delivery trucks will also be traveling in and out of the facility but none will be parked overnight. It is not anticipated ' that this level of activity will result in any problem with vehicle -related air emissions. Professionals familiar with this type of operation concur with this view. 23. Stationary source air emissions. Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air pollutants (consult EAW Guidelines for a listing) and any greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) and ozone-depleting chemicals (chlorofluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control ' devices. Describe the impacts on air quality. The most prevalent source of fugitive dust in an operation such as this is from on- and off-road wheeled vehicles as they move around. Dust control measures will be employed as follows: regular reclamation and planting/seeding of berms and pit floor will keep exposed soils to a minimum, and roads will be regularly sprayed with water. In addition, the much lower elevation of the mine floor will tend to protect it from westerly winds that may pick up dust. With one exception, there are no residences to the east of the proposed mine, which is generally the direction in which airborne dust is carried. The closest approach that mining will make to a residence will be 100 feet from the neighbors' property to the west, where the home sits on a five -acre parcel. The neighbor to the southeast will also be in close proximity to the activity, but a plan for double screening has been agreed upon with that neighbor. ' 24. Odors, noise and dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation? X Yes _No If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be discussed at item 23 instead of here.) Dust: Using table EC 10.1 from the MN Pollution Control Agency Form EC 10, calculations of annual PM and PM 10 emissions were made based on the plant layout shown on the attached plans. Annual production of sand and gravel was assumed to be 500,000 tons. The deposit was assumed to have moisture content of greater than or equal to 1.5%. If actual moisture content falls below this level then a wet suppression system will be installed. Based upon these calculations, the plant will actually emit 4,823 lbs of PM and 636 lbs of PM 10 ' annually. The theoretical maximum annual emissions of PM and PM10 are 16.9 tons and 2.2 tons respectively, based on 400 tons per hour for 8760 hours per annum. This would put the operation well below the federal and state thresholds requiring a Title V permit. A summary of these calculations is ' attached as Appendix D. Page 12 of 15 March 25, 2003 _Yes X No A cemetery is located southeast of the site at the corner of CSAH 42 and CSAH 71. However, it will not be impacted by the project. Further, the State Historic Preservation Office concluded that there are no known historic or archeological properties that will be affected by this project. See letter reference SHPO # 2003-0443 attached as Appendix B. Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? X Yes _No ' The two properties to the west of the subject property are enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program. Both owners have given notice of withdrawal from the Program, one recently and the other approximately two years ago. A soils map for the area is included in Appendix C. It is likely that the farmland in this area will be lost to development in the not too distant future, regardless of whether mining occurs or not, although the current City Comprehensive Plan shows this area as Agricultural. Designated parks, recreation areas or trails? _Yes X No L Scenic views and vistas? _Yes X No The skyline in this area is dominated by the Flint Hills refinery, and by numerous utility lines that cross the open farmland resulting in a generally industrial viewscape. Other unique resources? _Yes X No If yes, describe the resource and identify any project -related impacts on the resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. Page 13 of 15 March 25, 2003 Odors: There will be no odors generated from this operation. Noise: The equipment used for mining and processing materials will create noise. However, any noise generated will be well within MPCA guidelines as measured at the property boundaries, since the plant will be located close to the middle of the property and will be enclosed by forty -foot high banks on three sides. Flint Hills Refinery is the on the open side. The neighbors have been promised that the back-up beepers normally present on heavy equipment will be replaced with cameras (provided that this is approved by the Mine Safety and Health Administration). This beeping is the most frequent noise irritant from operations such as this. 25. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site? Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? _Yes X No A cemetery is located southeast of the site at the corner of CSAH 42 and CSAH 71. However, it will not be impacted by the project. Further, the State Historic Preservation Office concluded that there are no known historic or archeological properties that will be affected by this project. See letter reference SHPO # 2003-0443 attached as Appendix B. Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? X Yes _No ' The two properties to the west of the subject property are enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve program. Both owners have given notice of withdrawal from the Program, one recently and the other approximately two years ago. A soils map for the area is included in Appendix C. It is likely that the farmland in this area will be lost to development in the not too distant future, regardless of whether mining occurs or not, although the current City Comprehensive Plan shows this area as Agricultural. Designated parks, recreation areas or trails? _Yes X No L Scenic views and vistas? _Yes X No The skyline in this area is dominated by the Flint Hills refinery, and by numerous utility lines that cross the open farmland resulting in a generally industrial viewscape. Other unique resources? _Yes X No If yes, describe the resource and identify any project -related impacts on the resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. Page 13 of 15 March 25, 2003 1 26. Visual impacts. Will the project create adverse visual impacts during construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? Yes X No If yes, explain. None of the visual impacts discussed in the EAW Guidelines (e.g. intense lights creating glare, strobe 1 lights on a communications tower, large water vapor releases from and exhaust stack) or similar visual impacts will result from the proposed mine. There will be no direct visibility of the working mine ' from any residence, although one residence may be able to see some of the product stockpiling area. Vehicles on Co.71 and Co.38 will probably be able to see some signs of activity, but from a quarter mile away at the closest. Generally, the mine face will advance to the west, leaving the open face always directed toward the Flint Hills refinery. 27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations. Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? X Yes No. If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain. The project area is subject to the Rosemount Comprehensive Plan, and the subject property lies within ' an area in which mining activities were recently approved by the City Council as an interim use. This area is designated as Agricultural for the foreseeable future, but the proximity to the Flint Hills Refinery and to major haul roads are such that the long term uses are more likely to be commercial/industrial in nature. This project is also subject to the City's Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan and will be required to meet the requirements of this Plan. 28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? X Yes _No. If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure or services needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EAW; see EAW Guidelines for details.) A Traffic Study prepared by Benshoof and Associates is attached as Appendix F. It is possible that upgrades to the pavement on County 71, or turning and acceleration lanes may be recommended as traffic in this area increases. If trucking activity is to continue during road postings then Vesterra, LLC will need to find alternative access onto Co 71, or else cooperate in the upgrading of the eastern one quarter mile of 135f'` St. 29. Cumulative impacts. Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700, subpart 7, item B requires that the RGU consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential Page 14 of 15 ' March 25, 2003 for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item(s) elsewhere on this form). The City of Rosemount recently approved mining as an interim use in the area east of Akron Avenue, south of 135t` St, north of County 42 and west of County 71, with the exception of properties covered under the Agricultural Preserve program. Since no other applications for mining permits are forthcoming for this area at this time it is appropriate to proceed with an EAW for this property. The applicant, Vesterra, LLC, has committed that this property will be placed back into the EIS process in the event that such a process commences in the future. 30. Other potential environmental impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. The proposed mine in not anticipated to cause any impacts other than those already mentioned. 31. Summary of issues. Do not complete this section if the EAW is being done for EIS scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document, which must accompany the EAW. List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is begun. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. 1) Traffic — The addition of truck traffic on local county roads will be reviewed by the County Engineer. The applicant will cooperate with any mitigation measures brought forward by the County Engineer. 2) Noise and Dust — All operations will be conducted in a professional manner and will fall well within state guidelines. The applicant will work very closely with the two neighbors that may be impacted by these operations to ensure that problems are addressed in a timely manner. It is intended to push the processing plant and associated activities as far back into the hillside as practical to maximize the screening. 3) Visual Impacts — Berms and plantings will be used to screen those parts of the operation that are open to view. However, the activities will be surrounded on three sides by the natural landscape, resulting in a relatively low visual impact as far as the general public is concerned. 4) Storm Water — The project is anticipated to generate some additional storm water runoff. This runoff will be treated within on-site ponding facilities to reduce the runoff rate leaving the site and provide for storm water quality treatment. RGU CERTIFICATION. The Environmental Quality Board will only accept SIGNED Environmental Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB Monitor. I hereby certify that: • The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. • The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minnesota Rules, parts 4410.0200, subparts 9b and 60, respectively. • Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. Signature Title Page 15 of 15 ' March 25, 2003 Date O 1317.82 NO'11'33"E 7 z z c 7 R R C, C, R U m C -n C C7 FTI �1 C y C Cf) C rn c.� T O H20 O tm'i 'D p GT b 0 <1320,67 `=0'14'46"W oo1{n" ms$ti OF H oar n am "' m r = " m c o m z ooy 7. � r�; 5" t ^ •� o m zo s� T yo m i m K M x jM ry F a <a2 .8 •'< ^ _ Cp Z = 2 N _ A. � mw a ai m m C -n C C7 FTI �1 C y C Cf) C rn c.� T O H20 O tm'i 'D p GT b 0 oo1{n" ms$ti H oar n am "' m r = " m c o m z ooy 70, zo s� T yo m i m K M x jM Cp Z N � mw a ai m SANDERS VESTERRA; LLC USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP J L WACKER BERGLY ROSEMOUNT MINE PLAN EXHIBIT 6 INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS ROSEMOUNT, Saint East Kellogg MN 5101 MINNESOTA SainF Paul, MN 55701 .IANIIARY 13 mn.3 SANDERS VESTERRA, LLC BERGLY ROSEMOUNT MINE PLAN INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS ROSEMOUNT, 365 East Kellogg Blvd. Saint aint Paul, MN 55101 MINNESOTA Phone; (651) 221-0401 Fax: (651) 297-6817 Web Page: www.swbinc.com CONCEPT END USE GRADING PLAN EXHIBIT 5 JANUARY 13, 2003 --/ E co M 0 Go S0 `w- W Y cu 5 Iot SANDERS VESTERRA, LLC J L WACKER c� BERGLY ROSEMOUNT MINE PLAN INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS ROSEMOUNT, 365 East MN 5 KMINNESOTA Saint Paul, MN 55101 Phone: (651) 221-0401 Fax: (651) 297-6817 Web Page: www.swbinc.com N m '4 � W 7K n Q W tu 0 7 TYPICAL SITE SECTIONS EXHIBIT 4 JANUARY 13, 2003 I µ \ ► y,� ��pS '9 i�l t �(u,, t its i ac I i�tsGr VA, �h1i"I 9'II � k i Ai S' n. XLv Iis gii 1 '1 a.. s' G r hN wurv,�. 4�� u e IH�,yt �, ► f rp� � u' YrY 'T.� b x d �a �v i k � JRJ��ggN � '�,•. P�` IJ filY.tbk a j 6, NIF3�,1a'v,Y _ wM� �lp �1 `. . rn 1 a M, S . + -17 a 3 TYPICAL SITE SECTIONS EXHIBIT 4 JANUARY 13, 2003 a a 0 l , 1' � -"' j / -._- -,- .•-._ � \ ` � ( '\ -.,til' i `` !J� �Ir • 00 Q80 fUnv `��` .. 'ti � �'•, � , fel ' i o ,/li - r j//',r` j � •-� J � � � � ti _ � i` ce �- ,� ..� , I ,11• l.�li/ -moi.-' �� ' � .. I ! _... ... _ r • i. / 0 SANDERS VESTERRA, LLC WACR BERGLY ROSEMOUNT MINE PLAN INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS ROSEMOUNT, 365 East , MN 5 MINNESOTA Saint Paul, MN 55101 Phone; (651) 221-0401 Fax: (651) 297-6817 Web Page: www.swbinc.com END USE PLAN EXHIBIT 3 JANUARY 13, 2003 001 r 7 0 OKI ut N cn 0 rn �-m cn r - * z= w ca0 ah cyl z> 0 zm v� v m -u3 ------ - - --- -- -- � vyvvvvvv moll- �j it 4- SANDERS VESTERRA, LLC MINING OPERATIONS PLAN BERGLY ROSEMOUNT MINE PLAN EXHIBIT 2 INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS ROSEMOUNT, 365 East Kellogg 5 Blv101 MINNESOTA PhSainte: (6, MN 5510 JANUARY 13, 2003 Phone: (651) 221-0401 Fax: (651) 297-6617 Web Page: www.swbinc.com � � w RL BE W / � If( 1\\\\__\ I 1 1 1) �/ ��_ \ 11\1l\\ illi,�/.J 1 Ill\ / / >.%/, III 111 o pk�f II l� l 1 I (tl I \Ifl1/ Id, \\\//i_� \ / II1// \ 111\\\� 1\\ ��_/\Ill\1\�� _� �)J%1J f iIIIIIIIIIII 111 1 � l ,I1 // /// )11/1/)111 ///i /r,-�\� J// / 1//// o /J �•// �// // 1J11//J Ill\\t\�� /'�i %�IlrJl / , ��moi `= ( � 1 / / / / I/(/!///!!,'/ 1\ \\\ _ Ill l/( � ! 1 �1 i� I I l '/ /ii///,•�� / ! /` �\'1 \\\�� 1 /cam lC, // 13 \\\ —6 � //tel </ !�/ji/�Jll/jl// IITrr�z71` //Z Tm 1 \ \\IIfIIJ/(_1/ \\j)1t'I(/; /1!% I\/�/,/ iJ A -N—_-- 0 ��\\Illlllllll`�eb` 111/mil% �Z�� Iii t Ili/ J111 1IIII1(l( ( l = /1)111 111// (l\<<1!i/�%//� ////i' '��—' '/ l �o Z�ldllll /�1j1111l1Gii/i /i//// /'/' �� /'n ~`� �_ O / J r rt� \_ � 111 J�FA ///// / / / /—ter— ✓ i / Z \ — �hllll -06 G \ F�Ay age �. `- ,1 • / � / ��- � _ �\ j � � � _ j 1' I .HAUL ROUTE ° < � . SANDERS VESTERRA, LLC c BERGLY ROSEMOUNT MINE PLAN INC. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS ROSEMOUNT, SaintEast Kellogg 5 Blv101 MINNESOTA Saint Paul, MN 55101 Phone: (651) 221-0401 Fox: (651) 297-6817 - Web Page: www.swbinc.com LOCATION MAP EXIS11NG CONDITIONS HAUL ROUTES J EXHIBIT 1 JANUARY 13, 2003 11 INovember 25, 2002 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, Box 25 500 Lafayette Road Si. Raul. Minnesota 55155-40__ Phone: (651) 296-7863 Fax: (651) 296-1811 E-mail: sarah.hoffmann@dnr.state.mn.us Jonathan J. Wilmshurst ' Vesterra L.L.C. 12741 Shannon Parkway Rosemount, MN 55068 Re: Request for Natural Heritage information for vicinity of proposed Vesterra Sand & Gravel Mine, T1 15N R19W Section 23, Dakota County NHNRP Contact #: ERDB 20030453 Dear Mr. Wilmshurst, The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one -mile radius of the area indicated on the map enclosed with your information request. Based on this review, there are no known occurrences of rare species or natural communities in the area searched. ' The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Services, Department of.Natural Resources. Itis continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or ' otherwise significant species, natural communities, and other natural features. Its purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features. . Because our information is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there may be rare or otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database. A county -by -county survey of rare natural features is now underway, and has been completed for Dakota County. Our information about natural communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county. However, because survey work for rare plants and animals is less exhaustive, and because there has not been an on-site survey of all areas of the ' county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist on the project area. Please be aware that review by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program focuses only on rare natural features. It does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. If you require further information on the environmental review process for other wildlife -related issues, you may contact your Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Wayne Barstad, at (651) 772-7940. An invoice for the work completed is enclosed. You are being billed for map and database search and staff scientist review. Please forward this invoice to your Accounts Payable Department. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. Sincerely, ah D Hoffmann Endangered, Species Environmental Review Coordinator. encl: Invoice DNR Information: 651-296-6157 1-888-646-6367 TTY: 651-296-5484 1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer If Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a Whn V.1 -C tli—_;W ^^' ^ December 6, 2002 Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst Vesterra, LLC 12741 Shannon Parkway Rosemount, MN 55068 MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE --- - -R€.----Sand-and gravel-rnir:e--60 acres -- T1 15 cres—T115 R19 S23 NW -SE, Rosemount, Dakota County ' SHPO Number. 2003-0443 I I 11 v 11 Dear Mr. Wilmshurst: Thank you for consulting with our office during the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the above referenced project. Based on our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal agency. Please contact us at (651) 296-5462 if you have any questions regarding our comments on this project. -_ - J J 345 Kellogg Boulevard gest/Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102-1906/Teleplione 651-296-6126 I U.S department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Page - #k 8/14/98 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRIME FARMLAND Survey Area- DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prime - - -- _ Map Farmland = present on Vesterra, LLC property ' Symbol Code Soil Mapunit Name --------------------------------------------------------------------------- l� Ll C 2B 1 OSTRANDER LOAM, 1 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 27A 1 DICKINSON SANDY LOAM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES 27B 1 DICKINSON SANDY LOAM, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 39A 1 WADENA LOAM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES 39B 1 WADENA LOAM, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 39B2 1 WADENA LOAM, 1 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES, ERODED 49B 1 ANTIGO SILT LOAM, 1 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES 98 3 COLO SILT LOAM, OCCASIONALLY FLOODED 106B 1 LESTER LOAM, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 109 2 CORDOVA SILTY CLAY LOAM 113 2 WEBSTER CLAY LOAM 114 2 GLENCOE SILTY CLAY LOAM 129 1 CYLINDER LOAM 150B 1 SPENCER SILT LOAM, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 176 2 GARWIN SILTY CLAY LOAM 1:816 1 KENNEBEC VARIANT SILT LOAM 1827A 1 WAUKEGAN SILT LOAM, BEDROCK SUBSTRATUM, 0 TO SLOPES 27B 1 WAUKEGAN SILT LOAM, BEDROCK SUBSTRATUM, 2 TO SLOPES 1894B 1 WINNEBAGO LOAM, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 1895B 1 CARMI LOAM, 2 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES 1896B 1 OSTRANDER-CARMI LOAMS, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 1902B 1 JEWETT SILT LOAM, 1 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 203B 1 JOY SILT LOAM, 1 TO 5 PERCENT SLOPES 208 2 KATO SILTY CLAY LOAM 213B 1 KLINGER SILT LOAM, 1 TO 5 PERCENT SLOPES 226 1 LAWSON SILT LOAM 239 1 LE SUEUR LOAM 250 1 KENNEBEC SILT LOAM 252 2 MARSHAN SILTY CLAY LOAM 253 2 MAXCREEK SILTY CLAY LOAM 255 2 MAYER SILT LOAM 279B 1 OTTERHOLT SILT LOAM, 1 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 285A 1 PORT BYRON SILT LOAM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES 285B 1 PORT BYRON SILT LOAM, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 299A 1 ROCKTON LOAM, 0 TO 2 PERCENT SLOPES 29913 1 ROCKTON LOAM, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 301B 1 LINDSTROM SILT LOAM, 1 TO 4 PERCENT SLOPES 313 1 SPILLVILLE LOAM, OCCASIONALLY FLOODED 318 2 MAYER LOAM, SWALES 320B 1 TALLULA SILT LOAM, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 342B 1 KINGSLEY SANDY LOAM, 3 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES "'4 2 QUAM SILT LOAM IB 1 MERTON SILT LOAM, 1 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 378 2 MAXFIELD SILTY CLAY LOAM 38213 1 BLOOMING SILT LOAM, 1 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 409B' 1 ETTER FINE SANDY LOAM, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 2 PERCENT 6 PERCENT 1 WAUKEGAN SILT LOAM, 0 TO 1 PERCENT SLOPES 1 WAUKEGAN SILT LOAM, 1 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 2 HIAMEL SILT LOAM 1 CRYSTAL LAKE SILT LOAM, 1 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES 1 MINNEISKA LOAM, OCCASIONALLY FLOODED 1 KINGSLEY-LESTER COMPLEX, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 1 KINGSLEY-MAHTOMEDI-SPENCER COMPLEX, 3 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES Prime Farmland Code Description 1 All areas are prime farmland. 2 Only drained areas are prime farmland. 3 Only areas protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season are prime farmland. 5 Only drained areas that are either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season are prime farmland. 1ADDITIONAL FARMLAND OF STATEWIDE IMPORTANCE 8/99 NAME Ostrander loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Wadena loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Wadena loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Estherville sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Estherville sandy loam, 2 to.6 percent slopes Terril loam, 4 to 12 percent slopes Copaston loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Copaston loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes Lester loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Lester loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Chetek sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Otterholt silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes Port Byron silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Rockton loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Tallula silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded Kingsley sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Waukegan silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Kanaranzi loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Kanaranzi.loam,,2 to 6 percent slopes Kingsley -Lester complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes Wadena-Hawick complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes Wadena-Hawick complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes Kingsley-Mahtomedi-Spencer complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes Timula-Bold silt loams, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded Waukegan silt loam, bedrock substratum, 6 to 12 percent slopes 411A ;�K 411B ' X14 463 888B 895B 1 WAUKEGAN SILT LOAM, 0 TO 1 PERCENT SLOPES 1 WAUKEGAN SILT LOAM, 1 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 2 HIAMEL SILT LOAM 1 CRYSTAL LAKE SILT LOAM, 1 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES 1 MINNEISKA LOAM, OCCASIONALLY FLOODED 1 KINGSLEY-LESTER COMPLEX, 2 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 1 KINGSLEY-MAHTOMEDI-SPENCER COMPLEX, 3 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES Prime Farmland Code Description 1 All areas are prime farmland. 2 Only drained areas are prime farmland. 3 Only areas protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season are prime farmland. 5 Only drained areas that are either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season are prime farmland. 1ADDITIONAL FARMLAND OF STATEWIDE IMPORTANCE 8/99 NAME Ostrander loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Wadena loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Wadena loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Estherville sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Estherville sandy loam, 2 to.6 percent slopes Terril loam, 4 to 12 percent slopes Copaston loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Copaston loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes Lester loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Lester loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Chetek sandy loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes Otterholt silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes Port Byron silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Rockton loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Tallula silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded Kingsley sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Waukegan silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Kanaranzi loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Kanaranzi.loam,,2 to 6 percent slopes Kingsley -Lester complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes Wadena-Hawick complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes Wadena-Hawick complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes Kingsley-Mahtomedi-Spencer complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes Timula-Bold silt loams, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded Waukegan silt loam, bedrock substratum, 6 to 12 percent slopes 11 11 u 11 11 11 r r 11 11 EXHIBIT 9 Estimate of annual PM and PM10 emissions from proposed Vesterra. LLC mine Calculations assume that the sand and gravel will have moisture in excess of 1.5%. If it does not then a wet supression system will be used. Emission Source: Total lbs Total tons Federal threshold for Title V permit State threshold for Title V permit 4822.5 635.5 2_4 0_3 33796.1 4453.6 16.9 2.2 100lbs 100lbs 100 lbs 25 tons The annual potential tons of PM and PM10 are below the thresholds requiring a federal or state Title V permit * These factors are taken from table EC 10.1 in MN PCA Form EC -10 Potential Conveyor Transfer Point Est.act. Est.act. tons 8760hrs Potential Potential # points % tons Act. tons PM factor' PM10 factor* PM lbs PM10 lbs per annum PM lbs PM10 lbs 1 100 500000 0.00014 0.000048 70.0 24.0 3504000 490.6 168.2 5 95 500000 .0.00014 0.000048 332.5 114.0 3504000 2330.2 798.9 1 80 500000 0.00014 0.000048 56.0 19.2 3504000 392.4 134.6 1 65 500000 0.00014 0.000048 45.5 15.6 3504000 318.9 109.3 1 15 500000 0.00014 0.000048 10.5 3.6 3504000 73.6 25.2 4 5 500000 0.00014 0.000048 14.0 4.8 3504000 98.1 33.6 2 10 500000 0.00014 0.000048 14.0 4.8 3504000 98.1 33.6 Wet Screens # points % tons # tons PM factor PM10 factor 1 100 500000>1 0.0084 0.00084 4200.0 420.0 3504000 29433.6 2943.4 Crusher # points % tons # tons PM factor PM10 factor 1 10 500000 0.0016 0.00059 80.0 29.5 3504000 560.6 206.7 Total lbs Total tons Federal threshold for Title V permit State threshold for Title V permit 4822.5 635.5 2_4 0_3 33796.1 4453.6 16.9 2.2 100lbs 100lbs 100 lbs 25 tons The annual potential tons of PM and PM10 are below the thresholds requiring a federal or state Title V permit * These factors are taken from table EC 10.1 in MN PCA Form EC -10 Exhibit if Vesterra, LLC proposed Sand and Gravel mine Neighbors living within one-quarter mile of the Vesterra property boundary; - Adam and Sheila Kraft 2240 East 138' St Rosemount, MN 55068 Tel: 651-423-6342 Tony and Crystal Darsow 2112 135d' St E Rosemount, MN 55068 Tel: 651-423-4102 Neighbors owning property within one-quarter mile of the Vesterra property boundary; - Earl Bester 1659 E 145' St Rosemount, MN 55068 Tel: 651-423-2387 Wayne and Sheila. Groth 1450 135h Street East Rosemount, MN 55068 651-322-1546 La Verna Doehling 2051 E 145t` St Rosemount, MN 55068 651-423-2820 Mary I Courteau 2704 Mesa Verde Court Burnsville, MN 55337 Tel: 952-890-5401 Flint Hills Resources Don Kern P.O. Box 64596 St Paul, MN 55164-0596 Tel: 651-437-0700 EXHIBIT `.`C" DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT, COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS ' Easement. Seller shall grant to the owners of 1770 - 135 Street East, Rosemont, Minnesota ("Adjacent Property") a perpetual open space easement ("Easement") across the 100 foot buffer zone ("Buffer Zone") 'adjacent and contiguous and along the common boundary line between the West Parcel and the Adjacent Property. The Adjacent Property is described as the North 726 feet of the West 300 feet of the NWU4 of the SE U4 of Section 23, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota. The Easement shall not be enforced 'if the West Parcel continues to be used for purposes authorized in an agricultural zoning. The Easement shall automatically terminate if all of West Parcel is used exclusively for residential development purposes. The owners of the Adjacent Property agree to release this Easement of record at such time as the West Parcel_ is developed for residential purposes. The release shall be effective without any mortgagee, if any, of the Adjacent Parcel executing or otherwise joining in the release. 'Permitted Uses in the Open Space Easement Area ("Buffer Zone"). The Buffer Zone adjacent to the Adjacent Property shall not be used for any improvements including but not limited to non-residential buildings, storage, roadways, mining, ponds, drainage ditches, excavating ,landfill, gravel pit, garbage, construction debris or rubbish dump, recycling plant, hazardous waste dump or storage site, or for a track or trail of any kind except as required by the Berm described below, or the additional planting of trees or shrubberies. Likewise, the Buffer Zone shall not be used by any type of motorized vehicles including ATVs and snowmobiles except as those necessary to construct and maintain the Berm and Buffer Zone. t , w1k`CO 9.�*W '-rm. If the use of the West Parcel changes from residential or agricultural, the Buyer, its successors or ,Agns, shall install a Berm and landscaping as hereinafter provided at no expense to Seller. The Bern shall be at least four (4) feet high and will have a minimum of a sixteen (16) foot slope or greater (per the 4 to 1 ratio of the currentcity code) so that the total minimum width of the Berm will be thirty-two (32) feet. The Berm 'shall be installed in the Buffer Zone adjacent to the boundary of the Buffer Zone the furthest away from the Adjacent Property. At the top oFthe ridge of the Berm, the Buyer shall plan13 foot high evergreens at 8 foot intervals. If any of the trees should die, Buyer agrees to replace the trees. The owners of the Adjacent Property shall have the right to plant additional trees and shrubberies in the Buffer Zone. The Berm,may be removed if the conditions for termination of the Easement are met. Restrictions. Buyer, its successors and assigns agree that even if the Property under agricultural zoning may be used for raising swine, cattle, a rendering plant or slaughterhouse, the Property may not be used for any of these Purposes. Attornev Fees and Costs. If Buyer, its successors or assigns, as the owner of the West Parcel, fails to abide by the terms of the Easement and all covenants and restrictions with respect to the Buffer Zone and the Berm, the owner of the Adjacent Property shall be entitled to collect from Buyer, its successors or assigns, as the owner of the West Parcel, its reasonable legal expenses and costs incurred by the owner of the Adjacent Property in enforcing said covenants and restrictions and for all costs in constructing and/or completing and/or repairing the Berm and Buffer Zone including but not limited to all direct and indirect costs of constructing, installing and or repairing the Berm and Buffer Zone. Easement. Restrictions and Covenants Shall Run with the Land. The.Easement, restrictions and covenants 50755113 ' shall (i) be contained in a formal agreement between the parties and the owners of 1770 - 135`h Street East, 'osemount, Minnesota and shall be recorded with the County Recorder, (ii) be noted on the contract for deed .,nd any warranty deed given by Sellers as an exception or encumbrance, and (iii) encumber the Property being ' sold herein and shall become appurtenant to and run with the Adjacent Property. Buyers: Anthony Darsow Jani S. Weatherman J e . Sellers: Vesterra, LLC i James K. Bowers Its: Authorized Manager ' 507551/3 9 F111 1WBENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 10417 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, SUITE TWO / HOPKINS, MN 55343 / (952) 238-1667 / FAX (952) 238-1671 March 17, 2003 MEMORANDUM Ice: FROM: RE: Jonathan Wilmshurst, Vesterra, LLC Edward F. Terhaar and Aravind Gottemukkula Refer to File: 02-83 Traffic Study for Proposed Gravel Mine in Rosemount, MN PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND This memorandum is to present the results of our traffic study for the proposed gravel mine in Rosemount, MN. The proposed site for the gravel mine is located west of C.R. 71 and south of C.R. 38, as shown in Figure 1. Our traffic study addresses the following three traffic questions: a) What will be the impacts at the following intersections with the gravel mine in operation? • Highway 52/117' Street intersection • C.R. 42/C.R. 71 intersection • C.R. 71/117' Street • C.R. 71/C.R.38 • Highway 52/C.R. 42 ramps b) What will be the daily volumes on C.R. 71 with the gravel mine in operation? c) Would any improvements be needed to the surrounding road network to adequately accommodate gravel mine traffic? The proposed site will be used to operate a gravel mine that would provide construction aggregates for use in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The total area of the site is about 75 acres, of which 60 acres will be used for mining. The gravel mine will be in operation for about 10 years from 2003 through 2013. Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -2- March 17, 2003 VESTERRA, LLC TRAFFIC STUDY FOR LFIGUREPROPOSED GRAVEL MINE fBENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES,INC. IN ROSEMOUNT, MN T LOCATION TRANSPORTATIONEN8INEER$ANOPLANNER8 ' Traffic volumes at Highway 52/117t1i Street, C.R. 42/C.R. 71, and Highway 52/C.R. 42 ramps were obtained from count data collected by Mn/DOT and presented in the corresponding interchange studies for this area. Volumes at C.R. 71/117th Street and C.R. 71/C.R. 38 were collected by Benshoof & Associates, Inc. staff as part of this project. Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -3- March 17, 2003 ' Existing Conditions The proposed site is presently used for agricultural purposes. The area between the subject site and C.R. 71 is also used for agricultural purposes. C.R. 71 is a two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 55 miles per hour (mph) in the site vicinity. Traffic approaching C.R. 71 on C.R. 38 is presently controlled by a stop sign. North of the site, C.R. 71 intersects with 117th Street, which is a two-lane roadway with a speed limit of 45 mph. South of the site, C.R. 71 intersects with C.R. 42, which is a four lane divided roadway with a speed limit of 55 mph. Geometrics and traffic controls at the subject intersections are as follows: • Highway 52/117' Street — This intersection presently consists of two through lanes, one left turn lane and one right turn lane on the north and the ' south approaches, two left turn lanes, one through lane and one right turn lane on the west approach, and one lane for each movement on the east ' approach. A traffic signal presently exists at this intersection. • C.R. 42/C.R. 71 — This intersection is controlled with stop signs on the north and the south approaches. The; north and south approaches consist of one lane for all movements. The east and the west approaches consist of two through lanes, one left turn lane and one right turn lane. • C.R. 71/117' Street - This intersection is controlled with a stop sign on the 117th Street approach. All approaches consist of one lane for all movements. • C.R. 71/C.R. 38 - This intersection is controlled with a stop sign on the C.R. ' 38 approach. All approaches consist of one lane for all movements. • Highway 52/C.R. 42 ramps — Both of these intersections are controlled with ' stop signs on the ramp approach. Right turn lanes are provided in the eastbound and westbound directions at each ramp. All other movements are accommodated by single lane approaches. Traffic Volumes ' Traffic volumes at Highway 52/117t1i Street, C.R. 42/C.R. 71, and Highway 52/C.R. 42 ramps were obtained from count data collected by Mn/DOT and presented in the corresponding interchange studies for this area. Volumes at C.R. 71/117th Street and C.R. 71/C.R. 38 were collected by Benshoof & Associates, Inc. staff as part of this project. n Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -4- March 17, 2003 Future Roadway Characteristics The existing Highway 52/117th Street intersection will be replaced by an interchange before 2013. Both ramp intersections at this interchange will be signalized. The following geometrics will be provided at the ramp intersections: • Highway 52 East Ramps/117th Street — This intersection will provide two through lanes, one left turn lane; and one right turn lane on the west approach, one lane for each movement on the east and the north approaches, and two left turn lanes, one through lane and one right turn lane on the south approach. The south leg of this intersection will consist of the northbound entrance and exit ramps. The north leg at this intersection will be a frontage road. • Highway 52 West Ramps/117th Street - This intersection will provide one right turn lane and two through lanes on the west approach, one left turn lane and two through lanes on the east approach, and one left turn lane, one shared left/through lane and one right turn lane on the north approach. 1 t Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -5- March 17, 2003 TRAFFIC FORECASTS Trip Generation Trip generation estimates were developed for the proposed gravel mine based on its expected activity. The proposed gravel mine is expected to generate 200 loads per day. Each load will consist of an entering and an exiting trip. Of the 200 daily loads, 150 loads are expected to occur in the morning over a period of five hours. Therefore, 30 loads are likely to occur during the a.m. peak hour. The remaining loads will occur during the remainder of the day. To be conservative, we assumed that 30 loads would occur during the p.m. peak hour. Therefore, the total number of trips generated during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours is 60 (30 entering and 30 exiting). It is to be noted that almost all of the trips to and from the gravel mine will be truck trips. Trip Distribution Trip distribution percentages were established based on expected activity for the gravel mine as estimated by the owner. The following are the expected trip distribution percentages: • 70 percent to and from the north. on Highway 52 • 30 percent to and from the west on C.R. 42 Traffic Volumes Our traffic study focussed on impacts of the gravel mine traffic on the subject intersections both in the short term and in the long term. Specifically, we prepared traffic forecasts for 2005 and 2013 conditions. For this purpose, the development trips were assigned to the adjacent road network based on the distribution percentages presented above to determine the development volumes. To determine the 2005 traffic volumes with the gravel mine in operation, the resultant development volumes were added to the 2005 base volumes, which were determined by increasing the 2003 volumes at a rate of 1.9 percent per year. This rate of background growth is the same rate used by Mn/DOT in the 117th Street interchange study. Similarly, the 2013 base volumes and volumes with the gravel mine were determined. Figures,!, 3 and 4 show the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes. As described earlier, the existing Highway :52/117' Street intersection will be replaced with an interchange before 2013. To account for these changes, the 2013 volumes at this intersection were rerouted accordingly. Figure 4 shows the 2013 volumes at the Highway 52/117' Street interchange. After construction, both of the ramp intersections will be signalized. Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -6- March 17, 2003 We have also determined the daily volumes on C.R. 71 north and south of C.R. 38 for 2005 and 2013 conditions. For this purpose, the 2000 average daily traffic of 1,500 on C.R. 71 was increased by 1.9 percent per year to arrive at 2005 and 2013 base daily volumes. Weekday daily volumes for the gravel mine were then added to the base volumes to determine the 2005 and 2013 daily volumes on C.R. 71 with the gravel mine in operation (see Table 1). Table 1 Estimated Weekday Daily Traffic Volumes on C.R. 71 Location Daily Volume with Gravel Mine in Operation 2005 2013 C.R. 71 north of C.R. 38 1,900 2,200 C.R. 71 south of C.R. 38 1,800 2,000 11 u II II II 0 Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -7- March 17, 2003 M N LO coo 01T 11 7TH ST. 117TH ST 941981981113M6 M89 � � 1311311 --- 41412s126 X16/16 a, 35136/36 -� r T 0) CR 38, 6WW28 —T 2003 (EXISTING) 2005 WITHOUT GRAVEL MINE 2005 WITH GRAVEL MINE ��-- 2013 WITH GRAVEL MINE XX /XX1 C� vfv N NOT To SCALE :iCfSBM6ti�7T Q 18119128131 _,,1 696!723/7231840 i 4141415 NOTE: PLEASE SEE FIGURE 4 FOR 2013 VOLUMES AT THE HIGHWAY 521117TH ST. INTERCHANGE NT CR 42 76917BW8811116 33134 W40 I�I T [VESTERRA, LLC TRAFFIC STUL3Y FOR FIGUREPROPo,ED GRAVEL MINE WEEK©AY A.M. PEAKiw OOF&A=lATES,INC. IN RC)SEMOUNT, MN HC}UR VOLUMES TATIONEN(IINEEBSANDPLANNERB 1 u n L n Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -8- March 17, 2003 o T (� j�".,d. N Iia r 117TH ST. 117TH ST. 110/1141114/13316/16/18 18511 921213 — 15/15/15 -- 16/17/38140 16/16/16 —io 41/43/43 2081216/216 Tr ; i f mom i nNn pl.. BI C-, N l N coo a� t1) NOT TO SCALE CR 38 } HOSEMOU-Tr t 414125/26 3 /311 21 1 3 cc PROJECTJ Lw ua o v -1 n i t � i Nivt�*J CR 42 16J16/25128---- 21122122/26 E— 75$178717871914 684/690/690/802 �• ,� 5/5/516 2003 (EXISTING) 4/4/4/5 2005 WITHOUT GRAVEL MINE 2005 WITH GRAVEL MINE 1 �--- 2013 WITH GRAVEL MINE a ixxlxxfxxlxx� NOTE. PLEASE SEE FIGURE 4 FOR 2013 VOLUMES AT a THE HIGHWAY SM17TH ST. INTERCHANGE iiESTERRA, LLC TRAFFIC STUDY FOR FIGURE 3 PROPOSED GRAVEL MINE WEEKDAY P.M. PEAR SMHOOF&ASSOCIATES, INC. IN RflSEMOUNT, MN HOUR VOLUMES TRANSPORTATIONENGINEERSANDPLANINER$ Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -9- March 17, 2003 A.M. PEAK HOUR xw ! T. � X147 98 ;--42 55--- 103 5--- 103 14--> t-0 <- 11 �-4 i P.M. PEAK HOUR ¢g� cc cc 40 (7 11 7TH ST --110 t-0 243 --> 84 �' 4-14 _20 ----> N NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 4 7VESTERRX LLC TRAFFIC STUDY FOR,, PROPOSED GRAVEL MINE 2013 WEEKDAY PEAKIN ROSEMOUNT, MN HOUR VOLUMES ATUD )OF A;3SOCIA7ES, INC. HIGHWAY 521117TH ST.TATIONENSINEERSANDPiANNERS WITH INTERCHANGE 11 Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -10- March 17, 2003 TRAFFIC ANALYSES Level of Service Capacity analyses were performed for all two subject intersections during both a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the following four traffic scenarios: • 2003 (existing) • 2005 without gravel mine (2005 no -build) • 2005 with gravel mine (2005 build) • 2013 with gravel mine (2013 build) Existing geometrics and traffic controls described earlier were used in our capacity analyses, except for the 2013 scenario for the Highway 52/117' Street intersection. For the 2013 scenario, geomterics and traffic controls for the planned interchange were used for the Highway 52/117th Street intersection. In our analyses for scenarios without the gravel mine, we used a heavy vehicle factor of 10 percent, which was derived from the Minnesota Department of Transportation's traffic flow maps. For scenarios with the gravel mine, the development volumes were added to the existing truck volumes to determine the heavy vehicle percentages. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of Level of Service (LOS), which ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. Most agencies in Minnesota consider that LOS D represents the minimal acceptable LOS for normal peak traffic conditions. Results of the capacity analyses are presented in Table 2. Highway 52/117th Street Under existing conditions during the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements operate at level of service E or better, with the overall intersection at level of service C. Under 2005 no -build conditions during the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements operate at level of service E or better, with the overall intersection at level of service D. Under 2005 build conditions during the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements continue operate at level of service E or better, with the overall intersection at level of service D. Therefore, the traffic generated by the proposed mine has no significant impact on the operations of this intersection during the a.m. peak hour. Under 2013 a.m. peak hour build conditions with the interchange, all movements at both ramp intersections operate at level of service B or better. Both intersections operate at an overall level of service A. Once again, the traffic generated by the proposed mine has no significant impact on the operations of this intersection during the a.m. peak hour. Under existing conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements operate at level of service E or better, with the overall intersection at level of service D. Under 2005 no -build conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements operate at Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -11- March 17, 2003 level of service E or better, with the overall intersection at level of service D. Under 2005 build conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements continue operate at level of service E or better, with the overall intersection at level of service D. Therefore, the traffic generated by the proposed mine has no significant impact on the operations of this intersection during the p.m. peak hour. Under 2013 p.m. peak hour build conditions with the interchange, all movements at both ramp intersections operate at level of service B or better. Both intersections operate at an overall level of service A. Once again, the traffic generated by the proposed mine has no significant impact on the operations of this intersection during the p.m. peak hour. C.R. 42/C.R. 71 Under existing conditions during the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements operate at level of service D or better. Under 2005 no -build conditions during the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements, except the southbound approach, continue to operate at level of service D or better. The southbound approach falls to level of service E. Under 2005 build conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements continue operate at the same levels of service as the 2005 no -build scenario. Therefore, the traffic generated by the proposed mine has no significant impact on the operations of this intersection during the a.m. peak hour. Under 2013 a.m. peak hour conditions, the northbound approach drops to level of service E while the southbound approach falls to level of service F. These changes in level of service are due to the expected volume increase on C.R. 42, making turns onto the roadway from cross streets more difficult. The volumes generated by the proposed mine will have little impact on the overall level of service of this intersection because they are so small in comparison to the overall intersection volumes. Under existing conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements, except the southbound approach, operate at level of service C or better. The southbound approach operates at level of service E. Under both 2005 no -build and 2005 build conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements continue to operate at the same levels of service as the 2003 scenario. Therefore, the traffic generated by the proposed mine has no significant impact on the operations of this intersection during the p.m. peak hour. ' Under 2013 p.m. peak hour conditions, the northbound approach drops to level of service D while the southbound approach falls to level of service F. These changes in level of service are due to the expected volume increase on C.R. 42, making turns onto the roadway from cross streets more difficult. The volumes generated by the proposed mine will have little impact on the overall level of service of this intersection since they are so small in comparison to the overall intersection volumes. C.R. 71/117th Street I Under existing conditions during the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements operate at level of service B or better. Under 2005 no -build, 2005 build, and 2013 conditions L 0 0 i 0 0 Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -12- March 17, 2003 during the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements continue to operate at level of service B or better. Under existing conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements operate at level of service B or better. Under 2005 no -build, 2005 build, and 2013 conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements continue to operate at level of service B or better. C.R. 71/C.R. 38 Under existing conditions during the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements operate at level of service B or better. Under 2005 no -build, 2005 build, and 2013 conditions during the weekday a.m. peak hour, all movements continue to operate at level of service B or better. Under existing conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements operate at level of service B or better. Under 2005 no -build, 2005 build, and 2013 conditions during the weekday p.m. peak hour, all movements continue to operate at level of service B or better. Highway 52/C.R. 42 ramps The proposed gravel mine is not expected to add any volume to these intersections and therefore will have no impact on traffic operations. Operations at the 117th Street/C.R. 71 Intersection Field observations and discussions with the project developer indicate that some issues with truck operations currently occur at this intersection. Under existing conditions, trucks traveling northbound and southbound on C.R. 71 That turn onto 117th Street conflict with through vehicles on C.R. 71. The conflicts are mainly due to the large size and slow moving nature of the trucks, which are heavily loaded. The addition of the proposed mining operation will add truck traffic to this existing issue. A solution to this issue would be the construction of a northbound right turn lane and a southbound bypass lane for C.R. 71 at 117th Street. Further study is needed to determine exactly how these turn lanes would fit with the existing topography and roadway layout. It is our opinion that all existing and future truck operations in the area would benefit from such improvements and therefore should share in any potential costs associated with implementation. C 11 7 0 u 0 Mr. Jonathan Wilmshurst -13- Operations of the C.R. 42/C.R. 71 Intersection March 17, 2003 During the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours, we estimate that nine trucks will travel westbound on C.R. 42 from the south on C.R. 71 and nine trucks will travel south on C.R. 71 from the west on C.R. 42. This volume level will have little impact on the overall operations of this intersection. Trucks traveling westbound on C.R. 42 will be fully loaded and therefore will accelerate slower than other vehicles. C.R. 42 in this vicinity consists of two westbound through lanes which will allow faster moving vehicles the opportunity to pass the slower accelerating trucks. Therefore, the existing roadway layout on C.R. 42 will be able to adequately accommodate the expected truck volume from the gravel mine. CONCLUSIONS Based on information presented in this memorandum we have made the following conclusions: • The proposed gravel mine will generate an estimated 60 trips (30 entering and 30 exiting) during both a.m. and p.m. peak hours. • No improvements will be needed at any of the subject intersections to accommodate gravel mine traffic. • The addition of a northbound right turn lane and a southbound bypass lane at the C.R. 71/117' Street intersection would reduce conflicts currently experience between trucks and through vehicles on C.R. 71. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Meeting Date: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Lot Consolidations for Susan & Donald Stein 3820 and 3904 120th Street West AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner AGENDA IM # 6 ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution, Location map, Survey APPROVED BY: Applicant & Property Owner(s): Susan Stein, 3820 and Donald Stein, 3904 1201h Street West Nature of Request: Combine four parcels into two in the Rural Residential area, south of 120th Street West. SUMMARY This request originated with the distribution of the estate of the late Elizabeth Stein. Susan and Donald will each have a parcel of land consolidating their distributed portions of the land. Originally, the request simply shifted the existing four parcels. However, variances were needed because one parcel was land locked, and another had minimal frontage on undeveloped right-of-way. In the end, the tax implications of four parcels caused the Steins to choose the option of land consolidation into two parcels. No variances are needed, the resulting parcels will be: 3820 120th Street West— 18.91 acres and 3904 120th Street West — 16.68 acres As a consolidation, no Planning Commission hearing is necessary. However, the process did start out as a reconfiguration with variances and a public hearing was held. As the process unfolded, the request was modified to its current form, and thus, drastically simplified. If future subdivisions are requested, then variances may be needed. Approval of the lot consolidation does not bind the Council or Planning Commission to granting future variances. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the lot consolidation requested by Susan and Donald Stein. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LOT COMBINATIONS BETWEEN DONALD STEIN AND SUSAN STEIN WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application from Donald Stein and Susan Stein for approval of lot combinations concerning properties located at 3904 120th Street West and 3820 120th Street West, legally described as follows, to -wit: Existing Lot: All that part of the West Half of Government Lot 1 in Section 7 and of the West Quarter in Section 18 all in Township 115N, Range 19W, Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot 1 and running thence West along the North line thereof a distance of 1068.28 feet; thence South and parallel to the West line of said Government Lot 1 and said Northeast Quarter a distance of 296.48 feet; thence Westerly parallel with the North line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 242.07 feet to the West line of said West Half of said Northeast Quarter; thence Southerly along aid West line 830.60 feet; thence Easterly parallel with the North line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 388.70 feet; thence South 71' 06' 39" East 960.35 feet to a point on the East line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter 1437.58 feet South of the point of beginning; thence North on said East line to the point of beginning and there terminating, all according to the Government Survey thereof EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING: All that part of the West Half of Government Lot 1 in Section 7 and of the West Half of the Northeast Quarter in Section 18 all in Township I I5N, Range 19W, Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot 1 and running thence West along the North line thereof a distance of 618.28 to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing West along said North line a distance of 450.00 feet; thence South and parallel to the West line of said Government Lot 1 and said Northeast Quarter a distance of 296.48 feet; thence Westerly parallel with the North line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 242.07 feet to the West line of said West Half of said Northeast Quarter thence Southerly along said West line a distance of 433.28 feet; thence Easterly parallel with the north line of said West Half of Government Lot 1 a distance of 697.97 feet; thence Northerly a distance of 730.50 feet to the point of beginning. RESOLUTION 2003 - WHEREAS, on April 3, 2003, the City Council reviewed the lot combinations for Donald Stein and Susan Stein NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the lot combinations for Donald Stein and Susan Stein, resulting in the following legal description: DONALD STEIN PARCEL All that part of the West Half of Government Lot 1 in Section 7 and of the West half of the Northeast Quarter in Section 18, all in township 115 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot 1 and running thence west along the north line thereof a distance of 618.28 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing west along said north line 450.00 feet; thence south and parallel to the west line of said Government Lot 1 and said Northeast Quarter a distance of 296.48 feet; thence westerly parallel with the north line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 242.07 feet to the west line of said West Half of said Northeast Quarter; thence southerly along said west line 830.60 feet; thence easterly parallel with the north line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter 388.70 feet; thence southeasterly 321.43 feet along a line whose terminus is a point on the east line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter distant 1437.58 feet south of the northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot 1; thence north 1228.47 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 16.68 acres, more or less. Subject to an easement for ingress and egress over the south 60 feet thereof Said 60 feet being measured at right angles to said south line. SUSAN STEIN PARCEL All that part of the West Half of Government Lot 1 in Section 7 and the West Half of the Northeast Quarter in Section 18 all in Township 115 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot 1 and running thence west along the north line thereof a distance of 1068.28 feet; thence south and parallel to the west line of said Government Lot 1 and said Northeast Quarter a distance of 296.48 feet; thence westerly parallel with the north line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter; thence southerly along said west line 830.60 feet; thence easterly parallel with the north line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 388.70 feet; thence south 71° 06 minutes 39 seconds East 960.35 feet to a point on the east line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter 1437.58 feet south of the point of beginning; thence north on said east line to the point of beginning and there terminating, all according to the Government Survey thereof. 2 RESOLUTION 2003 - EXCEPT that part described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot 1 and running thence west along the north line thereof a distance of 618.28 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing west along said north line 450.00 feet; thence south and parallel to the west line of said Government Lot 1 and said Northeast Quarter a distance of 296.48 feet; thence westerly parallel with the north line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 242.07 feet to the west line of said West Half of said Northeast Quarter; thence southerly along said west line 830.60 feet; thence easterly parallel with the north line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter 388.70 feet; thence southeasterly 321.43 feet along a line whose terminus is a point on the east line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter distance 1437.58 feet south of the northeast corner of said West Half of Government Lot l; thence north 1228.47 feet to the point of beginning. Together with an easement for ingress and egress over the south 60 feet of said exception. Said 60 feet being measured at right angles to said south line of the exception. Containing 18.9 acres, more or less. ADOPTED this 3rd day of April, 2003. ATTEST: Linda J. Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against:_ Member absent: William H. Droste, Mayor Seconded by: SITE MAP NOTE: Dimensions rounded to nearest foot Zopyright 2003, Dakota County - This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, and :tate offices and other sources, affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes mly. Dakota County is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepancies are ound, please contact Dakota County Survey and Land Information Department. wtapDate: January 17, 2003 Parcels Updated: 1/22003 Aerial Photography: 0000�l '120TH 00 ST W zo -, FIZOPE 271F45 OCu122&n/T PA�zcEG L/NE5 P J tJ F ' 7b MOVE �2 I /3E A-1So23c-p w ' y NOTE: Dimensions rounded to nearest foot Zopyright 2003, Dakota County - This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, and :tate offices and other sources, affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes mly. Dakota County is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepancies are ound, please contact Dakota County Survey and Land Information Department. wtapDate: January 17, 2003 Parcels Updated: 1/22003 Aerial Photography: �Dskrno,&IL'� &JIT�� Com Wkia-h6--n p,pitt q -o CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Skate Park Equipment AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT PREPARED BY: Dan Schultz, Director of Parks and Recreation R6 AGENJIM 77 ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Skate Park Designs APPROVED BY: G�LI� Purchasing skate park equipment was discussed at the February 2003 City Council Work Session. It was the consensus of the Council to move forward with purchasing equipment to be placed at Central Park on a trial basis. A Request for Proposal (RFP) was prepared by staff and made available to skate park equipment vendors. Five manufacturers submitted proposals including: (Price of equipment $25,000) EFA — Skate Wave Weber Recreational Design — Ozone Flanagan Sales — American Ramp Co. (ARC) Athletica - Ramp Rider MN/WI Playgrounds — Custom Skate Park Concepts The Parks and Recreation Commission, staff and over 250 students at Rosemount Middle School reviewed all of the proposals. The students at RMS overwhelmingly voiced their fondness for the proposal from EFA - Skate Wave (3977). The Parks and Recreation Commission also recommended at their March 24, 2003 meeting to purchase the EFA - Skate Wave (3977) product. Staff agrees with this choice based on the design of the skate park, construction of the equipment and the recommendations from other communities that have purchased the skate park equipment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to recommend that the City Council approve the purchase of the skate park equipment proposal submitted by EFA - Skate Wave (3977). COUNCIL ACTION: 2 � * + 5 \ � � � -- O \ � � � 2 � * + 5 \ � � � -- O \ � } 4 � U / 2 � * + 5 \ � � � -- O a91 Q fig: 8p.eg� 03/12/2003 Skateruave- ROSEMOUNT PARK "'"°d ntivp ROSEMOUNT MINNESOTA SW2_ill_3977 Earl F.Andxv- Ix. � . #� ��t � .>z� < . \��^ � � � .� . �a 1 ^' CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Bloomfield Park Play Equipment AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT PREPARED BY: Dan Schultz, Director of Parks and Recreation AGEN4TW #6 Z ATTACHMENTS: Proposals for Playground equipment at Bloomfield APPROVED BY: Park Staff created a Request for Proposal (RFP) for playground equipment to be purchased and installed at Bloomfield Park based on the input received from the neighborhood meeting that took place in August of 2002. The deadline for submitting proposals was Friday, March 14, 2003. The City received proposals from seven playground equipment manufactures including: (Price of equipment including install is $45,000) EFA — Landscape Structures Webber Recreational Design — Miracle Flanagan Sales — Little Tikes Becker Arena Products — Romperland MN/WI Playgrounds — GameTime Midwest Playscapes — Playworld Systems St. Croix Recreation — Burke Attached is a copy of each proposal. Staff and Parks and Recreation Commissioner Johnson initially reviewed the proposals. After conducting the review process, the proposal from Minnesota/Wisconsin Playgrounds was identified as the top proposal. The Parks and Recreation Commission also reviewed the proposals and recommends purchasing the play equipment from Minnesota/Wisconsin Playground. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to recommend that the City Council approve the purchasing of play equipment for Bloomfield Park as proposed by Minnesota/Wisconsin Playgrounds. COUNCIL ACTION: 7M 0 v n co' 0 ¢ y Vin E E E �U rn o� o y n IV V v v ¢ 0 NW c o cn E m � Q 072 U n w Z a 6;3- „ U m C C d o N 0 N D D {r—{Ut—•Q E s o O a E w Z j V c v O O V 3 7 Y 0 0 V E m N I M O o� C r LL VJ V C men C V m 3 m m 3 m OO < NW Q Z ! � Q O w Z a „ V O w r C ¢ W D D 3 O O E w Z j V O y O O N 7 0 V E w 03� �N � x Ngo = Z 7 a UOV � � O d r Z::) QUE N Q ZCLi C O m N 0 w V ^ 3K aOZ xm =0O r LL VJ V C men C V m 3 m m 3 m NW � Q O „ C W D D O O E O y O 7 0 E w W J Z ¢ NW �� N N N o � � Q N W c' LL! QOM O li Q UOQ d �cmw U7 r V NLd N L -w CG — t+) N ZLJ u") (2n (n CV tl]LUMOf zV) V) 1w O� C m � o � � W M Li z J � W 1� 2 Za �z s CC =z6 2 a� H K- w w aQWgg 61 Z N N U a`�S 9Y a Z p q w a W M W O 4.o 4 s� �g LL.�o� any 0�'�aa" r�y m m a zKS o �� OHM 3 < ca3 f 0bbg m z Q r_J 3-13-03 )00 BLOOMFIELD PARK ST. CROIX REC. 31-6354-3 • R. ZILLS ROSEMOUNT, MN PROPOSAL 3 (':Burk® Company, LLC PO Box 549 Fond du Lac, Wisconsin 54936-0549 Telephone 920-921-9220 �| \ F » § rin § :1! !� < s ,,! ? !f< 0 r------------------ — — — — — ——— —— — — —— —— — — — —� i � I I I It � I Q MP I � I i � I I � I I g �v H I � I zN4 10 I o I > y 2 ° O I iz m•':5ii g o T"x A I xm I I I I �m �� mg •\ I I � I I I I I � I I I - I SSE`" I I ym�o I n P_ DN 8F �� I pu 8� M 8m I � I I • I`� I L— — — — — — — — _ _I— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —1_ _ _ _ — — — J � G' rs �nx m m � c3•c m O m n m v g e m m e g y m a e � p� eFh$' m'.�mmcm3 Z w ��m O0 300 �.m?0 �P.m��c c$gcm�e �2 cn y m m.a.�mm�eo D 0) N � TI �m o� � m� g_a W=sg asmm as9' z Zvi ° m r � 'gym `� wm� �� °N�3a R z CA a wco��l „�.s.. Nc 0 Fie . . 2 8 S9m, lil 0i� m m z gm� m 8�ze -m maw g yO C om� �ow m Cm w m 0 a 7 C m seR!T �= �mm a 0 !a ZN- W= X Nix m04 wm b - o b Z . Q- n M5 2 g W w l `� M % f 2 c V C � Fj h Z f o �? 5°92 €F 9 R�>��g !a ZN- W= X Nix m04 wm b - o b Z . Q- n 2 g W z Z w Q w Z p it Y mmMso 11 11 mmLjw � w ImJW N 110 WVQ�0N �Soav> ir Q� `tZUWO �U� �j j 0 a >aEL In O > Z U UW Z q 00900@ 0 I W Ir 00 8i -D a IL cn Q cv _LO N j � U (V .a 0i cn� � co�� per rte— m � W c Q. rte `° U� w a a , 4 9 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT CITY HALL 2875 - 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068-4997 Phone: 651-423-4411 Hearing Impaired 651-423-6219 Fax: 651-423-5203 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILED AND POSTED HEARING NOTICE FOR 160TH STREET SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT #365 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF DAKOTA )ss. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ) Linda Jentink, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: I am a United States Citizen and the duly qualified Clerk of the City of Rosemount, Minnesota. On March 14, 2003, acting on behalf of the said City, I posted at the City Hall, 2875 145th Street West, and on March 14, 2003 deposited in the United States Post Office of Rosemount, Minnesota, copies of the attached notice of public hearing regarding the proposed Improvements to 2002 Chippendale Avenue and CSAH 42 Reconstruction, enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon fully prepaid, addressed to the persons listed on the attached listings at the addresses listed with their names. There is delivery service by United States Mail between the place of mailing and the places so aaaa_uui we_se scu. Linda Jentink, Clerk City of Rosemount Dakota County, Minnesota Subscribed and sworn to before me this / 4A day of March, 2003. CINDY DORNM NOTARY PUBM • NNNES07 * Commission Expires Jan .31,20Q5 otary Public CITY OF ROSEMOU NT PUBLIC NOTICE CITY HALL 2875 — 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068-4997 Phone: 651-423-4411 Hearing Impaired 651-423-6219 Fax: 651.423-5203 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON IMPROVEMENTS 160"' STREET SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT 9365 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount, Minnesota will meet at 7:30 o'clock p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, Thursday, April 3, 2003 in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 2875 145th Street West, to consider the following improvements: City Project #365 — 160"' Street Sanitary Sewer Extension Improvements The nature of improvements shall include the construction of 1601h Street Sanitary Sewer Extension and appurtenant work. The total estimated cost of said improvements is $624,970. The area proposed to be assessed for the foregoing improvements would be all that area generally described as the following Parcel Identification Numbers: 34-03210-010-15;0.11-65; 023 -70;012- 75;014 -75;016-75;015-85; 23-70;012- 75;014-75;016-75;015-85; 019-85; 022-85; 030-85; 040-85; 050-85; 34-03310-010-01; 34-32800 010-01 as recorded in the City of Rosemount, Dakota County, Minnesota Such person(s) as desires to be heard with reference to the proposed improvements will be heard at this meeting. Written or oral opinion will be considered. Dated this 6th day of March, 2003. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL. City of Rosemount Dakota County, Minnesota Auxiliary aids and services are available - Please contact City Clerk at (651)322-2003, or TDD No. (651)423-6219, no later than March 26, 2003, to make a request. Examples of auxiliary aids or services may include: sign language interpreter, assistive listening kit, accessible meeting location, etc The Rosemount Town Pages AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Chad Richardson, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is an authorized agent and employeeof the publisher of the newspaper, known as .The Rosemount Town Pages, and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: (A) The newspaper has complied with all of the requirements constituting qualification as a legal newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statutes 331A.02, 331A.0 n other applicable laws, as ame ded. , (B) The printed tis ,JCAT( =MJeC± ��'d r7 b ` which is attached, was cut from the columns. of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for � n successive ks; it was first published on Friday, the ________________ day of C 12S , 2003 and was thereafter prinled andel Dublished on every Fri to and in luding Friday, the day of 2003; and printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, which is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication of the notice: abcdefghijklmnopgrstuvwxyz l -•"„ By: Subsc ' d and sworn to before me on this day of 2003. Notary Pu is AFFIDAVIT DAWN M SMITH NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA 40, My CiOMMIS$IOn Expires Jan, 31, 2005 PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON EVIPROVEMENTS 160th STREET SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT #365 To wHOM IT MAY CONCERN: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City'Council'of the City of Rosemount, Minnesota will meet at 7:30 o'clock p.m:. or as soon thereafter as possible; Thursday, April 3, 2003 in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 2875. 145th Street West, to consider the following '.. improvements: City Project #365 — 160th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension Improvements The nature of improvements shall include the construction of 160th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension and appurtenant work.. The total estimated cost of said improvements is $624,970. The area proposed to be assessed for the foregoing improvements would. be all that areagenerally described as the following Parcel Identification Numbers:. 34- 03210-010-15;.011-65;023-70;.012-75; 014-75;016-75;. 015-85; .019-85; 022-85; 030-85;040-85; 050-85;.34- _ 03310-010-01; 34-32800-010-01 as recorded. in the City of Rosemount, Dakota County, Minnesota Such person(s) asdesiresto be heard with reference to the proposed improvements will be heard at this meeting. Written or oral opinion will be considered Dated this 6th -day of March, 2003. _ BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL. Linda Ientink, City Clerk City.of Rosemount Dakota County, Minnesota Auziliary'aids and services are available Please contact City Clerk at (651)322-2003,. or TDD No. (651)423-6219, no laterthan March 26, 2003, to make a- request. j Examples,af auxiliary aids or services may include: sign language interpreter, assistive listening kit, accessible meeting location, etc 03/14 & 03/21 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: 160"' Street Sanitary Sewer Extension Improvements, City Project #365 AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer AGENJ1W # 7 ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, Revised Assessment Schedule APPROVED BY: At the March 6, 2003 Council meeting you received a Feasibility Report for the 160th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension Improvements, City Project #365. As previously noted, this project was initiated by a signed petition received from property owners along 160th Street. The project includes the proposed extension of sanitary sewer to properties located north of 160th Street, east of Trunk Highway 3 and west of Biscayne Avenue. Two alternatives to extend sanitary sewer service to these properties are included in the report. The estimated project costs are as follows: Alternative 1 $263,610 Alternative 2 $242,080 Biscayne Avenue $361,360 The total project cost will be dependent upon Council direction for which alternative to proceed with. For both Alternatives 1 and 2, 100% of the project cost is proposed to be assessed to the benefiting properties. For the Biscayne Avenue alignment, funding could possibly include City Sanitary Sewer Core Funds. As part of the process, Staff conducted Public Informational Meetings on March 13th and 14th. Several comments and concerns were discussed at those meetings, which will be presented at the Public Hearing for the project. Attached with this item are revised preliminary assessment summaries for each of the alternatives to replace those included as part of the Feasibility Report. Also, attached for Council consideration is a resolution approving the project and ordering the preparation of plans and specifications. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) MOTION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PROJECT AND ORDERING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 1601h STREET SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS WITH ALTERNATIVE 1, CITY PROJECT #365. -OR- 2) MOTION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PROJECT AND ORDERING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 160th STREET SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS WITH ALTERNATIVE 2, CITY PROJECT #365. -OR- 3) MOTION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PROJECT AND ORDERING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 1601h STREET SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS WITH ALTERNATIVE 1 AND BISCAYNE AVENUE, CITY PROJECT #365. -OR- 4) MOTION TO NOT PROCEED FURTHER WITH THE PROJECT, 160'x' STREET SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT #365. COUNCIL ACTION: DRAFT CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003 — A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROJECT AND ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR 160TH STREET SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS **WITH SUGGESTED ALTERNATIVE** CITY PROJECT #365 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemount ordered a feasibility report for 1601h Street Sanitary Sewer Extension Improvements, City Project #365: and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemount received the feasibility report on March 6, 2003 and ordered a Public Hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemount has held a Public Hearing on the 160th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension Improvements, City Project #365. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby orders the improvements of the 160'h Street Sanitary Sewer Extension Improvements, City Project #365. NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby orders the preparation of plans and specifications for the 160th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension Improvements, City Project #365. ADOPTED this 3rd day of April, 2003. ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Seconded by: William H. Droste, Mayor M O c O O N N O� O 00 C ti ER �+ p t \ C C;N M � 6M9 � cq yN9 y m c7 O � M 00 M 00 M 00 O C C py M O O 00 OG N O O 69.--� r MEon � M th 69 4609 fps 6s6�9 6s b9 O O � ,..� � +•+ O oD N N M O M 7 � D\ M M M N N z o�0 N N cN+i O O � O [� O cry 00 In 00 00 kf) 00 t!'1 OO F 1 �r O •^'^ M O M 01 O O O ^ O O O O O O O ►+ W N 00 N N N N N F•r M O M O p O O O h y M �t M 't 7 V d y J � M M M M M I W5 d q �. 0 Q N 3 00 00 � ,5.; M > .-r Vn � V'1 >0 >; kn 4) >, A; amiv> +� o O Q O a; ¢ > 0 0 +� t> .b vii to W o W o M °? N rn AY, ani anEni �,/ N 00 tl 001 Q"' ,�+^, f1. M � O O •cad cd � O tn O ++ O qq o Cd M Onuany OUAeOsiB WLLI _LLJ 2 O ti Of LLJ N Q W CA W (D 0~Z r Q W W O z W Z_ w N > co W CIO L S c1r) M Q Z OU O O W U) N O 'U) X lL W _N Z C O N (u cn O U)U)Z O co cu w 4- Z r` O 00 O rn � O (O = W . LL Q Z Q U 01 M M 00 vl O ~ F.i on 01 [— O M p �C O W 00 O t-- N N 00 C; 01 a; Oi a d• Q9 (A 64 69 69 6S 69 69 yNg N � o w z N bA oo0 ollcq 01 M N O 00 cq r N • 4" 00 01 M M N N Q � OO O OOO V) CN 01 00 O 000 N 00 O 000 O H •.r [p M _O y w k a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C W N M 00 N N M N M N M N M N M N M it O M O O O O O O y N 00 00 knin 'ter' > N O N O > o > tn o p ¢ 7 b o� cn o isa o N xO1 �.+ C� to N W) N O W ONO 001 M O M i.: 0 S. - h G CN C (3r CL4 a w w toto w z o �Zb w a c o bp x o Q A co U a, v it RS •--� N M C}' U) Q co W H EE Oe w Q ()f W p~ O J W W Q W 00 M rl_ N Z p N `- N Of O z `r) w > Or - w OU C N UU' 2 O 20 a) g Q � 4- w LL .N C0 M Z O N (� � L- U— W � Z � Ncur U) p ~ �r Cn ( C6 Q +_ t` ap W Z C (u rn O Cn c� S 4-' N U_ L O w r LL N Q T- 00 w Q U Fol O kr) M N N M N d• M -ry ti Qn w 69 69 69 469 chn 69 69 Q4 � M 6R N O CIS O oo h M i �" �n h �n h Wn h kn 00 Wn C7 kn 00 O 1-0 N_ N O O _O it ^ O O O O O O O O IH-I O _O _O O O_ O O O N N N N N N N Q 3-i M O M O M O M O M O M O M O M O N i i i i i ws cc 00 00 00 00 00 kn > kn 'n > W) W) > In > Ln v 'CS N 4. +- x `� o v +� v +- 3 Q +' p C:) V] EOr -- oA O �' o .OLi MfZnl r C5 °COG C rnvM, VA O � N� �G�O a te - rc� M'� CIS A 3 '4)PLO� o .•.. +� C 4r Gz. °' �y •� al Q O ou ani a Q u .� o on iUn CC ~ N M fit' In �o 00 Biscayne Avenue Assessable Frontage CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: SKB TRUST FUND APPOINTMENT AGENDA SECTION: OLD BUSINESS PREPARED BY: WILLIAM H. DROSTE, MAYOR AGEN[" # ATTACHMENTS: RESOLUTION APPROVED BY: City Council conducted interviews for city commissions and the SKB Trustee member on March 20, 2003. In the by-laws the term length is three years running from January 1 to December 31, therefore, this term will begin after appointment is approved by City Council through December 31, 2005. Mayor Droste recommends Rosemount resident Steve Casey to serve as the SKB Trustee beginning April 5, 2003 through December 31, 2005. A resolution is attached for council action. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION to appoint Steve Casey as Trustee for a three year term, beginning on April 4, 2003 through December 31, 2005. to the Rosemount SKB Trust Fund COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003 - A RESOLUTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF TRUSTEES TO THE SKB ENVIRONMENTAL ROSEMOUNT COMMUNITY TRUST WHEREAS, SKB Environmental Rosemount Community Trust Agreement provides that the Mayor and City Council shall appoint Class I Trustees to serve on this board. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rosemount, Dakota County, Minnesota, that they hereby appoint and designate Steve Casey to serve as a Class I Trustee for a three year term, expiring December 31, 2005. ADOPTED this 3rd day of April, 2003. William H. Droste, Mayor ATTEST: Linda J. Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Second: Voted in favor: Voted against: Member(s) absent: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Chippendale Avenue Speed Limit (CSAR 42 to 160"' Street) AGENDA SECTION: New Business PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer AGENDf" ft # ATTACHMENTS: Mn/DOT Local Street or Highway Speed Limit APPROVED BY: Authorization, January 11, 1982 ?�'� As you are aware, City staff received notification from Mn/DOT last December that the current posted speed limit of 30 MPH on Chippendale Avenue between CSAH 42 and 160th Street did not conform to Mn/DOT's authorized speed limit. Based on a speed study completed by Mn/DOT in 1982, the Mn/DOT authorized speed limit for Chippendale Avenue was 45 MPH. At the time that Staff was notified of this discrepancy, direction received from Mn/DOT was to request the preparation of a speed study by Mn/DOT to establish an appropriate speed limit for the present developed conditions along Chippendale Avenue. This request has been made and Staff is awaiting the completion of the speed study by Mn/DOT. Through recent discussions with representatives of Mn/DOT, it has been indicated that the speed limit on Chippendale Avenue between CSAH 42 and 1601h Street should be changed from 30 MPH to 45 MPH until such time that Mn/DOT has completed the speed study. Staff recognizes that this may create issues should the pending speed study indicate a Mn/DOT authorized speed limit between 30 MPH and 45 MPH. However, after discussing this item with the City Attorney, it is his recommendation that Council consider changing the speed limit to 45 MPH. It should be noted that should this change in speed limit be authorized by Council, the reverse curve at 1601h Street is built to a 30 MPH design speed and will be posted accordingly with advisory signing. Staff is recommending that Council authorize changing the speed limit on Chippendale Avenue between CSAH 42 and 160' Street to 45 MPH in accordance with the Mn/DOT Local Street or Highway Speed Limit Authorization dated January 11, 1982. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SPEED LIMIT OF 45 MPH FOR CHIPPENDALE AVENUE BETWEEN CSAH 42 AND 160"' STREET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE Mn/DOT LOCAL STREET OR HIGHWAY SPEED LIMIT AUTHORIZATION DATED JANUARY 11, 1982. COUNCIL ACTION: Mn/DOT 29213 (12-78) STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LOCAL STREET OR HIGHWAY SPEED LIMIT AUTHORIZATION ki �P;_5 Page of 1 Pages Road Authority City of A084VANt Date JUMry lit 1 , i .A Road Name or No, 14 A Termini of Zone: E" strw t To YN t U00 Of 150A SU"t Wat Date of req a e' is.. 1981 Kindly make the following changes in speed limits on the above -referenced section. Changes authorized herein are in accordance with Minnesota Highway Traffic Regulation Act, M.S. Chapter 169.14 and applicable subdivisions thereof. 36 Q1185 Pr k0W WUNM UN IsUrwti$# with 146Th .Sitnmt Unt WW the Intillillnutlen with L"Ith sit ice$. 45 miles W hour bebma the later tion with Iii Strut aw it point ippoxilutely hot SWU of 156th Stmt. Please I Sign��ic Engineer Sig , /I�-+G Here L�a _ `y (3) White — Road Authority (1) Pink — Central Office Traffic (1) Blue— District Traffic Engineer for Road Authority use only Date traffic control devices changed implementing this authorization Month -Day -Year I Signature I Title 612/295-5164 January 11, 1982 Mr. Jun F. Carlin- Clerk/Treasurer City of Rosemount 1367 - 145th Street E P.O. Box 455 Rose.`ii0unt, Minnesota 55063 near r. oarling. As requested by resolution 1381-40 adopted September 15, 1931, attached is authorization to erect the appropriate signs designating the reasonable and safe speeds on Chippendale Avenue. Sincerely, R. A. Kurpius :asst. Traffic Engineer, Operations cc: Leland S. Knutson - mayor of Rosemount (Transmittal Only) RAK/gw J. G. Hanson SF -00006-01 DEPARTMENT Mn/DOT - Field Operations Oakdale - District Nine TO K. K. McRae Director, Traffic Engineering,Section Roam 309 FROM Mark R. Wikelius District Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: Speed Zoning City of Rosemount Chippendale Ave. W. (From 145th St. W. to 700' So. of 156th St. W.) STATE OF MINNESOTA Office Memorandum DATE: December 28, 1981 PHONE: 770-2311, E. 213 We have completed the speed zoning survey on the above referenced road as requested by the Rosemount City Council in a Resolution No. 1981-40 dated September 15, 1981. The attached results were discussed with Mr. Don F. Darling, Rosemount Clerk/Treasurer, and met with his approval. Attachment: DATE D2c._28 1981.-.- _ COUNTY OR CITY`_ ROSEMOM BY — B. ,5a 11L- G Bovy Dakota STREET OR ROAD__ CHIPPEND.ALE AVE. T.—___ FROM 145thst.VT. --------TO-_i6othSt. w_ -- -------- ROADWAY : LENGTH l.�l miles SHOULDER TYPE_ Curb &Gutter _ None WIDTH 3b, north of _150th & 24, so. of 150th WIDTH-- TYPE- IDTH__TYPE_ _Bituminous & Gravel CONDITION CONDITION -Good _New ALIGNMENT: HORIZONTAL _ _ _ StraiLht - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ VERTICAL __—_Level to gently rolling LAND USE LiLln Resid. to Rural Residential VOLUME _ Light _ — _ _ — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ACCIDENT DATA _ Non avai&-ble _ _ CROSS TRAFFIC _.LiLhtto Yfp(lerate TRAFFIC CONTROL _St_o,)s at 145th, _150th & 160th Sts. T. EXISTING SPEED LIMIT _ _ _ _ _ 2-3-77)_ _ 35 MPH fro_m_145th St. W. to 150th St. �. �CSA.H 42�.and Statutor` from 150th St. '"I. to 160th St. TEST RUN SPEED_ 35_.40 mph in t -he 35 zone & 45-5o MPH in -the statutory zone D-F-SIGIN SPEED SPEED CHECK LOCATIONPOSTED ZONE NORTH BOUND SOUTH BOUND I MEAN 85TH PACE MEAN 55TH PACE from 150th St INto anprox At loth St. W. 35 3-422 36 39 32-41 37 42 33-4--- 2 At. 156th St. I.V. tatuto Ii1SUF ICIEN'?' VOME � 3 Note; School X-ing at 147th St. 77. el eAkl 7,e P.4C,.4�r/Z /TY �t C Rottivoui.,?. 4 o+scitss64 By p)0A r enl )n -5Q -g/ .,, ,tA noxj r. I7a4/ c - 5 1 6 7 8 9 10 j II 12 I ipeed Limii Recommendations (due to the results of and ,Justification: _35 i,�pg the above speed checks, from 1115th St. 7I. to 150th St. 7T.(CSAH 4z�; light residential in nature, and the test un speeds) A. 1i_5 mph. from 150th St INto anprox 700 feet south of 156th St. W.(due to t'--=- h_test testrun speeds & light rural/residential in nature] ' Statutory speed limit from 700, south of 156th St. W. to 160th St.T. ( due to gravel suliac: & rural in Nature). Note; School X-ing at 147th St. 77. el eAkl 7,e P.4C,.4�r/Z /TY �t C Rottivoui.,?. V o+scitss64 By p)0A r enl )n -5Q -g/ .,, ,tA noxj r. I7a4/ c - NORTH O DENOTES SPEED CHECK LOCATIONS ' INDEX MAP SCALE: / _ /600' MILEAGE l IPdPLACE PROP S.L. S L UPPER 145th ST, W 145th ST. W 146th ST W. UPPER 147th ST. W. 0 SA UPPER I 2 � U W. UPPER So � -4 6j, (1.)CHRYSLE .(2)149th S 1 190,4 Q UPPER 143rd ST ~ z a Qf(�14'4th�� ST. - `l w 146 h< ST. n ST. W. J Q U ST W. '`.ST. W w Q I49tn z T. W. Iag1h5T W. 1. Q m cm Th ST. N 4.� IJu a .�� T (3 ) CHORLEY AVE. F—� - 4 3 -r- Ploy > 2 �. W 0 J z 41 a � s U _ - I T p - Ir v 7 Ir- . - p V • - L 1 O ,:3c�- 473'0 s' r F, o osemoun ias - -12 4 F; C E R T I F I C A T E STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) ss CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ) I, Don F. Darling, duly appointed, acting and qualified Clerk/Treasurer of the City of Rosemount do hereby certify that I have examined the City of Rosemount records and the Minutes Book of said City for the meeting of September 15, 1981, and hereby certify that the attached copy of Resolution 1981-40 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE STATE OF MINNESOTA CAUSE A SPEED STUDY ON CHIPPENDALE AVENUE BETWEEN 145TH STREET AND 160TH STREET, is a true and correct copy of the City proceedings and records relating to said request. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this 1st day of October, 1981. t Don F. D rling, ClerkjTreasur r City of Rosemount Dakota County, Minnesota CITY OF ROSEMOUNT Resolution 1981-40 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE STATE OF MINNESOTA CAUSE A SPEED STUDY ON CHIPPENDALE AVENUE BETWEEN 145TH STREET AND 160TH STREET. WHEREAS, Chippendale Avenue has been reconstructed between 145th Street and 160th Street, and WHEREAS, the changes in roadway conditions warrants a review of the reconstructed areas with regard to Speed _Limits and Parking Areas. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount respectfully requests the State of Minnesota Department of Transporation cause a Speed Study to be completed on Chippendale Avenue between 145th _Street and 160th Street in the City of Rosemount, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that "signing" of the roadway sections being studied be delayed until the study results have been received from the State DOT. Adopted this 15th day of September, 1981. ATTEST: Don F. Darling, Clerk LelandS. Knu son, mayor CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Meeting Date: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Concept Residential Planned Unit AGENDA SECTION: Development — Centex Homes New Business PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner. AGENDA N ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution, Location Map, Concept APPROVED BY: Booklet / Reductions Comp Plan Excerpts, PC Craig Minea & Patricia Kavorius Minutes 3-11-03 Applicant: Steve Ach of Centex Homes Location: South of 135th Street Property Owner(s): Craig Minea & Patricia Kavorius Area in Acres: 155 Comp. Guide Plan Desig: Urban Residential Current Zoning: R-1, Low Density Residential Proposed gross density: 2.6 dwelling units per acre Nature of Request: Residential Development with a mix of Single Family and Townhouse Units; park and open space; two ponds Housing style Units %of overall Total Housing Mix: Single Family — 80 ft. lots 58 14% 166Tota1 Single Family Single Family — 70 ft. lots 108 27% 41 % Total Single Family "Vineyard" Attached 3 -unit row homes 63 2-0% 1510 "Carriage Townhomes" (Quads) 40 _44 o 1007,0 241 Total Attached units "Carriage 8 & 10 unit Buildings 138 34% 59 % Total Attached units Citywide Housing Mix estimate if concept is approved: 65.26% Single Family...................65% Goal 34.74 % Multiple Family ............. 35% Goal Planning Commission Action: Recommendation of Approval (5-0) SUMMARY Centex Homes is requesting approval of a concept for a mixed housing type development on the largest remaining parcel available for development in the current Metropolitan Urban Service Area. The booklet identifies constraints to development including several pipelines, significant storm water ponding requirements and the impact of Collector streets (Connemara Trail, Bacardi Avenue and a new as -yet unnamed collector street). The Master Plan distributes housing types with single family next to existing or planned single family (Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition) on the west side, and along the north edge, 135th Street. The 3 -unit row -homes are staggered along Connemara Trail, and the higher density townhomes enclosed by the pipeline corridor / Connemara Trail, the east -west collector street, and the eastern boundary (currently a fence -line with some vegetation). The overall intent of the concept is to concentrate density in various zones to compensate for the park, pipeline corridor and the streets. The estimate for density impact on the city-wide housing mix brings Rosemount closer to the goal of 65 % single family vs. 35% multiple family. This is clearly an advantage for Centex, as future developments will have to align much closer to the goal distribution to avoid too much multiple housing. March 11, 2003 City Council Executive Summary Centex Homes Concept PUD Page 2. Staff s concerns for the concept are: 1 The alignment of Connemara Trail impacts other properties beyond the west edge. Some flexibility may exist, however, the full impact will have to be verified, and the result may impact the number of dwelling units. As well, Connemara Trail will have to be constructed to a 40 mile per hour design speed. 2. Bacardi Avenue along the western edge might be severely restricted because of the convergence of many pipelines at the northwest corner of Bacardi Ave. and 135t" Street West. 3. No variances to right-of-way or public / private street standards are recommended. 4. Pipline easement restrictions may also prohibit the driveway encroachment of the southerly most Carriage Townhomes. 5. The Fire Code will require turn-arounds or looped connections at any shared driveway exceeding 150 feet. 6. The Park and Recreation Commission will evaluate the park, trails and connections and forward its recommendation to the City Council separately. 7. Common parking spaces should be provided at all of the attached housing areas. 8. Sidewalks / Trails are required on both sides of the Collector Streets. 9. The Concept must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies for the Urban Residential land use designation. For example, the average net density cannot exceed 5.8 dwelling units per acre without an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. 10. Completion of the appropriate environmental review process as required by the Environment Quality Board (in this case, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet - EAW). 11. Concept approval does not guarantee densities or numbers of dwelling units or lots. In addition, the land designated for higher density housing will have to be rezoned. The "Vineyard" 3 unit and "Carriage Townhomes" 4 unit building area will have to be rezoned to R-2, Moderate Density Residential, and the "Carriage Townhomes" 8-10 unit buildings will have to be R-3, Medium Density Residential. These issues adopted as conditions would influence the design of the preliminary plat, which is the next step in the process. The Preliminary Plat accomplishes the design of the development including streets, utilities, grading, landscaping and building design. The Concept approval gives the developer the expectation of preliminary plat approval if the design resolves the conditions suggested above, or as applied by the Commission and Council. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the concept for the Minea Property with conditions. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CONCEPT RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR CENTEX HOMES, INC.. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application from Centex Homes, Inc. for approval of a Concept Residential Planned Unit Development for a residential development with a mix of single-family and townhouse units, a park, open space, and two ponds proposed for south of 135th Street and north of the Union Pacific Railroad; and WHEREAS, on March 11, 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount reviewed the Concept Residential Planned Unit Development for Centex Homes and adopted a motion to recommend approval, subject to conditions, to the City Council; and WHEREAS, on April 3, 2003, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the Concept Residential Planned Unit Development for Centex Homes, Inc. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the Concept Residential Planned Unit Development for Centex Homes, Inc., subject to: 1) The alignment of Connemara Trail impacts other properties beyond the west edge. Some flexibility may exist, however, the full impact will have to be verified, and the result may impact the number of dwelling units. As well, Connemara Trail will have to be constructed to a 40 mile -per -hour design speed. 2) Bacardi Avenue along the western edge might be severely restricted because of the convergence of many pipelines at the northwest corner of Bacardi Avenue and 135th Street West. 3) No variances to right-of-way or public/private street standards are recommended. 4) Pipeline easement restrictions may also prohibit the driveway encroachment of the southerly most Carriage Townhomes. 5) The Fire Code will require turn-arounds or looped connections at any shared driveway exceeding 150 feet. 6) The Park and Recreation Commission will evaluate the park, trails and connections and forward its recommendation to the City Council separately. 7) Common parking spaces should be provided at all of the attached housing units. 8) Sidewalks/Trails are required on both sides of the Collector Streets. 9) The Concept must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies for the Urban Residential land use designation. For example, the average net density cannot exceed 5.8 dwelling units per acre without an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. 10) Completion of the appropriate environmental review process as required by the Environment Quality Board (in this case, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet — EAW). 11) Concept approval does not guarantee densities or number of dwelling units or lots. RESOLUTION 2003- 12) The land designated for higher density housing will have to be rezoned. The 3-4 unit buildings will have to be rezoned to R-2, Moderate Density Residential, and the 8-10 unit buildings will have to be rezoned to R-3, Medium Density Residential. ADOPTED this 3rd day of April, 2003, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. ATTEST: Linda J. Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against:_ Member absent: William H. Droste, Mayor Seconded by: MEMORANDUM DATE: March 26, 2003 TO: Rick Pearson, City Planner Jim Parsons, Community Development Director Andy Brotzler, City Engineer Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator FROM: Dan Schultz, Director of Parks and Recreation t,>r RE: Minea Concept Plan At the March 24, 2003 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, staff presented the concept plan for the Minea property. The concept included 12.1 acres of City parkland. The City's parks dedication formula is 1 /25th of an acre per housing unit. If the developer is approved for 405 units the parks dedication is 16.2 acres. The Commission felt the area of the proposed public park was in a location that would be suitable for the proposed park amenities as outlined in the 2002 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan. The Commission did however have a concern over the size of the park and the pipeline easement that cuts through the park. The Parks Master Plan calls for a 4 —10 acre park in this area, thus the Parks Commission is recommending no more than 8 acres (not to include the pipeline easement) be considered for land dedication. The remaining parks dedication would be cash in -lieu of land dedication. The Commission also recommends not giving any credit for the pipeline easement located within the park. The developer also asked the Parks and Recreation Commission to consider accepting additional open space that is currently identified as privately owned open space. The Parks and Recreation Commission and staff both recommend not accepting any of the additional open space based on the lack of habitat and possible maintenance costs. The open space area seems to be land that for various reasons cannot be built on and has so they have been left open for that reason and not for natural resource preservation or a concern for habitat. The Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Minea Concept Plan with consideration being given to the information provided above. If you have any further questions about the Commission's recommendation please let me know. PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 34-02110-010-75 FEE OWNER: CRAIG J MINEA & PATRICIA A KAVOURAS PMB 078-463 827 UNION PACIFIC LAREDO TX 78045-9452 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1982 135TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 PAYABLE 2002 TAXES NET TAX: N/A SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS: N/A _ TOTAL TAX & SA: N/A PAYABLE 20D4 ASMNT USAGE:AG-GREEN ACRES F3 NOTE: Dimensions rounded to nearest foot. Copyright 2003, Dakota County - SITE MAP 2003 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2004) LAND: ONMPA LOT SIZE BUILDING: MN*M TOTAL: MONOW 6,594,312 TOTAL SQ FT 151.38 TOTAL ACRES SCHOOL DISTRICT: 196 212,267 WATER SQ FT 113,927 ROAD RNV SQ FT LOCATION: NE1/4 SE1/4 SECTION 21-115-19 PAYABLE 2004 HOMESTEAD STATUS: NON HOMESTEAD WATERSHED DISTRICT: VERMILLION RIVER, LAST QUALIFIED SALE: DATE: AMOUNT: This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, and state offices and other sources, affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. Dakota County is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepancies are found, please contact Dakota County Survey and Land Information Department. Map Date: February 21, 2003 Parcels Updated: 2/1312D03 Aerial Photography: 1990 2003 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2004) TYPE S.FAM.RES YEAR BUILT 1875 ARCH/STYLE TWO STORY FOUNDATION SQ FT 1096 FINISHED SQ FT 2002 BEDROOMS 3 BATHS 1 FRAME WOOD GARAGE SQ FT 0 OTHER GARAGE MISC BLDG MISC BLDG Ak2oNl Y7- Wil k-- PLAT e PLAT NAME: SECTION 21 TWN 115 RANGE 19 TAX DESCRIPTION: N OF RR OF BE 1/4 150630 2111519 �� \_/ ��,/ /]]� Vim» _ . •z. y . ,. 2 / { / ( ._ Z rAlo @ k 2oo \/ 2§A/ \�� ®j/ 2 . § . tN uW u° nod St ns lb3 . . . . . . . . . . . .......... N. I if nod St ns lb3 . . . . . . . . . . . .......... N. I N U %z u° J= o . b � o x •3 O y C � G G > d sOd a, �Eo� U w xAxC7 00 N y O - .> y N on „� ori m oio� U � m Z C1. 0 N U 8 O Q y O y O v C N y y - -a v o -° " 3 � -3 c •c E� w N 0 C > O � � y 0 p y vVi cUV 4-' V O U .4 •p y of 'b'9 O i N N N � y N iyytl N .0 p c0 > i•, m N� 4 V N eVtl. N U 0', N ayi v i7 0 w O O ta %p N C F 03 C � d y e v 'o > (� W ``" 5N � J J� > y i-� cd 6 1 .U. .4+ y y U N U %z u° J= o . b � o x •3 O y C � G G > d sOd O O G 00 N o .> y N on „� ori m oio� U � m Z F. N U y Ri 00 O v � op C 9 a h O o 'o oQ 3 . O 5 o e v 'o > (� W ``" ��° aQ� ro O > y i-� G' U �n is .00 r W F,Hwvxp =Qv b> y ons o °�C �F o H �V o nU.° :D��"� 0Vz d cn 3W v y 3 WF N a> V U yd O b a C O vV W wa w w 3 w N U %z u° J= C 0 � m b o E ' `* o MY p�p �pf � g O { y ®' xsyyy�A�sss ®® i � •h y � a � > 5 fca > yN w x 000 di N G N G 1 C 3•� a b e oEi> > 3 C 0 � m b o g O { y k i � •h y � a � > 5 fca > yN 000 di N G N G 1 C 3•� a b e oEi> > 3 ,^<v, 0 uo rp 'oNM o.o e�eF °Jvv, 3 �wwencn (n u0cab .�rnd oopE-3p�U W x w A w w w C f a w ro IQ A o r N O pp i0 p E o`�•b V •a"iAr�� % ni � � N N O W L U •E 7 p V E is 0 c 0 O D G N N O .p m a y y V E . re 104d O pp 10 -W 0 V 4V. 'I•.. �' 0 � C F O .D Q > • A h 4o v c o c > x Z O of x .0-0 b o N N C N a o x V b O � on � k 5 it v •'�� 'O H r tY 0 y 3 o o d•o 4j n. � � ao C E `� ,� �".F W .'C � •� .5 " U •o w " a h 'o � �' <« 3 api CCi mo63 •fl •d a Oaj a " � a. 1011 I'71b:. '.'" i y l" c o o o aoi cls N V C V U 0 'C 4'- e ■ ` s i � 0 c 0 o N N O .p m a y y y C o.p > E . re 104d O pp 10 �" F N •b 3 5 V q N 0 � C F O .D Q > • A .0 .0O c o c > c Z o = c v .0-0 b O O Wl k 5 it v W v ; -0y r tY 0 w ooc 00 64 3 a o o d•o 4j �".F W .'C aCi o � ova ?c7 off o °aF Y W 0 C7 Ca �' g v o y O o O d 3 aJ G E C e c V O p V a �6i a.5�pF.3�v3 T. p. d C 0 a 8wv n W 'wwrn W O F F z H 1011 I'71b:. W W W . re i r I' ¢+. s Y �- tlVlion �ilIM Illllllll� f7"� Y, 1011 I'71b:. L II 1 e ■ ` s i IIIWIII ia�WIV k III r TN i- Ji N l w p �v, L M �p O, yj fn N CL O O p U E :01 d U d 4z u ai y O a °moo 0 w XAxC9 Ow U y O wV O� C p b m �oG E Ow U y O wV O� C p > O U R Lx v w 0 j 7 C N b0 G ate+ y C to N C y b 0N�E d _ g U E O > o V V N� F. h ^o on y V d .y � > C E • o en p U � � 4 N y IV, It F SO "10 3c Q O m O p U 0 W 3 'a .� y - —1 ^N00 c M� 7 U U b O v a4 A � �"'! •C ca •C C p ev � w 5 W On CAUv b m �oG > R Lx v b C T C to d _ g U E O > o o 5 h ^o on C p U � v C 3 SO "10 3c E W 3 'a .� o> > - —1 ^N00 c M� 7 a4 A O R: O O o0 Q U b0 R yr W W On CAUv 3 y >R �'a Gc7��oF a�a� W E- Inwv�y CJao. ��n ?.a¢ oOF3�v3 iwC/) >w a F z F wa w w 3 w 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update Urban Residential (UR) Urban Residential land uses are located entirely within the MUSA and are serviced by public sewer and water utilities. Housing types accommodated here include single-family detached, single-family attached, and manufactured housing with the predominant use being single-family detached. The City will consider other potentially compatible uses such as churches, schools, and neighborhood parks through a conditional use permit process. Policv It is the City's policy to: 1. cooperate with Federal, State, and County agencies to make affordable housing available and to redevelop and rehabilitate older homes in the City; 2. encourage clustering, where appropriate, and/or extraordinary setbacks at neighborhood edges to minimize the impact of major streets and conflicting land uses; 3. facilitate neighborhood planning for improvements which create or reinforce neighborhood unity, safety, and identity and to increase home ownership potential on a cost-sharing basis with neighborhoods. Improvements may include landscaping, parks, and local street modifications to reduce traffic impacts; 4. require the use of planned unit development for all developments proposing to vary from city standards in exchange for other benefits; 5. encourage the use of planned unit developments to protect and enhance natural features, open space, and to provide appropriate neighborhood transitions; 6. maintain a balance of housing types and densities in conformance with community objectives; and 7. incorporate pedestrian -friendly neighborhoods with sidewalks and trails as important design elements. -Tiwsition Residential (TR) The nsition Residential District is within the M -USA and is intended to have urban stre sand all public utilities. Howr`, some areas designated as Transition R d'ential are not identifie),as MUSA unless sanitary sewer is needed and cost'effective. The di 'f ct has been created to guide development in a critical transition area beten rural residential and urban residential Yle neighborhoods of the Cit�reas designated as Transition Residential necessitate extraordin ry envi mental consideration. These areas are characterized by�it�ue natural feitiWres such as woodlands, water, and topographic r lief which warrant sensiti treatment. When developed, this area is inte�Oadhave an urban/rural character -with a mixture of housing types, but wit 4 relatively low overall density in order to Pt�ect its unique stands of upland . 4rdwoods and its variable topography. 31 City of Rosemount wet ds that match the develo Tenf standards for a rural estate lifestyle. The Ru Residential area intain a minimum gross density of 1.0 dwelling unit 5 acr nd a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres. Due to ep'a agricultural preseeds in other parts of the City, this density standard willn6 tinue to app Rosemount despite its difference with the M;i�olitan Council's density objective of 1.0 dwelling unit per 10 Urban Residential (UR) This category is intended to be located entirely within the MUSA and serviced by public sewer and water. A range of single family detached and attached housing will be accommodated within this category at average net densities of 2.4 for detached and 5.8 dwelling units per acre for attached housing (twinhomes and townhomes). Attached housing within the Urban Residential areas will be located in logical transition areas from higher to lower intensity land uses, at the edge of a defined neighborhood, and/or planned to sufficiently integrate within a large planned development area. 90 acres of land is available within the 2010 MUSA, which meets the criteria for attached housing with a potential yield of over 500 units. i h Density Residential (HR) This categis intended to provide house es (condominiums and apartmen s)fhat meet the needs of renters, sma households, and senio�t2ens. An average net density of 10 dwelling un' er acre is exp"fid for this type of housing. A fairly small number of High- ensity� s� ing is planned between 1995-2020 at 10-15 units per year, or 3 tal units. This represents a modest 5.0 percent of all new hou,ing uni constructed within that planning time period. The City inds to disco�i r e large concentrations of high density housin ,o er 100 total units in y one location. Two separate a� locations Iesignated for High Density esidential:-in the commercial downtown area and south of County Road 4 ither adjacent to or on the techr,i al college property (student housing only). Transition Residential JR) This category is a new one for the com hensive plan, although it closely re bles the former Planned Develop nt Residential (PD -R) catege6y. It is intended to provide unique house opportunities in apas that are environmentally sensitive and are adjacen the City''"tablished Rural Residential areas. Two major areas include 5 + acre Kelley Trust property and a smaller area north of 135�h Strom d east of Highway 3. Another smaller area includes rural res�i 1efitial lots .5 to 5 acres in Birchview Terrace and Le Foret Addition !The City will allo a clustering of housing units in areas in order tofavoid impacts to natural fea es, allowing smaller lots Within the clustered areas at a maximum net denn it of 2.4 dwelling units per acre ;6r single-family detached and 5.8 for sin -family attached housing, wXl ew i e maintaining an average net density of 2.0 Iling units per acre. 48 I City of Rosemount • Land Demand. The estimated demand for acres to accommodate urban residential growth from 1995-2020 is 2,240 acres (compared to 2,675 by the Metropolitan Council). • Household Forecast. The estimated number of total households in 2020 is 10,200 ... 3,785 in 1995 +'6,385 in MUSA by 2020 + 30 outside MUSA by 2020 (compared to the Metropolitan Council's 2020 estimate of 12,500). 3.3.5 Housing Definitions Cluster Housinq - A method of arranging housing units in a concentrated .area that achieves efficient use of public/private infrastructure and/or preserves open space. High Density — Condominiums .and/or apartments at an average net density of 10.0 dwelling units per acre (10.0 du/ac). Net Density - The total number of housing units divided by total land area, including local streets and alleys, but not wetlands, parks, other undevelopable land, or any land that is protected by local ordinance from development. Rural Residential - Housing on lots that are a minimum size of 2.5 acres and a minimum gross density of 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du/ac); none of these units will be within the MUSA, and therefore, are not part of the "total" column for acreage demand. Total Units - The total of all urban detached, urban attached, and high density housing at an estimated demand of 195 units/year from 1995-2000; 250 new-units/year from 2000-2010 and 285 new units/year from 2010-2020. Urban Attached - Traditional twin -home and townhome developments at an average net density of 5.8 dwelling units per acre (5.8 du/ac). Urban Detached - Traditional detached single family housing on separate lots at an average net density of 2.4 dwelling units per acre (2.4 du/ac). 50 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 11, 2003 Page 2 Public Hearing: Centex Homes/Minea Property Concept Plan This public hearing is continued from February 25, 2003. This is the largest remaining parcel of land available for development with urban services. The constraints of the land include several pipelines, significant stormwater ponding requirements, and the impact of three Collector streets. The proposal includes mixed housing developments and densities. There are two types of single family housing on 70 foot and 80 foot wide lots. There are quad carriage homes and 8- and 10 - unit carriage homes. In addition, there are also 3 dwelling unit townhomes. There is a public park area on the northwest corner of the property. Connemara Trail extends through the property and Bacardi comes down from the northwest connecting to Connemara Trail and a future unnamed collector street coming down from the northeast corner then across the property to connect to Connemara Trail. There are 166 single family houses and 241 total attached units. This does meet the overall citywide density goals. Staff has identified several concerns that are added as conditions of approval. There was discussion about the neighboring land to the east and Mr. Pearson stated it is included in the 2020 MUSA line as urban residential.' There was also discussion about the collector street alignments and where the sidewalks would be placed. Mr. Pearson said the preliminary plat process would outline more details such as grading, street alignment, lot lines, etc. Ed Hasek, Westwood Professional Services, passed out a new map to replace the one on page 5 of the booklets. The reason for the amendment was to clarify what the open space on the plan is. Mr. Hasek went through the bubble diagram and explained that the sunburst in the middle represented an area of conflict for development. There is a grade crossing that will have to be accomplished at some location on the pipeline. They can grade no more than 2 feet up or down because of the depth of the pipe.. That means that Connemara Trail coming across the railroad tracks is going to intersect at some point there and the road will have to be kept high to make that work. They concur with Staff concerns and know that more work will need to be done on this project. The new map illustrates why things were done the way they were. The open space around the higher density or more intense portions of the development was done to create larger pockets of open space. The reason for the densities and types of housing units is because they feel there is a place in the market. They are trying to provide life -cycle housing. The carriage homes are in the location they are is because that is the part of the site that is the flattest and most conducive to that type of development. There is nothing to preclude them to cross the pipeline to develop but they felt it was an opportunity to provide more open space. Between the parks and open space they are at about 24-25 percent of the site being in recreational space. Add the wetlands into that and they are at about 35 percent. The extension of Bacardi Avenue is flexible. They feel it provides good access to the future fire station and water tower but also provides good access to the parka If they are unable to extend Bacardi Avenue they still have significant access potential to the park and future fire station and water tower. There was discussion about the size of the wetlands and the water level. Mr. Hasek stated the diagrams show the highest water level of each particular wetland. It was questioned if one of the carriage homes and driveway was over the pipeline and if that was an issue. Mr. Hasek stated the building will not be built into the easement and the driveway can be built on the pipeline as long as it doesn't change grade by more than two feet. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 11, 2003 Page 3 MOTION by Schiltz to close the public hearing. Second by Napper. Ayes: Schiltz, Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel mentioned these wetlands were not in the wetland inventory and asked Water Resources Engineer Donnelly if they would at some point become a wetland, particularly the larger pond. Mr. Donnelly stated that if it becomes a stormwater pond it doesn't fit the classical wetland definition unless it has pretreatment of the stormwater for the influent from the site. Otherwise it just basically acts as a stormwater pond. Chairperson Weisensel asked if this pond was set up to retain water or if it would just hold it for the storm duration and then dries up. City Engineer Brotzler stated this will serve as a regional pond in the City's overall stormwater system. There will be an inlet pipe from the Biscayne Pointe 4th Addition on the west and then there will be an outlet pipe to the south that will be built underneath the railroad tracks through the Bloomfield development where there is another large wetland that the pond will drain to and will function as a main stormwater pond. The main infiltration basin is further downstream along CSAH 42 at the Bloomfield 5th Addition. It will at times retain water. Chairperson Weisensel wanted to check into that because he was of the understanding that areas developed that had stormwater pond retention areas that they became a wetland. Some of that had to do with the types of soils, etc. He was interested in the impact of the ordinance has on creating wetlands. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the concept for the Minea Property subject to the following conditions: 1% The alignment of Connemara Trail impacts other properties beyond the west edge. Some flexibility may exist, however, the full impact will have to be verified, and the result may impact the number of dwelling units. As well, Connemara Trail will have to be constructed to a 40 mile per hour design speed. 2. Bacardi Avenue along the western edge might be severely restricted because of the convergence of many pipelines at the northwest corner of Bacardi Avenue and 135t" Street West. 3. No variances to right-of-way or public/private street standards are recommended. 4. Pipeline easement restrictions may also prohibit the driveway encroachment of the southerly most Carriage Townhomes. 5. The Fire Code will require turn-arounds or looped connections at any shared driveway exceeding 150 feet. 6. The Park and Recreation Commission will evaluate the park, trails and connections and forward its recommendation to the City Council separately. 7. Common parking spaces should be provided at all of the attached housing areas. 8. Sidewalks/Trails are required on both sides of the Collector streets. 9. The Concept must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies for the Urban Residential land use designation. For example, the average net density cannot exceed 5 dwelling units per acre without an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. 10. Completion of the appropriate environmental review process as required by the Environment Quality Board (and Environmental Assessment Worksheet — EAW). 11. Concept approval does not guarantee densities or numbers of dwelling units or lots. Second by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Schiltz. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Mr. Pearson stated this will go to the City Council on April 3, 2003. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 3, 2003 AGENDA: CONSIDER RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT -- AGENDA SECTION: GREAT RIVER ENERGY EXEMPTION LEGISLATIVEANTERGOV PREPARED BY: JAMIE VERBRUGGE, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AGEN IM. ATTACHMENTS: NONE APPROVED BY: A Great River Energy has approached the City of Rosemount seeking support for legislation granting a personal property tax exemption on a clean -burning natural gas intermediate power plant that is proposed to be built in east Rosemount. Great River Energy has also approached the Dakota County Board of Commissioners seeking similar support. Great River Energy, at the request of the City, hosted a public information meeting at Rosemount City Hall on Thursday, March 27. The meeting was well attended. At the time this agenda was prepared, staff was still gathering relevant and significant information necessary for City Council consideration. A supplemental agenda memo will be prepared and distributed to the City Council prior to the April 3 meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECOMMENDATION FOR A MOTION WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA INFORMATION MATERIALS . COUNCIL ACTION: IN April 2003 Monthly Planner Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 1 2 Thursday 3 Friday 4 Saturday S April Fool's Day 6:00 PM Port Authority 7:30 PM City Council 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Daylight Savings Time Begins 5:30 PM Utilities Commission 6:30 PM Planning 6:30 PM Committee of 01-oa 6:00 PM -7:00 PM Commission Informational Mtg. re: Chippendale the Whole �{ Ave/42 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 6:00 PM Port Authority 7:30 PM City Council 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 i 6:30 PM Planning - Commission 27 28 29 30 Mar 2003 May 2003 7:00 PM Park & Rec Comm. S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 1 2.. 3 2 3 4 5 6� 7 8 4 5 � 6 7 8. 9 10 9 10 11 12 '13 14 15 11 12 i13 14 15 16 -17 16 17 18." 19 20 211 22 18 19 �20 21: 22 23'_ 24 23 24 25 26 27. 28... 29 25 26 ?27 28 . 29 .30'.31' 30 31 Printed by Calendar Creator for Windows on 3/12/2003 May 1 63 Monthly Planner Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday 1 Friday 2 Saturday 3 '. Apr 2003 - Jun 2003 - S.. M T: W....T -: F S S M T.<W T F." --S-' _ 1 2: 3 4 . 5, 1-- 2 3.......' 4. 5 6.', ;=7- 6 7 8 9 10 11, 12. 8;9 10 11 . 12 13__:14: 13 14 15 - 16 17 18' 19 15.16 17 18 19 20 21 20 21 - 22 23 24 25 26 22 23 24 ""25 26 27 - "28 27 --:28-.29_-30. -. 29 30 -"- 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 6:00 PM Port Authority 7:30 PM City Council 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Mother's Day 5:30 PM Utilities Commission 6:30 PM Planning Commission 6:30 PM Comm. of the Whole Armed Forces Day 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 7:00 PM Park & 6:00 PM Port Rec Comm. Authority 7:30 PM City Council 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Holiday, City 6:30 PM Hall closed Planning Commission Memorial Day (Observed) Printed by Calendar Creator for Windows on 3/12/2003 June 2003 Monthly Planner Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 1 2 3 4 Thursday S Friday 6 Saturday 7 6:00 PM Port Authority 7:30 PM City Council 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5:30 PM Utilities 6:30 PM 6:30 PM Comm. Flag Day Commission Planning of the Whole Commission 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Father's Day 6:00 PM Port LMC LMC Su nmer begins Authority LMC Conference Conference Conference 7:30 PM City Council 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7:00 PM Park & 6:30 PM Rec Comm. Planning Commission 29 30 .May 2003,,; _ „Ju12003.? W✓'T F,td" S. S` T 'F. 5 '. 4 5,�-,6, 7----8 9-=10 �6 7 8'i.- 9 10 -11 .12° 11 12,"r, 13, 14 =�15 16;.. 1713 = 14', 15', 16 17 18 19' IS 19x 20 21�, 22 23� 24 20 21 22:"-23 24-. 25 26 '�. 25 26 27 28a29'+r30114.3p4 -27 2M 29K,30 31 . �n Printed by Calendar Creator for Windows on 3/26/2003 CITY OF ROSIMOUNT A(JEN DA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2003 7:30 P.M. C4f-C'C--K1S JF11- E 2 coo 3 —13 1. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance 2. Additions or Corrections to Agenda - Council, Staff 3. Public Comment * *opportunity to bring issues to City Council attention 4. Response to Public Comment ** ** update on prior public comment 5. DEPARTMENT HEADS REPORTS/BUSINESS a. Port Authority Term Determination 6. CONSENT AGENDA a. Minutes of March 20, 2003 Regular City Council Meeting b. Minutes of March 13, 2003 Committee of the Whole C. Minutes of March 20, 2003 Special City Council Meeting d. Bills Listing e. Receive Donation for Parks & Recreation Department f. Expenditure of Donation for Police Department g. Budget Amendments h. Declaration of Surplus Property i. Authorization to Accept Quotes and Purchase Personal Computer Workstations j. Ratification of Fire Department Appointments k. Mutual Police Assistance Agreement 1. Public Purpose Expenditure Policy in. Hiring of Assistant Planner (& Authorize Resident Survey delay eJ o. Receive Letter of Appeal and Set Public Hearing - Kulhanek Property a8 p. Lot Combination Between Dakota Enterprises and Tom Engelmeier q. 2003 Agreement for Solid Waste & Recycling Services a r. Biscayne Pointe Fifth Addition Final Plat and Subdivision Development Agreement s. Municipal State Aid Mileage Amendments 'P -11"t. Schedule Special City Council Meeting for April 12, 2003 32 u. Receive Bids/Award Contract - Bloomfield 5`h Addition Street & Utility Improvements, C.P.364 V. Change Order No. 3 for Rosewood Street and Utility Improvements, City Project #350 & Authorize Distribution and Publication of Vesterra, LLC Mining EAW —33 x. Stein Lot Consolidation y. Skate Park Equipment Z. Bloomfield Park Play Equipment - 31 aa. AJ4 _o N Ci'i')r prof, 3(07 7. PUBLIC HEARING -160th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension, City Project 365 ■ Staff Comments ■ Applicant Comments ■ Open Public Hearing for Public Comment ■ Close Public Hearing ■ City Council Discussion and Action 8. OLD BUSINESS a. SKB Trust Fund Appointment 9. NEW BUSINESS a. Chippendale Avenue Speed Limit (CSAR 42 to 160th Street) '38 b. Concept Residential Planned Unit Development - Centex Homes C. 10. LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOVERNMENTAL - a. Consider Resolution of Support - Great River Energy Exemption b. 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS 12. ADJOURNMENT x z n 0 � z d 7 � b (71 H z � H y o z 0 z x z n 0 a AT • • • • • • ►d n w ?; m CDITI v voo •t "CD cn c CD r <. N fD b _ �• O N • CD. CD lC HCD CCD O I",r`�+ h vl t r V � It m do 3 `s nC) , b CD o A m o rcp w Y� D L rn �- w O O 00 N fD O CCD chit w w — �o Co N A w PD W C Qj o tzi `. Oro a m rn to GL C 1a "� � _JJJ c y� o o y 7 r4y�CD -1 r� y "4Yt.A 4CD C4 On — y CD f CD V CD ��j//j''' 17� > �n 7 V1 (AN a OU O Cl) W ? U (-AZ m It 00 00 CD -�. CA cn y W W W W W W W n�! H C H O O O O O N O N N N N N 00 N 7 O ISI 4 CD n O W O U O A O O r-+ OO N "z V] ,3 O o 00 o• o tx U U 00 U 00 U 00 U O -4 O �. i a - O O N v O CD a �p rI O C y rte. CD z � o N w O w N N 000 O 03 u A � O O w W 69 O 69 O A tV w 00 w cc � 64 O nom+ W O p p 90 O Oo A puj W O U wrA w y A � O rA � N N W W R tDCD W 00 6g J H 0 03 w N' m m Z. Z —I p mD r 00 m Cn D m m X Cn i_, X C) p m D r m Cn D m m Biscayne Avenue cn Cn CD Cn (n CD O v Ca CD rn 0 I- zr Cn 0 Cn v v Cn CD CD I X 3 Cn O� D m v CD Z O O S Cn 8 �-• CD CD cNp O -n h D n w N' m m Z. Z —I p mD r 00 m Cn D m m X Cn i_, X C) p m D r m Cn D m m Biscayne Avenue cn Cn CD Cn (n CD O v Ca CD rn 0 I- zr Cn 0 Cn v v Cn CD CD I X 3 Cn O� D m v CD Z O 0 �C A � yy yy y 'z CA p' w ;rJ co 4 = 1 Z vo O OCD cn - C C = n y co -, y. d o < b -CD D oa CD ° c g o A `. n OTi, O 'TJ '17Tl m N C/] N At 0 cn � C w a Oa, �O cn CDN V. � � � O°� S � � u' w � A 00 N � � Ln O w a9 _ 7C' N c� w W (D c O ff•. LA L,.� � Vi ° A �y �� ° a O �! r+ Na U O ;, CD �� O WCDO VI LA Ur_ z � co 00 00 A A� CD R -r CD A y ° C y W W W W W W W W h O O O O O O W O s N - N N N N N 000 N CTj R A O O O w w ° LA N O00 m U 00 U 00 U 00 U 00 U 00 U O a o a y p N N O A ,.] 00 N b J N QQ (D. A co 6 O a,✓ O N O Q9 N 69 69 69 69 69 69 64 69 N _ _ 000 &M O 00 N J ujOi W N J ACA O O\ NJ OLA N O O J C1 O W W W U � e� 8 rn 0 CD CD r-« 0 n D w = m w D O N O co _m Z m N w 4 m Z co -..m Z 0 —I m �� m �D m n D w z N D --i O co _m OD m 1' z w n N D OK w 0 zc� �O rn 0 C) m D r m m 61 O s CD CD v D� Cl)� (D (n (n CD v CD --z cD m o m CQ � CD D CD v cD 0 N U) --i O co z OD 1' m —I z z w n N D OK w 0 zc� �O rn 0 C) m D r m m 61 O s CD CD v D� Cl)� (D (n (n CD v CD --z cD m o m CQ � CD D CD v cD 0 N q 21 3� DY _T .� 73 z m CD D A m z PF m w � r W • • • • • b 00 a,LA A n CD 03 n 03 CD 3 o d CA y w m y 7y CD a p a cozy tTj CCD CD iD y r^S a CD CD CD cd �.CD l) �CD c CD CD CD W N o Q U b "� N CA N �! W -- cys tin iD vpi �l � `C 000ITI O� O1 CD u+ d w 3 w vii w tz CD t1i CA CD cD w CCD O a' :01m b 7 G G1 vo X O py O G7 <:01N O CD CD cn 0 CD CD oo a CD `� CD �.CD LA CD < �< � LA �< LAua cn CD A CD (ON C:) CD O O CD LA O 9 CN W Q, Uo 00 00 oho .�. 00a w y P `t 00 Go 0 W w w N O O O rt N N N O w0 O ON O O O O + O D 00 l^ 00 LA 00 VI c11 Cli CA a W N C SCD CD `� < �. CD o CD 0 fA E!i (A ON W o w V 1 VA N ? "ON O _ - W LA CD COD O 02 C�JC > CJS O\ 00 Biscayne Avenue Assessable Frontage ; ' y O r Ile id n n y ' O ' d � b td � t� t� t� ►-C � t� N O W N O W N O W N O W N O W N O W N O W MEMORANDUM DATE: April 2, 2003 TO: City Council FROM: Linda Jentink, City Clerk SUBJECT: Additional Information for City Council Agenda 4/3/03 1. Great River Energy Exemption Item 10a See attached executive summary. 2. Chippendale Ave speed Limit Item 9.a. See attached memorandum dated April 2, 2003. 3. Ratification of Fire Department Appointments Item 6. j. See memorandum from Paula Graff for a potential grievance for Captain appointment. 4. Receive Bids/Award Contract —Bloomfield 5th Add'n City Project 364, Item 6.u. The bids were received on Friday Mar. 28. The recommendation is to award the bid to Ryan Contracting Co. in the amount of $869,564.30. See attached resolution. 5. Add -On Item. 6.aa. Authorize Feasibility Report for Biscayne Pointe 5th Add'n St & Util. Improvement City Project 367 See attached executive summary. . T-leln-) Ct.b. Ci 'V 110-y\- 4u koresi(),n M i A CITY OF ROSEMOUNT AGENDA REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2003 7:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance 2. Additions or Corrections to Agenda - Council, Staff 3. Public Comment * *opportunity to bring issues to City Council attention 4. Response to Public Comment ** ** update on prior public comment 5. DEPARTMENT HEADS REPORTS/BUSINESS a. Port Authority Term Determination 6. CONSENT AGENDA a. Minutes of March 20, 2003 Regular City Council Meeting b. Minutes of March 13, 2003 Committee of the Whole C. Minutes of March 20, 2003 Special City Council Meeting d. Bills Listing e. Receive Donation for Parks & Recreation Department f. Expenditure of Donation for Police Department g. Budget Amendments h. Declaration of Surplus Property i. Authorization to Accept Quotes and Purchase Personal Computer Workstations j. Ratification of Fire Department Appointments k. Mutual Police Assistance Agreement 1. Public Purpose Expenditure Policy in. Hiring of Assistant Planner n. Authorize Resident Survey o. Receive Letter of Appeal and Set Public Hearing - Kulhanek Property p. Lot Combination Between Dakota Enterprises and Tom Engelmeier q. 2003 Agreement for Solid Waste & Recycling Services r. Biscayne Pointe Fifth Addition Final Plat and Subdivision Development Agreement S. Municipal State Aid Mileage Amendments t. Schedule Special City Council Meeting for April 12, 2003 U. Receive Bids/Award Contract - Bloomfield 5h Addition Street & Utility Improvements, C.P.364 V. Change Order No. 3 for Rosewood Street and Utility Improvements, City Project #350 W. Authorize Distribution and Publication of Vesterra, LLC Mining EAW X. Stein Lot Consolidation y. Skate Park Equipment Z. Bloomfield Park Play Equipment aa. 7. PUBLIC HEARING -160th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension, City Project 365 • Staff Comments • Applicant Comments ■ Open Public Hearing for Public Comment ■ Close Public Hearing ■ City Council Discussion and Action 8. OLD BUSINESS a. SKB Trust Fund Appointment 9. NEW BUSINESS a. Chippendale Avenue Speed Limit (CSAH 42 to 160th Street) b. Concept Residential Planned Unit Development - Centex Homes C. 10. LEGISLATIVE /INTERGOVERNMENTAL a. Consider Resolution of Support - Great River Energy Exemption b. 11. ANNOUNCEMENTS 12. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF ROSEMOUNT SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA MEMO APRIL 2, 2003 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 3, 2003 AGENDA: CONSIDER RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT -- GREAT RIVER ENERGY EXEMPTION AGENDA SECTION: LEGISLATIVE/INTERGOV PREPARED BY: JAMIE VERBRUGGE, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AGENDA NO: 10a ATTACHMENTS: Resolution; Senate File 715; Dakota County APPROVED BY: Assessor estimates BACKGROUND Great River Energy has approached the City of Rosemount seeking support for legislation granting a personal property tax exemption on a clean -burning natural gas intermediate power plant that is proposed to be built in east Rosemount. Great River Energy has also approached the Dakota County Board of Commissioners seeking similar support. State Senator David Knutson has authored Senate File 715, providing that certain personal property tax at an electric generation facility is exempt from taxation. This bill has been introduced and referred to the Senate Commerce and Utilities Committee. According to House and Senate rules, the first deadline for bills to clear a committee is April 4, 2003. It is anticipated that SF715 will be heard on Friday, April 4. There currently is no companion bill in the State House of Representatives. State Representative Dennis Ozment is considering authoring the companion bill, but is awaiting an indication of local support. The exemption that Great River Energy is seeking applies only to a personal property tax imposed by the State of Minnesota on electric utilities. The exemption does not apply to real property taxes. Since 1994, there have been seventeen (17) personal property tax exemptions granted by the Legislature. Not all of those exemptions were followed by construction of electric generation facilities. Based on comments from Great River Energy and other industry representatives, the exemption is a matter of economic competition as no other neighboring states impose such a tax. According to the industry, it is not economically feasible to develop a power plant with such a competitive disadvantage. Great River Energy, at the request of the City, hosted a public information meeting at Rosemount City Hall on Agenda Item 10a April 2, 2003 Thursday, March 27. The meeting was attended by approximately 35 interested residents. There were nearly 60 people in total at the meeting including representatives of Great River Energy, industry partners, Dakota County, media, and Rosemount City officials. Of the interested residents, a great majority reside in east Rosemount near the proposed location of the power plant. There were also a number of residents from Nininger Township in attendance. Comments at the public meeting focused almost exclusively on environmental impacts associated with the proposed power plant. There were concerns expressed that additional industrial intensity will only contribute to what was characterized as an already unpleasant condition. According to some residents, the refinery and other commercial industrial operations generate odors and emissions that foul the area. These residents were concerned that a power plant would add to that situation. Great River Energy representatives explained in great detail the environmental review process prior to permitting. WORK PLAN In March 2003, the City Council identified the power plant proposal as a major issue to be addressed in the 2003 goals. The Council determined that an appropriate goal was to create a Resolution and policies that support that Resolution. The primary result identified for this goal was an educated and informed public. In order to achieve the goal, the work plan directed staff to compile information and coordinate with the County and legislators. The City Council directed that staff should form a recommendation and draft resolution for action. To communicate with the public, the City posted a prominent notice of the Great River Energy public meeting on its website. Along with that notice, the City encouraged website visitors to submit comments or questions about the proposed power plant. One comment was received. Additionally, the local newspapers and the St. Paul Pioneer Press have followed this issue closely. Great River Energy also direct -mailed nearby property owners in advance of the public meeting. ISSUES Prior to considering a recommendation, it is important for the City Council to understand and be comfortable with a number of issues related to this proposal. Those issues are identified below. The Process — The City of Rosemount is effectively cut out of the project approval process by the fact that local zoning control is superceded by State authority in dealing with electric utilities. Were it not for the fact that Sen. Knutson and Rep. Ozment have asked for the City's input, and were it not for the fact that Great River Energy is seeking to establish a good relationship with the local community, this proposal could be proceeding through the legislative and administrative permitting processes with only cursory City review. The fact that Rosemount's State elected officials are interested in our viewpoint gives the City a significant stake in identifying issues of concern and gaining assurances that those concerns are adequately addressed. The timeline for consideration of this issue has been accelerated because of the legislative calendar. Legislation granting a personal property tax exemption is only the first of many steps necessary for Great River Energy to Page 2 of 5 Agenda Item 10a April 2, 2003 proceed, but being the first step means the legislative calendar is driving the process right now. The Exemption and Project Costs/Financing — Great River Energy indicates that without the personal property tax exemption this project is not feasible. In essence, Great River is saying that without the exemption this proposal will not proceed and another site will be pursued. Because Great River Energy is a not-for-profit member cooperative, it is difficult for the City to evaluate the economic feasibility of the proposed project. When partnering with private businesses for economic development purposes, especially when the City is a financial partner, the City has an opportunity to review the project financing to determine that public assistance is warranted. That analysis is usually done by looking at the rate of return a developer seeks on investment. In this circumstance, Great River Energy is not seeking a return per se. The goal is to produce electricity and sell it to its cooperative members. According to Great River Energy, if the project costs are too high then the cost to produce electricity is greater than what the members are willing to pay. The City is simply not in a position to evaluate the need basis for the exemption due to the market nature of electric generation. However, it is fair to estimate that this project will most likely not proceed without the exemption because no project since 1994 has proceeded without it. Environmental Concerns — Great River Energy proposes to build a combined -cycle intermediate power plant primarily fueled by clean -burning natural gas. The power plant is not proposed to produce electricity every hour of every day. The plant will operate on a needs basis. In terms of particle and air emissions, Great River Energy states that this type of plant comparatively produces 10% of the pollutants attributable to a coal-fired electric generation power plant. Noise and vibration have been identified as possible concerns. The levels and frequency of noise that this plant is likely to create make it seem unlikely that a substantial and sustained increase in audible noise impact will be experienced by most residential properties. Environmental regulation for the proposed power plant — addressing particle emissions, air pollution, noise, water and soils, etc. — would have to go through rigorous analysis and review at three different agencies prior to pennitting. The Public Utilities Commission (PUC), Environmental Quality Board (EQB), and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) all have significant roles to play in approving any proposed development of this type. The City of Rosemount would be certain to actively engage in every step of the process to be sure that our concerns for environmental matters are being adequately addressed. �ala> Land use/zoning — The proposed site for the power plant is a 340 acre piece f property west of Highway 52, north of County Road 42, and south of Ehlers Path. The actual development site is going to be approximately 75 acres within the 340 acres. Siting of the 75 acres will be part of the permitting process, so we are not able at this time to determine the most affected adjacent properties. However, the area is guided for Industrial/Mixed Use development. The power plant is a permissible use within that land use designation. It is also a compatible use for existing heavy industrial commercial operations. Tax Bene at — With or without the exemption, Great River Energy will pay real property taxes on the land and building. In an analysis performed by the County Assessor's office, based on information provided by Great River Energy, the market value for the project would be nearly $43 million. The market value is based on a Minnesota Department of Revenue ratio for utility new construction. The County Assessor has no determination in the value. Page 3 of 5 Agenda Item 10a April 2, 2003 Based on the analysis, the total tax on real property in 2003 would be $1,473,608. A breakdown of 2003 taxes shows the City of Rosemount would receive approximately $329,640. If this amount was calculated into the City's tax capacity, the 2003 estimated taxes payable on a home valued at $200,000 would decrease by $56. The City's tax capacity rate would decline from 57.1% to 54.3%. That does not factor in the amount of property tax payable to the County, School District, and other taxing districts. Impact on City Services — This is one of the primary concerns associated with the proposal. The City has identified a number of potential impacts related to public safety, transportation, and infrastructure should this project proceed. It is important to note that staff has identified potential impacts. Staff has contacted other communities to better understand service needs and implications inherent to hosting a power plant. Some of the service issues that are being evaluated include use of the City's water system, storm water system, and police and fire. Great River Energy recognizes the importance of being a good corporate citizen of the community and has indicated a strong desire to work with the City of Rosemount to address issues of concern. A number of communities have entered into a Host Agreement to formalize the arrangement. Host Agreement — The Host Agreement is recognition that there are impacts to the community in which a power plant is located. Because the proposal for the plant is in the preliminary stages, it is difficult to ascertain the extent to which the services and systems provided by the City will be stressed. The Host Agreement will identify the issues that concern the community. Additionally, the Host Agreement recognizes that the host community is providing a benefit to the larger community of power providers and consumers. Through the Host Agreement, the City hopes to appreciate a benefit in return for providing the greater community benefit. Great River Energy representatives and City staff have had preliminary discussions regarding the terms of a Host Agreement. Should a document not be ready for Council consideration by April 30, or if the staff determines that substantial progress has not been toward terms of an agreement, the Council should consider revoking support for the project. Because the Legislature is scheduled to adjourn in mid-May, the May 1 City Council meeting would be the last reasonable opportunity to amend its position. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of a resolution supporting legislation granting a personal property tax exemption to Great River Energy for the purpose of constructing a combined -cycle electric generation intermediate power plant primarily fueled by natural gas. In making this recommendation, staff has evaluated the issues identified above and come to the following conclusions: Environmental concerns are paramount. However, the regulatory permitting process for this type of facility is extensive and thorough. Furthermore, the City staff will be deeply involved in the environmental review process to assure that community impacts are being addressed. The State of Minnesota may supercede local zoning for the purpose of electric utilities. However, the Page 4of5 Agenda Item 10a April 2, 2003 proposed location is compatible in terms of currently guided land use, as well as compatibility to adjacent or nearby commercial industrial operations. • The type of facility being proposed is not intended to be operated every hour or every day. It is an intermediate power plant that is intended to supplement capacity and accommodate peak usages. Furthermore, this type of facility is among the least impacting from an environmental perspective. • The real property tax benefit to the City of Rosemount is substantial. It is unlikely that our best efforts at economic development in the near term would produce such a high value commercial user. • The developer is committed to working with the City and will formalize the relationship in a Host Agreement. • Despite a fair amount of publicity — in local newspapers, St. Paul Pioneer Press, and the City website — there has been very little public reaction. The issue has not seemed to generate significant community concern. Finally, should the City Council accept the recommendation and approve a resolution of support, staff suggests that several key messages be agreed upon. The City of Rosemount is pursuing a Host Agreement to protect its interests and the interests of the community. The City will continue its efforts to educate and inform the community regarding this issue. City staff will closely monitor the plant siting and environmental review processes. " f38 RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SENATE FILE 715 AND COMPANION HOUSE LEGIS ATION GRANTING A PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION TO GREAT RIVER ENERGY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A COMBINED -CYCLE NATURAL GAS INTERMEDIATE POWER PLANT IN THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, CONTINGENT UPON EXECUTION OF A HOST AGREEMENT WITH GREAT RIVER ENERGY. COUNCIL ACTION: Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003-- A RESOLUTION RELATING TO GREAT RIVER ENERGY; SUPPORTING SENATE FILE 715 AND COMPANION HOUSE LEGISLATION GRANTING A PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION TO GREAT RIVER ENERGY FOR CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A NATURAL GAS INTERMEDIATE POWER PLANT IN THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT. WHEREAS, Great River Energy, a not-for-profit generation and transmission member cooperative that includes Dakota Electric Association, has proposed construction of a 250-600 megawatt combined -cycle power plant primarily fueled by natural gas in the City of Rosemount, east of U.S. Highway 52 and north of County Road 42, and WHEREAS, Great River Energy has approached the City of Rosemount for support of legislation that would grant a personal property tax exemption similar to legislative exemptions granted seventeen times since 1994, and WHEREAS, Great River Energy will not be exempt from real property taxes assessed on the land and building, and WHEREAS, construction of electric generating power plants is exempted from local zoning and land use planning controls by the State of Minnesota, thereby limiting control and influence by the City of Rosemount in the site selection, approval, and development processes, and WHEREAS, the proposed location of the power plant is in an area that is guided for industrial land uses, represents a compatible use to adjacent or nearby existing commercial industrial business operations, and would not be compromised from a land use perspective through a regulatory permitting process that supercedes local authority, and WHEREAS, Great River Energy must go through an extensive regulatory review by the Public Utilities Commission, Environmental Quality Board, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency before receiving the necessary permits to begin construction, and WHEREAS, Great River Energy has indicated a willingness to enter into a Host Agreement with the City of Rosemount that will address issues of significance and concern to the residents and businesses of Rosemount including, but not limited to, agreement by Great River Energy to accept responsibility for the cost of all public improvements, public utilities, and public services directly impacted by construction and ongoing operation of the proposed power plant, and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount supports Senate File 715 and companion House legislation granting a personal property tax exemption to Great River Energy for construction of a natural gas intermediate power plant in the City of Rosemount. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount reserves the right to withdraw support for the legislation if a Host Agreement is not approved by April 30, 2003, or if the City Council determines that Great River Energy has not demonstrated substantial, satisfactory progress toward completion of a Host Agreement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that by indicating support of the proposed Great River Energy combined -cycle natural gas power plant the City Council does not tacitly or implicitly support any other proposal for an electric generating power plant, either by Great River Energy or another prospective developer. ADOPTED this 3rd day of April, 2003, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against:_ Member absent: William H. Droste, Mayor Seconded by: 2 �i.r No. / 15, as introduced Logi latero #466* l se h l t#ella I; twks tt, th* W*rld KEY: s = old language to be removed underscored = new language to be added NOTE: If you cannot see any difference in the key above, you need to change the display of stricken and/or underscored language. Authors and Status ■ List versions S.F No. 715, as introduced: 83rd Legislative Session (2003-2004) Posted on Mar 6, 2003 1.1 A bill for an act 1.2 relating to taxation; providing that certain personal 1.3 property at an electric generation facility is exempt 1.4 from taxation; amending Minnesota Statutes 2002, 1.5 section 272.02, by adding a subdivision. 1.6 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 1.7 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2002, section 272.02, is 1.8 amended by adding a subdivision to read: 1.9 Subd. 56. [ELECTRIC GENERATION FACILITY PERSONAL 1.10 PROPERTY.] (a) Notwithstanding subdivision 9, clause (a), 1.11 attached machinery and other personal property which is part of 1.12 a combined -cycle combustion -turbine electric_ generation facility 1.13 that exceeds 150 megawatts of installed capacity and that meets 1.14 the requirements of this subdivision is exempt. At the time of 1.15 construction, the facility must: 1.16 (1) utilize natural gas as a primary fuel; 1.17 (2) be owned by an electric generation and transmission 1.18 cooperative; 1.19 (3) be located within ten miles of parallel existing 1.20 24 -inch and 30 -inch natural gas pipelines and a 345 -kilovolt 1.21 high-voltage electric transmission line; and 1.22- (4) be designed to provide intermediate energy and 1.23 ancillary services, and have received a certificate of need 1.24 under section 216B.243, demonstrating demand for its capacity. 1.25 (b) Construction of the facility must be commenced after 2.1 January 1,_2004, and before January 1, 2009. Property eligible 2.2 for this exemption does not include electric transmission lines 2.3 and interconnections or gas pipelines and interconnections 2.4 appurtenant to the property or the facility. 2.5 [EFFECTIVE DATE.] This section is effective for taxes 2.6 levied in 2005, payable in 2006, and thereafter. Page 1 of 1 http://www.revisor.leg. state.mn.us/cgi-bin/getbill.pl?session=ls83 &version=latest&session number=0&ses... 4/l/2003 M O O N ti r � v W Z W 4- 0� O N> m I.L F- W W CQ V W C) O ti O \ o (Y) 0 O O M LO Co Co U9- N U t6 Q C U) C6 C (Q U) O x C6 � O C: O O O U U) (O F- U) LU Co E cn Vj O Z(D 0 CU E ss P: U) > o O c� Q H F- �sM3 U W F- } ry W Z_ 2 U Q W a- 0 C) W O ti p J o X Z LO M O H? CO W a_ 6 W Q 0 Z Q F- C: W O .00-0 UO�/ o L 12f 0 C J CM O Q CN �O �W �W O J F- O % Z :P �- c10 w �OfC� w C) Z— AA 0 O O 0 (Y) ti O O p 0 (:5 N N O N N II II 0 Lf') r O O 0 O ti U-) x O Ocoo (15 6 Lo CD co C) Efl c 6-j- 11 H aW : U O > Q CL �C) J L x Wim~ w N '.7 w W O x w F- R O z w w r� w d x A a o D O H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l 0 0 0 0 0 \ o o N 01 00 M N 0000 It M C\ 01 N 'N- \G l- M' — O\ C� [-- C\ � v'� � M t- I'- N oo kn d' Z M M O c�rEos vi b3 'us Eo,�ross9 M cd rA O c,3 Q o o O C13 0 �wUQv�v�UQU c') 0 0 N O N (Y) M, cn W LLJZ U LI. a w a.J Z W a W U Q LIJ W W I.L LLJ Q � O r-1 •--' l� .fir M � � .-+ � H [� O `0 00 00 O ' N � O N � 6R 64 6s 69 69 69 6s 6s 69 69 Ge Z In cz C) cz Q w � C, o 0 C:) o ��o Ua H wa�Av�v�Ur�U aU O CN 0 00 00 M N N- �i C) e4 o°OomooW) O r 00 O O O O O vi Lr OC OC) "-4-i \ C1 00 00 O N -� �--� H O) FH r..( p O*l 00 1n "It •-• r -i 64 T— p N r M U U U U U p, X69 Ge V6 rsrsbs69Go!i6l HHRH � z ii u u A o as 00 o Q oC7U t4z� �'oo v � rn � `O a co � ° ° � J; O Ua H 4 zP4 Q U Ua co ii ii a ii W C N O O O v r- .-- O �o I'D M 00 O Q O O O t� \o \p O -- [— � O 00 � � � O O LU t-kn00W) c� - M�o� N k x Q o00 m N—C o000� O Z o C: 69 � 69 69 69 Os os os 69 69 C O O >+ N N N N L = W z D rn C C O 75 O O 69 69 60. 69 U '5 (Q O (B a o 0 o C/1 0 LUQ y� OtC)o0 c qt m c6 cc H wrxAvov�Uv�U Ua z a) _ >, >, >, >, Co N.-- > Q Q Q Q [f l� \o 00 V 00 C1 -r 00 It >m CO E CB cII cL3 a M 00 m 00 M � 00 Ol, Vn M EW � � C) C) �r- M- oNoo -Mvi 0 L O O 00 r- N O ch 00 69 69 69 69 69 09 69 69 69 O H •= �C o b ::3 O u o V H wc�AununUVJU";5 W U W v �.H.{0000 0* 00 r-� t - r - 00 r--+ o Z M M M N s-1 ds h AoF- O in O O TO: FROM: DATE MEMORANDUM Honorable Mayor and City Council Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator Andrew J. Brotzler> P.E., PECi Engineer City g April 2, 2003 RE: Supplemental Information Chippendale Avenue Speed Limit (CSAH 42 to 160th Street) Agenda Item q.a. This memorandum is intended to provide additional information for Council consideration in association with the above -referenced agenda item for the April 3, 2003 City Council meeting. Following the completion of the Executive Summary for this item, Staff was contacted by Mn/DOT and given a verbal summary of the speed study analysis completed by Mn/DOT for Chippendale Avenue from 145" Street south to 160" Street. Based on this conversation, it is anticipated that the following speed authorizations will be forthcoming in the next 4 to 6 weeks from Mn/DOT for Chippendale Avenue: Chippendale Avenue -145`" Street to CSAH 42 35 MPH Chippendale Avenue - CSAH 42 to 160th Street 40 MPH For the segment of Chippendale Avenue between 145th Street and CSAH 42, there will be no required change in the current posted speed limit. For the segment of Chippendale Avenue between CSAH 42 and 1601h Street, there will be a required change in the current posted speed limit of 30 MPH to the anticipated Mn/DOT authorized speed limit of 40 MPH. As this anticipated authorized speed limit is less than the current Mn/DOT authorized speed limit of 45 MPH and to minimize the opportunity for confusion as a result of changes to the posted speed limit, Staff would recommend to Council a revised recommended action as follows: Revised Recommended Action: Motion to table item until such time that the formal results of the speed study completed by Mn/DOT are made available for consideration and action. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. GAorms/memorandum April 3, 2003 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Rosemount 2875-145 th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068-4941 Re: Bloomfield 5th Addition Street and Utility Construction and Appurtenant Work City of Rosemount Project No. 364 WSB Project No. 2012-50 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Bids were received for the above -referenced project on Friday, March 28, 2003, and were opened and read aloud. A total of 14 bids were received. The bids were checked for mathematical accuracy and tabulated. Please find enclosed the bid tabulation indicating the low bidder as Ryan Contracting Co., 8700 13th Avenue East, Shakopee, MN 55379 in the amount of $869,564.30. We recommend that the City Council consider these bids and award a contract to Ryan Contracting Co. based on the results of the bids received. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. Mark E. Erichson, P.E. Project Manager Enclosure cc: Ryan Contracting Co. sm Minneapolis • St. Cloud •Equal Opportunity Employer F.•IWPWIM2011-501recmmdtn ltr.doc PROJECT: Bloomfield 5th Addition Street and Utility Construction and Appurtenant Work City of Rosemount Project No. 364 LOCATION: Rosemount, MN WSB PROJECT NO(S).: 2012-50 Bids Opened: Friday, March 28, 2003, 10:00 a.m. Engineer's Opinion of Cost $1,059,918.05 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct tabulation of the bids as received on March 28, 2003. Mark E. Erichson, P.E., Project Manager ** Denotes corrected figure Contractor Addendums Rec'd. Bid Security Total Bid 1 Ryan Contracting Co. X X $869,564.30 2 S.M. Hentges & Sons's, Inc. X X $885,498.91 3 Redstone Construction Company, Inc. X X $913,940.23** 4 Contractor's Edge, Inc. X X $918,330.39 5 Northdale Construction Company, Inc. X X $918,450.21** 6 Three Rivers Construction X X $920,183.25 7 A-1 Excavating, Inc. X X $928,883.98 8 Barbarossa and Sons, Inc. X X $958,214.36 9 Burschville Construction, Inc. X X $963,398.27** 10 Hydrocon, Inc. X X $971,398.60 11 Heselton Construction, LLC X X $972,652.09 12 Richard Knutson, Inc. X X $999,760.83 13 S.J. Louis Construction, Inc. X X $1,052,801.05 14 Sammon Parker Construction X X $1,054,053.67** Engineer's Opinion of Cost $1,059,918.05 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct tabulation of the bids as received on March 28, 2003. Mark E. Erichson, P.E., Project Manager ** Denotes corrected figure CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003 — A RESOLUTION RECEIVING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR BLOOMFIELD 5TH ADDITION STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT NO. 364 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount, Minnesota, as follows: All bids on construction of the Bloomfield 5d' Street and Utility Improvements are hereby received and tabulated. 2. The bid of Ryan Contracting Company in the amount of $869,564.30 for the construction of said improvements are in accordance with the plans and specifications and advertisement for bids is the lowest responsible bid and shall be and hereby is accepted. 3. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with said bidder for the construction of said improvements for and on behalf of the City of Rosemount. 4. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of all successful bidder and the next two lowest bidders shall be retained until a contract has been executed. Award of the bid is contingent on the determination by the City Administrator that all necessary rights -of -entry or easements by deed or dedication have been secured for construction of the improvements. ADOPTED this 3rd day of April, 2003 ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against: William H. Droste, Mayor Seconded by: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Authorize Feasibility Report for Biscayne Pointe 5`h Addition Street & Utility Improvements, City Project #367 AGENDA SECTION: Consent (Add-on) PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer AGENDA NO: ATTACHMENTS: Resolution APPROVED BY: In anticipation of Council approval of the final plat and Subdivision Agreement for the Biscayne Pointe 5' Addition development, the developer, Heritage Development, is requesting that the feasibility report for the public improvement component of the project be prepared. Based on this request, Staff is recommending that Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the preparation of a feasibility report for Biscayne Pointe 5th Addition. The developer has deposited with the City the necessary funds for costs associated with the preparation of this report. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION ORDERING A FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE BISCAYNE POINTE 5'H ADDITION STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT #367. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003 - A RESOLUTION ORDERING A FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE BISCAYNE POINTE 5TH ADDITION STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT #367 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemount has received a request and monies from Heritage Development, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemount deems it necessary to investigate the feasibility of the remaining preliminary plat previously approved, City Project #367. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Staff is directed to have the necessary feasibility report prepared for the Biscayne Pointe 5th Addition Street and Utility Improvements, City Project #367. ADOPTED this 3' day of April, 2003. ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against: William H. Droste, Mayor Second by: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 3, 2003 AGENDA: PORT AUTHORITY TERM DETERMINATION AGENDA SECTION: DEPT. HEADS REPORT PREPARED BY: JAMIE VERBRUGGE, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AGEND1jff-Mk "'5 A ATTACHMENTS: LETTER, MEMO APPROVED BY: City Attorney LeFevere reviewed information regarding the terms of office for Port Authority Commissioners Zimmer and Baxter. Commissioner Zimmer was appointed to fill the unexpired term of former Commissioner Kevin Carroll. Mr. Carroll's term would have run from February of 1999 to February of 2005. Therefore, Commissioner Zimmer was appointed to fill the unexpired part of a six-year term, and restoring the terms of Port Authority Commissioner to six years would restore the length of that unexpired term. Ms. Zimmer's tern will expire in February of 2005. Commissioner Baxter was originally appointed to fill the unexpired term of Commissioner Norm Miller. Miller's term would have expired in February of 2002. Commissioner Baxter's term therefore expired in 2002 and he was reappointed in March of 2002. That reappointment was thought to be a three-year appointment. However, with the change of term, restoring the term to six years, Commissioner Baxter's term will expire in February of 2008. The motion set below would record this information in the City Council's minutes for a permanent record. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION to reaffirm the terms of non -elected members of the Port Authority due to an amendment reversing three-year terms back to six year terms; Commissioner Zimmer's term will expire February, 2005 and Commissioner Baxter's term will expire February, 2008. COUNCIL ACTION: C H A R T E R E D 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax http://www.kennedy-graven.com CHARLES L. LEFEVERE Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337-9215 email: clefevere@kennedy-graven.com March 24; 2003 Jamie Verbrugge City Administrator City of Rosemount 2875 1456' St. W. P.O. Box 510 Rosemount, MN 55068 Re: Terms of Office of Port Authority Commissioners Dear Jamie: Based on information provided by Linda Jentink, it seems to me that the terms of office of Commissioners Zimmer and Baxter will expire in February of 2005 and February of 2008 respectively. Commissioner Zimmer was appointed to fill the unexpired term of former Commissioner Kevin Carroll. Mr. Carroll's term would have run from February of 1999 to February of 2005. Therefore, Commissioner Zimmer was appointed to fill the unexpired part of a six year term, and restoring the terms of Port Authority Commissioner to six years would restore the length of that unexpired term. Ms. Zimmer's term will expire in February of 2005. Mr. Baxter was originally appointed to fill the unexpired term of Commissioner Nona Miller. Mr. Miller's term would have expired in February of 2002. Mr. Baxter's term therefore expired in 2002 and he was reappointed in March of 2002. That reappointment was thought to be a three year appointment. However, with the change of term, restoring the term to six years, Mr. Baxter's term will expire in February of 2008. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Very truly yours, MAR 2 2003 Charles L. LeFevere CLL:sez CLL -229210v1 RS230-1 MEMO DATE: 1/15/03, and amended 3/21/03 FROM: Linda Jentink, City Clerk TO: City Administrator Jamie Verbrugge, Interim City Adm. Gary Kalstabakken, Com. Dev. Dir. Jim Parsons, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Mayor Droste, Council Members Riley, DeBettignies, Strayton, Shoe -Corrigan. RE: Port Authority Term length discussion I pulled out the Port minutes to verify the term for Cami Zimmer. No term length is mentioned when the appointment was made, either in the Port Authority minutes or the City Council minutes or Clerk's File. However, tracing back I found that Cami Zimmer replaced Kevin Carroll's resigned position. Carroll held a six yr term from 2/93 to 1/31/99 and then was reappointed Feb. 2, 1999 for another six yr term. Carroll resigned 7/14/99 and Cami was not appointed until 6/20/00. So to preserve the rotation of members, when Cami was appointed on 6/20/00 her term would have been five years, ending in 2005, finishing out the rotation position of Carroll. So she could be considered "grandfathered in" because she was appointed before the April 2001 when changes were made to the terms with Resolution 2001-34 to the Establishing Resolution 1991-53. The other commissioner's terms were all amended to change to one-year terms, so I applied that process, and changed her term in 2002 to the amended 3 yr term.. I have not heard from Charlie yet on his opinion. But I have no gain to protest either way. I believe we can administer this the best way we see fit and if that is to have Cami's term go to 2005 that would be fine. Mike Baxter filled Norm Miller's term. Miller was appointed 2/96 for a six yr term to 2/02 but Miller resigned on 12/3/96. Baxter began 2/97 for a five-year term to end 2/02. Baxter was reappointed 3/02 for the bogus 3 yr. term. So we need to establish if Baxter's term ends in 2005 or goes six yrs to 2008. What is difficult to keep separate here is the council 4 yr terms and the resident 6 yr terms and the transition of terms between the changes. So it would be helpful if we can establish that the council filled positions keep their rotation by elections and if a replacement commissioner is appointed the term remain with that council members seat. Then, we will have two alternating resident terms which should not technically end the same year so continuity remains with the commission. However, we do have Baxter and Zimmer's term ending in 2005 if no changes are made. We need to determine if this is OK, or if a year should be added to one in order to obtain that rotation again. Or, go back to saying the 3 yr term was null and void and it should have been six years and so Baxter's term ends in 2008 and Zimmer's in 2005. I have the documentation of dates if it is helpful. Let me know what you decide. Other notes: Jeff Caspar ran in the 2000 election and was defeated. 1998 was the first even year election; they previously were odd year elections. April 2001 Port terms for City Council members coincided with their elected terms. Sheila Klassen was appointed to fill Dennis Wippermann's Council term. 7/20/99. Klassen was elected to City Council Nov. 2000. Kevin Carroll resigned at 7-6-99 meeting, effective 7-14-99 from City Council and Port. Mike Baxter filled Norm Millers PA term. Norm's term started 2/96 and would have gone to 2/2002. Mike Baxter start 2/97 and with a five year term would end 2/2002. Baxter was reappointed 3/02 for 3 yr term to 2005. r ITEM# 6 A ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING MARCH 20, 2003 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the Rosemount City Council was duly held on Thursday, March 20, 2003, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 2875 145th Street West. Mayor Droste called the meeting to order with Council Members DeBettignies, Shoe -Corrigan, Riley, and Strayton present. Also in attendance were City Administrator Verbrugge, City Attorney LeFevere, Community Development Director Parsons, Parks and Recreation Director Schultz, and Engineering Consultant Mark Erichson. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Additional information was added to Item 6. e. Receive Bids/Award Contract for Portable Generator/Receptacle Project, City Project 366. Council consensus was to approve the agenda as presented. There were no public comments or response to public comments. Mayor Droste welcomed Jamie Verbrugge, the new City Administrator for Rosemount. Council and department heads spent much of the weekend setting goals and priorities with Verbrugge. Droste also thanked Police Chief Gary Kalstabakken for serving as interim city administrator for three months. Droste noted that staff maintained a professional and organized manner throughout. Department Heads Reports/Business Mayor Droste presented a proclamation for Space Day on May 1, 2003. This is sponsored by Lockheed Martin Tactical Systems, Naval Electronics and Surveillance Systems in St. Paul. Their program "Embrace Space" is supported by more than sixty partners who represent educational, professional and trade associations, youth groups, corporations and space -related organizations. Embrace Space encourages people of all ages to advance science, math and technology education to inspire future generations to continue the vision of our space pioneers. MOTION by DeBettignies to proclaim Space Day on May 1st, 2003 in the City of Rosemount. Second by Riley. Ayes: Shoe -Corrigan, Droste, Riley, Strayton, DeBettignies. Nays: None. Motion carried. Consent Agenda MOTION by Riley to approve the Consent Agenda for March 20th. Second by Shoe -Corrigan. Ayes: Droste, Riley, Strayton, DeBettignies, Shoe -Corrigan. Nays: None. Motion passed. a. Minutes of March 6, 2003 Regular City Council Meeting b. Bills Listing C. Receive Donation - D.A.R.E. Program and Administration d. Authorization to Solicit Quotes for Personal Computer Workstations e. Receive Bids/Award Contract — Portable Generator/Receptacle Project, City Project #366 f. Receive Revised Feasibility Report/Set Public Hearing-Chippendale/CSAH 42 Improvements, City Project #344 g. Bloomfield 5th Addition Final Plat and Subdivision Agreement h. Maintenance Agreement with Department of Military Affairs i. Bloomfield Park — Contract for Construction Administration and Project Management j. Bard's Crossing Final Plat and Subdivision Agreement 1 ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING MARCH 20, 2003 PUBLIC HEARING: Port Authority Establishing Resolution Amendment Mayor Droste reviewed the public hearing process. The Affidavit of Notice and Publication were on file with the City Clerk's office. This process required two publications on March 7th and March 14th to fulfill State Statutes. City Clerk Jentink reviewed the requirement by State. Statutes to maintain six- year teens for Port Authority members other than elected Council commissioners. On April 17, 2001 the past City Council approved amendments to the establishing resolution without proper publication notice and so this resolution will put into policy that elected council members and mayor Port Authority Commissioner terms will coincide with their elected term. City Attorney LeFevere noted that the terms of Port Authority Commissioners Zimmer and Baxter will hold until a replacement or re -appointment would be made if determined that their term length is over. An amendment made April 17, 2001 by the City Council did not have legal authority to change the term length to be less than six years. The apparent terms for Baxter and Zimmer presume to expire in 2005. Mayor Droste opened the public hearing to audience comment. There was no audience comment. MOTION by Droste to close the Public Hearing for the Port Authority Establishing Resolution Amendment. Second by DeBettignies. Ayes: Riley, Strayton, DeBettignies, Shoe -Corrigan, Droste. Nays: None. Motion carried. Council Member Riley noted a correction of date within the certification clause in the resolution. City Clerk Jentink stated the correction would be made. Riley then asked staff to determine when Port Authority terms would be expiring for the Port Authority Commissioners that are not council members because of the change from three-year terms to six-year terms. Staff was directed to research the facts and report back. MOTION by DeBettignies to accept the recommended changes to the Port Authority enabling resolution by ADOPTING A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE ROSEMOUNT PORT AUTHORITY; AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1991-53. Second by Riley. Ayes: Strayton, DeBettignies, Shoe -Corrigan, Droste, Riley. Nays: None. Motion carried. Funding Street Construction and Maintenance in "Minnesota Cities" Report City Engineer Brotzler gave a presentation requesting that cities have additional options to incur funding to support transportation related expenses. New legislation would be required to grant greater local revenue raising authority to meet specific needs in cities. A transportation utility fund is not allowed with current state law. The League of Minnesota Cities, City Engineers Association of Minnesota, and the Minnesota Public Works Association released this report titled "Funding Street Construction and Maintenance in Minnesota Cities." Council asked at what level of maintenance the streets in Rosemount are at? Brotzler noted that the maximum life expectancy of a road is fifty years with routine maintenance. This maintenance includes overlays, reconstruction, and seal coating at various years. Usually at 17 years, 26, and 33 years major maintenance is done, with seal coating between when needed. There are many residential streets that are reaching that fifty year mark in Rosemount. 2 ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING MARCH 20, 2003 MOTION by Shoe -Corrigan to adopt A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING LEGISLATION TO PROVIDE IMPROVED FUNDING OPTIONS FOR CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS. Second by Strayton. Ayes: DeBettignies, Shoe -Corrigan, Droste, Riley, Strayton. Nays: None. Motion carried. Announcements Mayor Droste reviewed upcoming meetings for Council and city commissions. City Administrator Verbrugge noted that there will be an informational meeting regarding a proposed power plant with a presentation by the Great River Energy Inc. on Thursday, March 27, at 6:30 p.m. at Rosemount City Hall. The meeting was adjourned at 8:03 p.m. Mayor Droste noted that the Council will reconvene the special meeting held at 4:00 p.m. regarding commissioner appointments to make final selections. Respectfully submitted, City Clerk Linda Jentink Recording Secretary The City Council Agenda Packet is Clerk's File 2003-12. 3 ITEM# BIOSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MARCH 13, 2003 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof the Committee of the Whole Work Session was held on Thursday, March 13, 2003 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Mayor Droste and Council Members Riley, DeBettignies, Shoe -Corrigan, and Strayton were present. Also in attendance were Interim City Administrator/Police Chief Kalstabakken, Community Development Director Parsons, Human Resource/Communication Coordinator Graff, Finance Director May and Parks & Recreation Director Schultz. Transportation Plan An update was provided to Council on the status of the transportation plan. Chuck Rickart with WSB & Associates, Inc. was in attendance at the meeting to present to Council the work that has been completed to date and the work remaining to be completed. To date, two stakeholder meetings have been conducted; the stakeholders being Mn/DOT, Dakota County, adjacent City's, Flint Hills Resources and the University of Minnesota. One public informational meeting has also been conducted. Traffic issues that have been identified through these meetings have been compiled on an exhibit of the City transportation system which was presented to Council. The basis for the traffic model being completed is an enhancement of the model completed by Dakota County. The model completed by Dakota County is being modified to add Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) to the City of Rosemount. Traffic counts completed last year will be used as a baseline to calibrate the model. Through the next two to three months, a third stakeholder meeting will be conducted as well as a second public informational meeting. At these meetings, the results of the modeling will be presented along with proposed future improvements to the City's transportation system. Council noted the following issues: • Signal system at CR 38 and TH 3 • Signal system at Connemara Trail and TH 3 • TH 52 / CSAH 42 Interchange project • Shannon Parkway speeds It was noted that these issues and other identified issues will be addressed in the final plan. User Fee Analysis Study A draft of the user fee analysis study was presented to the Council for their discussion. Finance Director May provided an overview of the process and Al Erickson and Jessie Hart from Springsted were there to follow up on the process and the rationale for the proposed changes to the fees. After a lengthy discussion, this item was tabled until the April work session. Council is to direct any further questions to Finance Director May so that the fees can be finalized and implementation of the changes can be determined at that time. 2003 Budget Issues This item was divided into three parts: 1) discussion of operating fund balances; 2) the Chippendale Avenue reconstruction project; and 3) proposed budget cuts. Fund balances were looked at in relation to the State Auditors recently published report that listed the City of Rosemount in the "high" category. It was determined to use a portion of our excess fund 1 A ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MARCH 13, 2003 balances to help fund the Chippendale Avenue project. This will allow us to merge two years' worth of projects (south of CSAH 42 and north of CSAH 42) into one year. This will help minimize the construction inconveniences to citizens along this road and to help us realize some cost savings by combining the two projects into one. We will use approximately $1,000,000 of reserves to help with the funding for this project, bringing our operating fund reserves into a more acceptable range for the State Auditor. Finally, Finance Director May presented a list of 38 items for Council consideration to deal with the potential loss of State aids. The City could potentially lose up to $780,000 in aid this year. The 38 items represented approximately $549,000 of the total losses. The items will all be formally addressed when the State has their final budget proposal in place sometime later this summer. The remaining amount will be addressed at that time with additional cuts to be made or the use of operating reserves to make up the difference. Public Purpose Expenditure Policy HR/ Communications Coordinator Graff presented a draft of a Public Purpose Expenditure Policy to the City Council for their review and discussion. The policy is modeled after other cities' policies which arose following the State Auditor critique of employee expenditures made by the City of Brooklyn Park. The policy outlines when City funds may be used. Acceptable expenditures include employee recognition and the purchase of flowers or cards when employees are ill or experience a death. Graff will also include a cake or other food items when employees terminate with the City as an acceptable expenditure. These expenditures will be deducted from the City Council budget. To offset these expenses, money from vending machines in the Public Works Garage and the public area of City Hall will be shown as revenue in the City Council budget. The final version of this policy will be brought for Council action at the April 3, 2003 meeting. CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES Neighborhood Education and Enforcement Effort. Staff presented statistics and narrative information to outline the efforts in 2002 to educate residents and enforce codes in three specific neighborhoods. The codes regulate outdoor storage, off-street parking, and other issues related to property maintenance. Staff sent letters and conducted inspections in the neighborhoods bounded by Diamond Path, Co. Rd. 42, West 145th Street and Chippendale Avenue. After contacting hundreds of residents, staff found strong public support for a neighborhood -by - neighborhood approach to code enforcement that emphasizes educating the residents and voluntary compliance. Over 70% of the 435 properties inspected were found to be in compliance at the first inspection. In 2002, nearly half of the over 200 residents to whom staff sent a first notice of violation corrected the situation (including complaint -based notices). Over 60% of the 106 residents to whom staff sent a second notice then complied with the ordinance. Only a tiny fraction of the total cases in 2002 went to the step of getting a citation or formal complaint from the City — just ten out of 771 total cases. Council members expressed support for the neighborhood education and enforcement effort, but described calls from residents upset about receiving violation notices. Council members called for the highest standard of customer service by code enforcement persomiel, with polite, professional treatment of residents at every step of the process. Members asked for the number 2 ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MARCH 13, 2003 of RV cases, the cost of pending court cases, and for continued public relations efforts to inform residents of future inspections. Members suggested using testimonials from residents, e.g., at Cameo Place, about their appreciation for cleaning up outdoor storage and other violations at various properties. Waste Enclosure Violations. Staff described efforts in 2002 to enforce an ordinance that requires that waste containers such as Dumpsters be enclosed or fenced. The requirement applies to commercial properties and apartment buildings. For new construction, the enclosure must match the exterior of the building; for existing buildings, the fence may be of wood or chain-link with screening. The purpose of the ordinance is to stop trash, garbage or food waste from being scattered or blown around the vicinity of waste containers. Enclosures also enhance the look of an area. Some property owners downtown and elsewhere have complained about the difficulty of locating an enclosure on their property. Staff cited 38 violations of the waste enclosure ordinance in 2002. About 26 of these properties are still in violation; staff is aware of other violations that have not been cited. The City Council extended the compliance period through the winter. Staff expects to continue to enforce the ordinance and will work with property owners regarding how they can locate an enclosure on their property so they can comply. Council members asked how many of the unresolved violations are downtown and how many are in the commercial area near Co. Rd. 42. Members described unsightly outdoor storage at a commercial property near Canada Avenue. Downtown Enforcement. Staff reported on code issues in the downtown area including non- conforming signs, outdoor storage, lack of enclosures for waste containers, and others. There are no setbacks for waste containers and enclosures in the downtown (except where adjacent to residential areas). Council members discussed whether to delay enforcement of code requirements downtown until after the City Council adopts a downtown redevelopment plan. Members directed staff to continue enforcement efforts downtown and elsewhere in a tactful, professional manner with an emphasis on customer service, that is, helping property owners and business operators comply with the ordinance. City Hall, Parks and City Entry Monument Signs Staff discussed the past direction given for city signage. Staff brought examples of current signs used by the City and signs used by other communities. Council did not have a strong opinion about signs other than we want to provide something that represents the City in a positive manner (ie. signs that look nice and are easily visible. Staff will return this issue when we start our 2004 budget process and provide a signage plan for the council to review. UPDATES Great River Energy (GRE) Update. Staff from GRE met on March l It" with City Engineer Brotzler, Community Development Director Parsons and Interim Administrator Kalstabakken to further discuss the proposed power plant. GRE stressed that although state permitting processes over rides local zoning and other regulations for power plants, it was still GRE's intention to comply with the spirit of the local requirements. This was clarified to mean that GRE would continue to work with city staff to identify issues important to the city, for example, adopting a landscaping plan, site plan review, and public services requirements of the plant. 3 ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MARCH 13, 2003 Tim Seek, GRE, was present and reviewed the plant location and reasons that the Rosemount site is desirable for a power plant. He also gave a brief overview of the permitting process. Seek stated that Senator Knutson has authored a bill in the Minnesota Senate regarding GRE's request to be exempted from the personal property tax. Council discussed the need to have staff continue to work with GRE to gather additional information regarding a landscape plan, identifying police and fire related issues at the proposed plant and the impact of the plant on city sewer and water utilities. In addition, Council stressed to Mr. Seek the importance of communicating the company's plans to the community — particularly the residents in the immediate area of the proposed site. GRE will coordinate an Open House to discuss the proposal with concerned or interested residents. City staff, Council, Representative Ozment and Senator Knutson should be advised of the Open House date so that they may attend and observe. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, City Clerk Linda Jentink Recording Secretary The City Council's Agenda Packet is Clerk's File 2003-09. El ROSEMOUNT CITY PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL MEETING MARCH 20, 2003 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a special meeting of the Rosemount City Council was duly held on Thursday, March 20, 2003, at 4:00 p.m. at the Rosemount City Hall, 2875 145th Street West. Mayor Droste called the meeting to order with Councilmembers Riley, Shoe -Corrigan, DeBettignies, and Strayton present. Also in attendance was City. Administrator Verbrugge. Mayor Droste noted that the purpose of the meeting was to interview and to appoint commissioners to the Parks and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission, and Port Authority. The applicants interviewed were John Powell, Steve Foley, Steve Casey, Harry Willcox, Terry Zurn, Larry Petron, Steve Wilson, Cindi Potaracke, and Jay Tentinger. Due to a scheduling conflict, applicant Charlie Koehnen was interviewed on Saturday, March 15, 2003. Applicant Heidi Grange did not appear at the March 20th interview. Mayor Droste adjourned the meeting at 6:10 p.m. to be reconvened following the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on March 20, 2003. Mayor Droste reconvened the special meeting at 8:15 p.m. for the purpose of discussing applicants and appointments. MOTION by DeBettignies to appoint Terry Zurn as Planning Commissoner, Steve Wilson as Parks and Recreation Commissioner, and Jay Tentinger as Port Authority Commissioner. Second by Strayton. Motion passed 4-1. Mayor Droste indicated that he would contact one of the applicants to discuss an appointment to the SKB Trust Fund board and place the appointment on the next City Council meeting agenda. The special meeting adjourned at 9:31 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James D. Verbrugge, City Administrator Recording Secretary The City Council Agenda Packet is Clerk's File 2003-11. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Receive Donation - Parks and Recreation Department AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT PREPARED BY: Dan Schultz, Director of Parks and Recreation AGENDIIN FIE' ATTACHMENTS: None APPROVED BY, is a request for Council to receive the following donations: Donation from Amount Use Rosemount Jaycees $2,500 Jaycee Egg Hunt CF Industries $200 Blarney Stone Hunt - Lep Days CF Industries $300 Fishing Derby - Lep Days Dakota Electric $500 Safety Cam First State Bank of Rosemount $350 Safety Camp RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve receiving the donations as listed above from the Rosemount Jaycees, CF Industries, -Dakota Electric and First State Bank of Rosemount. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Donation Account Expenditure —Police AGENDA SECTION: Equipment Fund CONSENT PREPARED BY: Gary D. Kalstabakken, Chief of PoliceAGENDt M #6 F_ .� ATTACHMENTS: Worksheet APPROVED BY/ The Council is asked to approve the expenditure of monies from the Equipment Fund to purchase new long guns for the police department. A total of six rifles will be purchased, which is one for each marked squad car. Funds in the Equipment Fund are from both donations and criminal forfeitures. A vehicle seized in a burglary conviction was recently sold at auction and the proceeds, approximately $925, were deposited in the fund. The purchase of these long guns is to replace weapons that were purchased in 1989. Those guns were not designed as a law enforcement weapon and do not have sufficient range or ballistics to serve the needs of our department. In addition, these weapons have experienced increasing maintenance and malfunction problems; which renders them unsafe and unreliable for use by officers. Rosemount's rural character and large open spaces on the east end require the department to have a long gun with sufficient range and ballistic capabilities to be effective in the open areas as well as being suitable for the traditional urban development. The department's firearms instructors have researched long guns over the last one -to -two years. Based on the criteria identified by the firearms instructors and in researching the long guns available to law enforcement agencies, the recommended weapon for purchase is the Defense Procurement Manufacturing Services, Inc. (DPMS) Model Al — Tactical 16. The best quote received on this long gun is $644 per weapon, which amounts to a total cost of $4115.16, including tax, for six guns. There is currently just over $3100 in the Equipment Fund. It is proposed to pay for the long gun purchase by using $3000 from the Equipment Fund and. the balance taken from the 2003 Operating Budget of the Police Department. ITEM AMOUNT COMMENTS DPMS Model Al — Tactical 16 $3000 Balance of an estimated $1115.16 .223 Calibre Rifle to be paid from the Operating Budget of the Police Department RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the expenditure of $3000 from the Police Equipment Fund for the purchase of six (6) rifles. COUNCIL ACTION: DONATION REVENUE WORKSHEET RECEIPT OF DONATION Donation Received on: Amount Received: $ '- Receipt # for Donation: Purpose of Donation: POLICE EQUIPMENT FUND Account # for Donation: 101-22222 (Must be Liability # assigned for each individual Department) EXPENDITURE OF DONATION Amount to be Spent: $ 3 0<C7 C-) To be Spent from Acct #: 101-42110-01-208 (Must be Expenditure # corresponding to individual Department) Purpose of Expenditure: 1- GLA -11,Y i`iG�"�P AMENDMENT OF BUDGETS Amend Donation Revenue Acct #101-36230-00-000: Amend Exaenditure Acct # 101-42110-01-208 (The twodollaramounts should be the same) $]060 GENERAL JOURNAL ENTRY TO ADJUST DONATION LIABILITY # Debit: 101-22222 (Donation Liability #) $ 36'x Credit: 101-36230-00-000 Journal entry to reduce deferred donation revenue and increase donation revenue to actual per council action on _ 06 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Budget Amendments AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Jeff May, Finance Director AGENDAIfU #6 G ATTACHMENTS: APPROVED BY: Council Memo, Resolution, Donation Worksheets This item is on the agenda for Council to formally amend the 2003 General Fund budget by resolution for donation items that Council has previously authorized covering expenditures made during the first quarter of 2003. Rather than bringing a resolution before the Council each time there is a need to spend money from donations previously received, we have developed procedures that allow us to have you authorize the expenditure and amend the budgets at the time the expenditure is made and then periodically bring to you a resolution that formally amends the budgets for a number of these donation expenditures. The attached memo and donation worksheets support the figures given in the resolution. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDMENT OF CERTAIN 2003 BUDGET ITEMS for the General Fund as outlined in the attached memo. COUNCIL ACTION: MEMORANDUM DATE: March 24, 2003 TO: Mayor Droste Council Members DeBettignies, Riley, Shoe -Corrigan & Strayton FROM: Jeff May, Finance Director SUBJECT: Budget Amendments This is a request to amend both the revenue and expenditure budgets for the General Fund and to formally approve the expenditures of donations previously received. This memo is to show the line by line detail of the actual changes to be made to the budgets, of which the totals are summarized in the Resolution before you. GENERAL FUND DETAIL Detail for Revenues: 101-36230-00-000 (Donations) $ 1,421.92 Total Revenues $ 1,421.92 Detail for Expenditures: 101-41320-01-394 (P.C. Software Purchases) $ 1,000.00 101-45100-01-439 (Other Miscellaneous Charges) 421.92 ------------------ Total Expenditures $ 1,421.92 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDMENT OF CERTAIN 2003 BUDGET ITEMS WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the need to amend certain items from the 2003 General Fund Operating Budget, the totals which are as follows: (1) General operating revenues, the total which reflects an increase of $1,421.92; (2) General operating expenditures, the total which reflects an increase of $1,421.92; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the amendment of the above listed budget items for the 2003 General Fund Operating Budget. ADOPTED this 3rd day of April, 2003. William H. Droste, Mayor ATTEST: Linda J. Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Seconded by: Voted in Favor: Voted Against: Members Absent: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 6, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Expenditure From Donation Account - AGENDA SECTION: Parks and Recreation Department CONSENT PREPARED BY: Dan Schultz, Parks and Recreation Director AGEff .: JA Ir ATTACHMENTS: Donation revenue worksheet APPROVED BY: This is a request for Council to approve the following expenditure listed below from the donation account. Expenditure amount Use\Item purchased Donation made by $ 421.92 Supplies and Sled Dog rides for McDivot's Sports Pub and Eatery the "It's Snow Fun" event at Jaycee Park. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the expenditure listed above and detailed on the attached donation revenue worksheet. COUNCIL ACTION: DONATION REVENUE WORKSHEET RECEIPT OF DONATION Donation Received on: 1/7/02 Amount Received: $ 500.00 Receipt # for Donation: # Purpose of Donation: It's Snow Fun Event Account # for Donation: 101.22223.27 (Must be Liability-# assigned for each individual Department.) EXPENDITURE OF DONATION Amount to be Spent: $ 500.00 To be Spent from Acct #: 101-45100-01-439 (Must be Expenditure # corresponding to individual Department.) Purpose of Expenditure: Supplies and Sled dog rides AMENDMENT OF BUDGETS Amend Donation Revenue Acct #101-36230-00-000 Amend Expenditure Acct #101-45100-01-439 (The two dollar amounts should be the same.) $ 421.92 $ 421.92 GENERAL JOURNAL ENTRY TO ADJUST DONATION LIABILITY # Debit: 101-22223.27 (Donation Liability #) $ 421.92 Credit: 101-36230-00-000 $ 421.92 Journal entry to reduce deferred donation revenue and increase donation revenue to actual per council action on 3/6/03 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING DATE: February 20, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Expenditure From Donation Account - AGENDA SECTION: Administration Consent PREPARED BY: Jim Parsons, Dakota Electric Community Development Director I 6 ATTACHMENTS: Donation Expenditure Worksheet APPROVED Backl4round Minnesota's E -Commerce -Ready Program guides communities that wish to enhance the ability of local businesses and institutions to use computer technology and telecommunications. The program certifies communities as ready for electronic commerce (e-commerce). The main benefits of the program are that the community organizes all the information about its telecommunications infrastructure, addressing any gaps or shortcomings found and promoting itself as a location that is prepared for technology -oriented business. Rosemount has the opportunity to be certified as a city that is ready for e-commerce by participating in a county -wide effort organized by the Dakota County Economic Development Partnership (DCEDP). Rosemount would receive full certification, just as it would via a stand-alone effort, but will receive assistance from the Northern Dakota Chambers of Commerce and from Community Technology Advisors, a consultant retained by DCEDP. Certification is done by the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development. There is a $1,000 fee for participation in the county -level effort. The Rosemount Port Authority recommends that the City of Rosemount pay the fee with funds donated by the Dakota Electric Association for community marketing and promotion. Expenditure Amount Item Purchased Donation Made By $ 1,000.00 E-commerce fee Dakota Electric RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the expenditure for certification by the Minnesota Dept. of Trade & Economic Development of Rosemount as a community that is ready for electronic commerce (e-commerce). COUNCIL ACTION: DONATION REVENUE WORKSHEET RECEIPT OF DONATION Donation Received on: 01/01/2003 Amount Received: $6,000.00 Purpose of Donation: Community Marketing and Promotion Account # for Donation: 101-22225 (Must be Liability # assigned for each individual Department.) EXPENDITURE OF DONATION Amount to be Spent: $ 1,000.00 To be Spent from Account #: 101-41320-01-394 Purpose of Expenditure: E-commerce initiative (Must be Expenditure # corresponding to individual Department.) AMENDMENT OF BUDGETS Amend Donation Revenue Account # 101-36230-00-000: $ 1,000.00 Amend Expenditure Account # 101-41320-01-394: $ 1,000.00 (The two dollar amounts should be the same.) GENERAL JOURNAL ENTRY TO ADJUST DONATION LIABILITY # Debit: 101-22225 (Donation Liability #) $ 1,000.00 Credit: 101-36230-00-000 $ 1,000.00 Journal entry to reduce deferred donation revenue and increase donation revenue to actual per Council action on 02/20/2003 . c SCAU2U)U2 tiWWwW )aa:ja AMMQQ lzzzz )0000 H H H H ?mEEn ull Cs. Cx. Oa fx. amrnoto) pmmnlm rrr, r J N N N N 1 I I I �OOE>In Ho 14 aIH zzzzz .-i H 3 z Ei U2 I U> H W a O Mmw%m O aaalaa 'of w 0 w In Ch i Ic Irl G U) � U R aw Pm. w X H W i z O W t z14 Q > N E-4 rA r In iw 0 v m o z i ri H rC C v L W H a U2 nmmM l Ln a a T Iz N 1 W O 0 H In m oa q' N m .-I W .-11 H al I Q SCAU2U)U2 tiWWwW )aa:ja AMMQQ lzzzz )0000 H H H H ?mEEn ull Cs. Cx. Oa fx. amrnoto) pmmnlm rrr, r J N N N N 1 I I I �OOE>In Ho 14 aIH zzzzz .-i H 3 � m U2 I U> H W F4 I Mmw%m O aaalaa 'of w I H N Ch H Irl G U) � U R Pm. w X H W i A O W t z14 Q N E-4 U r In iw 0 v m o z i ri H rC C v a W H lO (N If1 a a T O N 1 H ui O 0 H In m q' N m .-I W .-11 H .-i '. C, Q H c 01 z Wm z r m ma O U c z a a+ rC W FC C) a u; wa o ° U zz SCAU2U)U2 tiWWwW )aa:ja AMMQQ lzzzz )0000 H H H H ?mEEn ull Cs. Cx. Oa fx. amrnoto) pmmnlm rrr, r J N N N N 1 I I I �OOE>In Ho 14 H zzzzz .-i H , w a m m co 0 U> H W F4 I Mmw%m M aaalaa 'of N C, N Ch to G Irl G U) www Pm. w X W e O H Q N u1 r In iw 0 v m 0: ". m ri m ,-j v a N h lO (N If1 a '-I T O N 1 H ui O In q' .-1 .-I .-11 .-i '. C, .0 m 01 z � z a N Q I C) u; z o U U CO) U UU NOD m VI N r 0) C`II N W to > CA CO O IO 0 0) 01 Ol to H rep r � I w w' V 'D 0 q x m h m In -4 r w I Ol IT) H m ( F �Q r -I N h rnm m m V' tb dI 0 0 0 9 r m In .j .4 In 0 m m m. A r 1 N m '-1 N 0 m z In I wa -I "1 I FC tY m m W 0 'm Q a a . -1 0 0 W4 z W a H O H f 4 t U)munmU2 14 i zzzzz .-i H , w m m co 0 W W W W I 0Im W Mmw%m M aaalaa 'of N C, N Ch to G Irl G www Pm. w w W e H N u1 r In lO 0 v m 0: ". m ri m ,-j v N h lO (N If1 '-I T O N 1 H ui O In .-1 .-I .-11 .-i '. C, .0 m 01 a a w Pa r4 9 U U CO) U UU NOD m VI N r 0) C`II N ' 01 to 0 m �` CO O IO 0 0) 01 Ol to n rep r Ei Ei' w w' V 'D 0 q x m h m In -4 r Ol ( F 0) In Ill r -I N h Ln l� 0 V' tb dI 0 0 0 9 r m In .j .4 In 0 m m m. A r 1O N m '-1 N 0 0 Il'1 to u In I -I "1 m m m m 'm CO .-1 -1 0 0 co (.. 10) m j :N f 4 t U)munmU2 14 i zzzzz .-i H , w m m co W W W W I w W [ Mmw%m M aaalaa 'of I N 01 ; in 000UU Irl G www Pm. w w W e mmr -IH� r r r H .-1 N N r 1 1 I 0 0 E HtDU m 1-4 0 w U z ED co W H a a H K w z U H aG W IT) 0 I OD I 0 0 m N 0 Imm • r,r I N N 1 1 Imo I 0 ui WWW m I O F tt a w z 0 G ?+ E w 5 � a u z z a O w E-4 o4 U) +x u W >4 c Cn U G m m n co m o m m n 1 I � 0 0 E 0 0 c �r w E m m c rl Il 1 I I H "H 0 0 6 co N U m m m m m m 1 r' 0 E9 I 1, 0 m vI 0 m v .-I m W [M 1< 0 0 to V co to .-1 m In In m 0 20 In In kK it r, Ey H m " fn s Co m m m.-, I 1 0 E> i 1 N 0 0 vI N 01 Ln '-1 I I 0 0 m m m 0 z vI r 01 N N m ' lO Ol` U) co) co co U➢ 0C'J000 zzzzz HHHHFN 0000 zo HEEEx-IH 3F HH z zz� a�aa.3 ac�aaal xxxxx W W W W W aaaa� 4. fz Ca Cs. C rrrrr� N (SNN` r LNl r r` r -t .� �-I r•I 0�<00u1 IDI I- W w w 0 0 N H z z Ott W O o IH -I N U m 0 1 m m " 0 N m N H 0 0 0 h W 9 O a w f 14 aD oh .-i H , w m m co m w m '-I m M rq cti1 N 01 ; in Irl In H x s « s « O O O O O a a w Pa r4 9 U U CO) U UU a a a z o o O O, a aO a « c E+ H* s x x H Ol 4. m I m m m m 1*` 0 0 9 0 0 m m m m 'm 0 E> 0 0 0 co (.. 10) � N :N N N h9 N N > > > m m m m m m 1 r' 0 E9 I 1, 0 m vI 0 m v .-I m W [M 1< 0 0 to V co to .-1 m In In m 0 20 In In kK it r, Ey H m " fn s Co m m m.-, I 1 0 E> i 1 N 0 0 vI N 01 Ln '-1 I I 0 0 m m m 0 z vI r 01 N N m ' lO Ol` U) co) co co U➢ 0C'J000 zzzzz HHHHFN 0000 zo HEEEx-IH 3F HH z zz� a�aa.3 ac�aaal xxxxx W W W W W aaaa� 4. fz Ca Cs. C rrrrr� N (SNN` r LNl r r` r -t .� �-I r•I 0�<00u1 IDI I- W w w 0 0 N H z z Ott W O o IH -I N U m 0 1 m m " 0 N m N H 0 0 0 h W 9 O a w f I; O H W z IS U1 R H 0 H E-4 a � U1 Q Cl d LfH E-1 ISU Q U H C a w z z r �z E I E H ; wU > C E a p a U G w � � c z a O C z ri W > F r 6 H a Q t* 6 M O 1T Z w � W :2 a. w,V 7 to t0 a 4 t0 t0 tb to ' 1 D x x iOD m m N I H a O z 4 O o w >, w A H i a H H x �i .4 ri c� m B r rtl r .wwww mm m x x B a a m tall 6) O m r N rFrri'� r •-i ri 1�I 1-I W x x tAo`m a m w N OD .-I(9 Ln N lout x m co a) '-10 m to M) I CD -0 B(9G M) .--1 N u x O to O OD eW aYo 04? o'P op I � I B ILU)1 F tEQ 1 N N a ami cww HH mml+hmrn 0104 Q a i I m H E 0 `.f. j Lo Ln ui ui to 3 3 3 3 3 3 FC W 66 KC tr O C QQ�QQ uu C11C]CaCat] co tD—CB W m eaamaaa a minae AAAA 1ww.-1 N co 0888800 s 0600 b r+ m in a a m ®mama e m e a I NOt Q)(Q ri 6) Oat9Ot9CD ®,BBB ,]�U tp j 80806100. BBB < < F1 z H x x O 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D 0'6 O B x H 0 BM)Mit M) Ino M)0 M)M) j N N rim NrAN r-1NMt crt j m m dP oto dP oW oW oW dP oM i oW oW OD U) sn CD OD CO CD W Oo Co r Q N vi r -i r .- r -I 1-i r1 r1 -4 r•, .-1 1 N B i I l0 W W W W Q1 a I 0i Q Q m, Q a 5=1 :D O m m m m m m m m m m N AAgC� .E OGGGOOO aaem ZZZ aD oD tD ao m td r rF r r 00 O O O I HHHzH2 H 0 Lnto O wwrw wc W 0404 xmxcxnmv� �QQ�0Q QOQA C� z F9 ' 3330 ui cn �u)W>1Nuicn ui La to U u V z z >4 >+ >4 �Jd1 'J1 >4 >4 >4 >I aaa.a x x C]OAf�1AL,[ caAAA I [a Ql GDW 04 04 94 ld to kO U %D W U w w w 12.a40. z mm mm to tow a) co a a ry 1' N r-1 1-1 i I q 0 NNNC li 61 a rrr rr r rr cy N N N w w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .- 00 f- r, rn rn ww'wwwww wwww ri ri 1-I r-1 N N N N .--1 w 1-1 w G B :t9 G �-I -1:r-1 eyl 0 0 o .-1 r-1 m .-1 � (D 0 .-1 .-i II 1 I it Fi I II I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1-1 ri N m 0 0 0 8 ri 0 -4 0 M) O.Ln U 1-1 040 c r r B N C.C .--1 u m Ml 0 0 14 w to kc w to u 7 t0 to uC, w w (!� W FC KC w,V 7 to t0 a 4 t0 t0 tb to ' 1 D x x iOD m m N I H a O z 4 O o w >, w A H i a H H x �i I ri c� m B r rtl r .wwww mm m x x B a a m tall 6) O m r N rFrri'� r •-i ri 1�I 1-I W x x tAo`m a m N t98OOa tb r- r- t9 .-I(9 I I Bm�em I rrr�r r--14-1mm lout x mm'maa ulmmLOw co a) '-10 K to M) I r1 C14 0B -0 B(9G M) B Mt u x BOmOO d' O eW aYo 04? o'P op I � rM1r, M1r ILU)1 F tEQ 1 N N ami cww HH mml+hmrn 0104 Q a H E 0 `.f. Lo Ln ui ui to 3 3 3 3 3 3 FC W 66 KC tr O C QQ�QQ uu C11C]CaCat] AA A a WW a w� AAAA I l,li I I Cz.rk.G.N.r.. 4.G. W AA z H a ,]�U W U> < < F1 z H x x O H x H x � N crt m m OD sn w Q N vi 1 N 1 N B I l0 Q1 0 N N N a � a w,V 7 to t0 a 4 t0 t0 tb to ' 1 D x x iOD m m N I H a O z 4 O o w >, w A H i a H H x �i I ri c� m B r rtl r .wwww mm x x a a m tall 6) O m r m m rFrri'� r •-i ri 1�I 1-I W x x tAo`m N N (N N m N t98OOa tb r- r- t9 .-I(9 I I Bm�em I rrr�r r--14-1mm lout x mm'maa ulmmLOw co a) '-10 aaaaa to M) I r1 C14 0B -0 B(9G M) B Mt x BOmOO d' eW aYo 04? o'P op I � rM1r, M1r ILU)1 F tEQ 1 N N ami cww HH mml+hmrn 0104 rrrrrr I `.f. Lo Ln ui ui to 3 3 3 3 3 3 W WCc1W W 6 66 °o 0 QQ�QQ uu C11C]CaCat] AA uico:to co r�Iwwww WW wwwDOw IZ wg AAAA I l,li I I Cz.rk.G.N.r.. 4.G. AA wtn two twoOOwO w,V 7 to t0 a 4 t0 t0 tb to ' 1 D x x iOD m m N I H a O z 4 O o w >, w A H i a H H x �i I , w,V 7 to t0 a 4 t0 t0 tb to ' 1 D x x iOD m m N I H a O z 4 O o w >, w A H i a H H x M1 r` rr .wwww mm x x 0404 0404 0 8 0 0 rFrri'� r •-i ri 1�I 1-I rr ri .--I x x N N (N N N N x I 1 1 I I I I x O)mDD r4m r4-4 NMA '-10 x r1 C14 0B -0 B(9G M) B Mt x w,V 7 to t0 a 4 t0 t0 tb to ' 1 D x x iOD m m N I H a O z 4 O o w >, w A H i a H H x IN -C tac LU -o ww, m 10 0 -Z 2: Li X z < uj <Ix Cle (n D ul C uj LU X u z Le) Z 6 a X: 0 ce A;04 Z44 X, on a,- J CD o C, 4M cr m A < :z OO= z ze, w -W M- =Wz, -i m Li X tx v 0 W M -i z W w 0 z m 0 uJ 4& z n - -C CC Lu I�Z 6: UJ co 'FUEA" f- 0 �51 1 -C w z g"k�= = W < z Wto W w W Li -i O C) it —j M V) Z -J W> C) > 0 O Q 6 ,-1' =D 0 A W -j tr < Ln LL1 z >- Z C) h- 0 0 ty C) pn rn co N tv rf ri = 14 -4 14 -4 "N 4 &k, C>. 31 to N, s"Z 56 10 C5 0 iM,C> Z z z E Z I" w V7 W J J O V J ¢ Z V W f— Z a W Z Z W 2 M O 1 M 1 M M P cli e•1 O Z 7 =� H Z Z �X1G�� Z # 40 WO Y-• S ZC2 4 O - LO c • o ry 'u+ o i+ f 0 =Z O W O 0. 0.. O 9 a d' M 2 �..;' V v - J -2-i, OZ! O ratW W "Z M O W rtil J W 2 l' S Wi: 00 z -tDQ O W Y.S J I-. e ..1 J X O O 00 '�' 'If! Z I -- 0 �= am" O Z' `�'rY G •++ J b� W II rn yr010 M O P 'C � .-1 li O � .••� O O N_ o P M M II M M M N 0. UJ O M Y O x Z n P- Kl am a0 1 o 00 O :' " 1".l�:. P S E .. O "i < w n 1.4 f z z Z z 4 W 1 sg rY •�, 2 N 00 00 M O. N §0fn C, LIJ u1 x I Z <Z - -r4 0. ti !/1 O W 3 l7 N .4\: O J '�;+ii ' N Y w- V- �. V O Q: "-M x W x� r tn . W a• r : - in z z <x'- �� W O 1 2 Z:` O O 1 0. 3 M J r '.e ¢ .r. N {1 O W W- LM i ' N 1 Z U Od, 1 >� 1 U w? N I i Z_I 1 W W M 1 �e Z W V) -r'k- r -i O - `: O i 1 " 2 3 J J' 2 V V. N .Z : Sa i— W Li; O LAi1 JJ .. W a s w i z s n a a.. x , c7 Iv, 1--+ 1 � a S n W W 2 2 a < .. t - W U_ 1 3 1- -bl W s 2 �. Q o In w o .w z [ N U) _ v w ^-D v v' > cn z 71 x LU ui z re ui m o w- E i a 1.-<, a wrQ cc mss., C7 V U. W a0 J M Z ui s to4,f ol ;00 ,N - a _I '� / • Avg _ i s `7 1 1 q 1 . (2 1 1 - O > w O O O'- 00 �^ ` O . O I •i O < •-1•-1 00 T O 1-• ..: 00 ,, ri:"v a,i .••1 � :-f ,: ; � N 00 W rY 2 F G - •-i 1 M �{ •+(: 1 fi VR` M M N �#_ .-I N �7' N a.•t5,� 0 0. ' N r.- a 0. LJs �. w �a 1 b;�'. t 1 �o t' �.a ".a '� ' . .-1 s. -r � ,r ."': r, .-I .o G N N_ n N � a : .� .� .-1 . � :.-4 '.. .� .-r s -- "+. ..I •� a N OW Wy«-{` ' .-1 .-1 , O J .'�4 a ;,. 00 r •-1 Ciis,. v� '.t O L rl - 1-4 V > Y O N tT: �6f O0 tn "P'. 00 .;•Z ,1: •-1 P Cl Ln 00 'G N_ In w V7 W J J O V J ¢ Z V W f— Z a W Z Z W 2 M O 1 M 1 M M P cli e•1 O Z H Z Z �X1G�� Z # 40 WO Y-• S ZC2 4 O - LO c 43i 7E 2"C3'!r 2 W 4 rt! i+ f 0 =Z O W O 0. 0.. O 9 a d' M 2 �..;' V v - J -2-i, OZ! O ratW W "Z M O W rtil J W 2 l' S Wi: 00 z -tDQ O W Y.S J I-. e ..1 J X O O 'If! Z I -- W O¢ O Z' `�'rY G J . MCD II rn yr010 M O P 'C � .-1 li O � .••� O O N_ o P M M II M M M N 0. O M Y O x Z n P- Kl a0 a0 1 o 00 P •r py m N 1 3 N N 1.4 z z Z z sg w V7 W J J O V J ¢ Z V W f— Z a W Z Z W 2 M O 1 M 1 M M P cli e•1 O Z �oI � w xw o v v.> d w O � N 1 b oma`; o M M r4 .--1 CD O Nil w 4 IT So —I) Y- to� V- I •.+ .: to F - F J D: 3 V O. '++ •T� O 0.' O=.� Z O l•J O O Z O O cn 2 "Z O 4 O.. O -a. .� b O Q O r. O Z O VS o n . -Y w 0 ZD X: U 2 l7 S "' X: Z S Er S tri tt1E E zO. o_a < da j xQ «+< za .. U)4 < . 4 w w i O 7-- p Q' Of I d' ,J LY to cle Ir O in .. O "w O, m O ffZ Z �. 2' II Z LL OZ VZ- ZM OS 2 W O .w. W �- O t,t1 Z w w1 w Q w d w I, w w v w O > ZU UD Z >" J>yy > <> Fi > sn �• > CL >- > 00 Z O- < 4 k I L : N O W > _Z d S> >< 2 Q, ZQ +Q Q 6 2 J 4 2'+C Q < w F- F +,F # F- H !- W F J F N F F! !- J M- Z 1 F: S F w -> O Z O O — O �-+ O N O t!T ':' O +� O H O l Oa O '. V O O i.. o K �.-_ S 3--3 �-• ca' F Z # O# E. 0- ,', d# CL a# 3# CC # X# M I M� i G O O >� O O? O O O I O _ 00 O P€< N FipCl: N ai 3_' O -� N : N O O s N M O 1 M O M- : M M M N - kk O O O -41, .O N [([ P M- M J Ito .o Q Q O '.Z 7M1I= N O N U b N N N- N .•tY M _ M M 1 L M M .t,. M M M M 0 CD 0C)p � Z Z f'.2 Z g ' Z z 2 Od >_aZ., :) - F.� .. z.I'.em.':, 'w W' 'L ' Vt s W- = 4i o # z -C z O z W # Z; 2 t3 Z Z V ,. • Z Z 0M: d4i z cno z tzv o ..v 'J='. o >..:v o sa b` WM w O Z o'tZ r G.=F O '}?i e!� f Q W O 4 WQ oa Z'. fF- W J�c <_ d Z re 3 d'> 4 fL' c; 'f s K W 2^ m {� O.' 'f K Vt � W O X-0 ¢ O O Pa O Q O = CD N O cr O ui on p 1- a'; a { Q H- D 3 p Z p O W d Z O O O` t? Q 4 W Z Z' Z w:- W 4u Z, ZZ ''. CD Z .; `..� J +�- 4 Z w O Z 1- w 0 V d wi P Z > Z V ` V {,1 '.'f Z > 7_ > to > aft w. • > > > J OJ i O.J QJ 00- O1- >¢' ¢ ZQ �-¢ [ tII .: K JQ CC< I Q wC z o, W l-. i cno w vto' w ae Nv. o w r ,no w r- U- C) jjjjjj a N- z. -v o+ so z w ¢o a r- ¢o m .. J a #o-', n- o o�- I a�- a LJ x sem a # s # f n # Ul vt # ut V) n ; cn �t j M rn M InM M fn' N N O /1 [ M N M MMMIII M �; iti1 K2 1 O N M V1 IA c v .-i I t OO' E P A .'i O ". N '-°• t M - C ik'V.- M pcl M M d 1„ M -I H -4 .-1 H e+i ? zan` i'es•! , .14 .-1 ed = .d C (-Z Z Z " Z z O Z f .� z O f Z O O Z Z` ,'s :' G P N M ut W Z O 4- N F - w Lo Of 4 H M O i I O O 1 e-1 O Z > , ul Zd Z < Z W O' 1 O. S O N !•- i- O 1- }..z#�. i Z Z O «-� O O f 0 W Z Z O Z t " Z Z 79 N< 2< Q O O <C Of rt .2 11' Q <O �O F� O pp r4 ' E 3 < d': O: U Z 1I W O J 0. �^,. W O ^'7 C>r O U O O� < 4 6 o x Cl on fl a o z o . o � � €. o r r x.,.EX Z H Z ,µ 2 il') '. W rW Z 1 lD W _ kap W h.l kLJ W W ui > wW w 1`� xW aIu 3w v1w _. ¢ x'x W i Cr Z x x {�' V U> 7 >' 4' •✓ p t V U> W V [.,Fy,ie V GJ ;; V U E _J U- 0- 6 'O 7 z Z � 0 O E O 1 Z O -�2 & O .�b < CL - O _j O J O J S _! i 7_ O O _J W O O O, x .O n n o ..oJo 3 M.- Z z1 < 0r,x0_ 1.. W /.. cto W a� m O F. W U M, -M M 1Rf M O "O 1 I O 1 O q O O O00 1 ri rl O ,-1 N I• N .-i e-( .i �9 �'� .i'e .�{ '{.< ri ri Nb N M -. M E M K'1 � M M �� . +0 N 1J1 E{ kn In v1 v, M ` res v1 ,art>, v, M M WN Hl .—I - �-i •-f � .-# .-i ,�{ ri T1 '-i ri,: Jif - rl x e-I;. rl !-I I Z ':Z" Z (- O O O O O O _ ss Z Z 2 2 qq Z� Z 2 v - I T W f' N 0�o . •l 4 an .N-•i V rO, ENO ; lO�•.<"a'. Q U.j Z 1, O E l Ot 1 O a N C a¢ vN P-1M1 w� . b N e -. LU 6 r - rte' ri Pr" O M C M 3 e3 tsl r s t' Ln 2 h LIJ E l7 v Fre j�D s h w ►- �" I' J { H q- J Q 97 c- x 5 �. .� w �-Z ¢;1.1 ! m :- w .�. J w <J E_ rOi WAN' Q U. �„� 3I J IL FI�� Q n at I CL W` ` J IC Z i. N N l a H W Z°` r. •,�� F- J ` � w Z � H � a d ', �4� " i� `1!' � F- .. IIIIk :. z M6 W .,:K v CL W 41 W. Y 2 _ I ry N f•e I d' } } N n n irn O O k mJ D s'I-i+.t b 0 O ZVr I >, � LLJ w w i d' J 4 i.." to '• z l Z O Q H W w: ,: Z ,y Z.+ LL W W $W Uj Z .Q' cg Y V uJ J k" U,,. , 3 �-. r_ o O ¢ F- wS W t i LL t c!I p O V gun)S U... l� UI M Z VILu k ' o �- w 00 : x-01'''.0 00 t 0 90 00 coo -0 1 a,.{s ;00 .,.. m o 00 O N LM Et On MM' M M 1 M M F'1 M M M M 1' M e N J r z O O IE O- O O O ,f? O a O O P ,�s �rn A 7A (k M"...�1 O > w : Z O in '7 b J N "4'V N_ .. O P N .f N , b O : N M W K 5 f O iln a .-i o,4'_�l ri .-7 .• t�V .-1 �� .. w-1 epi N f%� .i N 1f� 'v. Oa N a o c r;. f d. ri MVl M �., a s 1t oa n! 4 a v n W 6 i t E �� i �? i i I- t .t .� v Cr h QQ O d p .-4 rl � .a .-! •-1 O .-1 .' a-1 I[ .4 LL 2' O w � �, �I W � e-) .p .-� .O{ u O 4 O O b O Q. _ O O V1 O O %a� ` O • h 7 J ,.•.( x� M -4 00 M M M rr p t a0 4�v N .-1 p. N[g1r qf�V1 M to ,. ,p „+1P N M .J.i '3 'W N 1 N 'tNj O N IVl -' rl M vT+, M ki+.�,. to+ `: 'O to L OR4t N w � .' -, t, 'R�' � �� .A-1,. �� T Q 9 � � a. S•a �� kf�`P 59.1.. d At. # Y m Q W O d' a a 4 m S & N # 2 O < < a - o 4 tL' Q M R' �..`Z .p ,p ;,. M O : MM p V > 0o z O o W n n J > cZ > < W #r w > o z LU.. ,:. d'.r. .. At. # Y m Q W O d' a a 4 m S & N # 2 O < < a z o 4 tL' Q M R' �..`Z W z M O : S W p V > 0o z O o W n n J > cZ > < W #r w > o z � M 1F 1 P N d 1< M Y I O S 2 Y Q •. N < CI j en ®p 7 W CJ I �j o a At. # Y m Q W O d' a a 4 m S & CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: DECLARATION OF SURPLUS PROPERTY AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT PREPARED BY: PAULA GRAFF, HR/ COMMUNICATIONS COORDINATOR AGfW a' 6 3F ff- ATTACHMENTS: NONE APPROVED BY: This is a request for Council to declare the following items as surplus property and authorize staff to dispose of these items from the Public Works Department and the Administration Department. Public Works Meter Test Bench Administration Swintec 1186 CM Typewriter Swintec 8016 Typewriter RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO DECLARE THE ABOVE LISTED ITEMS AS SURPLUS PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO DISPOSE OF THESE ITEMS. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Authorization to Accept Quotes and Purchase Personal Computer Workstations for City AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Jeff May, Finance Director AGENDA %M P6 ATTACHMENTS: None APPROVED BY: On March 20th the City Council authorized staff to solicit quotes for the purchase of new PC workstations. We will be receiving these quotes on April 1St and would like authorization to proceed with the purchase of the workstations. After your authorization we will order the workstations and I am estimating that we would have them in operation by the end of April. This time frame will allow the Police Department to have their workstations upgraded in time for the installation of their new software. If the quotes are higher than anticipated we will pull this item for further discussion on April 3rd. We have looked at prices in general and do not anticipate this to be an issue. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize staff to proceed forward with the purchase of new personal computer workstations for the City of Rosemount. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Ratification of fire department appointments AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Scott Aker, Fire Chief AGENDt 'M # 6 J_ ATTACHMENTS: List of names for officers, committee members and coordinators APPROVED BY�c The suggested names, for officers, committee members and coordinators, for positions on the fire department for the next year are attached. Annually, according to city policy, these people need to be approved by the city council With input from Assistant Chief Mike Haeg, as well as my own evaluations, a decision was made to select these people to serve in the capacities indicated for the coming year. The safety officer, which is the function of the assistant fire chief, needs to be approved officially as required by OSHA. The fire department looks to the city council to ratify these appointments. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION to approve the training coordinators, fire prevention personnel, safety officer, captains and lieutenants as presented for the positions for the next year. COUNCIL ACTION: Appointments its Of Officers, Committee Members, and Coordinator Positions Rosemount Fire Department April 1 , 2003 --- to --- March 31, 2004 Training Coordinator David Bailey Fire Prevention/Education Ed Kropelnicki Jerry Noll -Assistant Leigh Anderson -Assistant Safety Officer Mike Haeg Captains Mike Reis Kevin Tucker David Bailey Scott Engelmann? Lieutenants Rick Schroeder Jim Voelker Joe Gerrits Glenn Snyder Garr Nelson Explorer Advisors Ed Kropelnicki Steve Turner CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Mutual Police Assistance Agreement AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Gary D. Kalstabakken, Chief of Police AGENITM r 6 K ATTACHMENTS: Agreement and Signature Page APPROVED BY: The law enforcement agencies in Dakota County have had an Assistance Agreement in place for many years and the most recent update to the agreement was done in 1991. Participating cities and Dakota County approved the agreement in 1992. It is important for police agencies to have an agreement in place because of the regular assistance provided to each other. The agreement covers the more routine requests for assistance, for example, having a neighboring agency assist on a call that is particularly violent or when all an agency's officers are on other urgent calls. It also covers the assistance provided after tornados, flooding, or large scale events, such as, demonstrations, presidential or other dignitary visits, etc. Attached for Council consideration is an updated Mutual Police Assistance Agreement. This agreement has been reviewed and approved by City Attorney LeFevere. The Dakota County city administrators/managers and the chiefs of police also discussed it. This updated agreement is not changed much from the 1992 agreement. However, there are two primary changes to the agreement. First, agencies outside of Dakota County have been brought into the agreement. These agencies include, Cottage Grove Police Department, Metropolitan Airports Commission Police Department and the Metropolitan Council (Transit) Police Department. These agencies were added either because they have a close working relationship with Dakota County agencies or because in the event of an airline or bus emergency the agencies will be called on for assistance. Second, the liability language has been changed so that the requesting agency agrees to defend and indemnify the responding agencies. The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) prefers this language in the agreement because the LMCIT defends most municipalities. This language allows the LMCIT to defend as one agency rather than each responding agency independently. The prior agreement required each agency to indemnify themselves — even if both were members of the LMCIT. The attached document is the complete document except only the City of Rosemount signature page is attached. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO APPROVE THE MUTUAL POLICE ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZE ITS EXECUTION BY MAYOR DROSTE. COUNCIL ACTION: MUTUAL POLICE ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT Purpose. The purpose of this agreement is to provide for the joint exercise of the parties' law enforcement powers pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.59 during periods of Disaster or Emergency, so that the parties may furnish Assistance to each other in the event of Disaster or Emergency. It is not the purpose of this agreement to provide for or address in any way requests by one party of another party for routine services, including ordinary patrol services, not provided in the context of a period of Disaster or Emergency. 2. Definitions. Assistance — providing law enforcement personnel, equipment and materials Commanding Officer — the person designated by a Requesting Agency who is responsible for exercising tactical control of personnel and equipment provided by a Responding Agency Disaster — as defined at Minn. Stat. § 12.03, subd. 2 Emergency — an unforeseen exigent circumstance requiring immediate action beyond the Requesting Agency's capabilities Requesting Agency — a party to this agreement who has requested Assistance from one or more other parties to this agreement Requesting Official — the person designated by the Requesting Agency who is responsible for requesting Assistance from other parties Responding Agency — a party to this agreement who has provided Assistance to one or more other parties to this agreement Responding Official — the person who has been designated by the Responding Agency to determine whether and to what extent the Responding Agency should provide Assistance to a Requesting Agency 3. Requests for Assistance. Whenever the Requesting Official, in his or her sole discretion, determines that the conditions within the Requesting Agency's jurisdiction cannot be adequately addressed by that official's department because of a disaster or emergency, the Requesting Official may request orally or in writing that any other party to this agreement provide Assistance. K/K02-151 JPA Page 1 of 21 4. Response to Request for Assistance. Upon the request for Assistance from a Requesting Agency, the Responding Official for any other party may authorize, direct and permit personnel of the Responding Agency to provide Assistance to the Requesting Agency. Whether the Responding Agency shall provide such Assistance, and the extent of such Assistance, shall be determined solely by the Responding Official. The decision of a party in responding to a request shall be conclusive. Failure to provide Assistance in response to a request made pursuant to this agreement will not result in any liability to any other party. 5. Recall of Assistance. A Responding Official may at any time and in the Responding Official's sole judgment terminate and recall Assistance or any part thereof. The decision to recall Assistance provided pursuant to this Agreement will not result in liability to any other party. 6. Direction and Control. Personnel and equipment of a Responding Agency shall remain under the direction and control of the Responding Agency. However, such personnel shall be subject to tactical control of the Requesting Agency. Law enforcement officers who are assisting the Requesting Agency shall follow the lawful orders and commands of the Commanding Officer then on duty in the Requesting Agency during the period that Assistance is being provided. The Commanding Officer in the Requesting Agency shall designate the radio channel that will be used during the period that Assistance is being provided. 7. Exercise of Police Power. An officer providing Assistance to any Requesting Agency pursuant to this agreement has the full and complete authority of a peace officer as though appointed by the Requesting Agency and licensed by the State of Minnesota provided the officer meets the requirements set forth at Minn. Stat. § 471.59, subds. 12(1) and (2). 8. Compensation. When a Responding Agency provides personnel to a Requesting Agency, such personnel shall be compensated by the Responding Agency just as if such personnel were performing the duties within and for the jurisdiction of the Responding Agency. No charges will be levied by a Responding Agency for Assistance provided to a Requesting Agency pursuant to this K/K02-151 JPA Page 2 of 21 Party against any claims brought or actions filed against the Responding Agency or any officer, employee, or volunteer of the Responding Agency for injury to, death of, or damage to the property of any third person or persons, arising from the provision of Assistance pursuant to a request for Assistance by the Requesting Party under to this agreement. (3) Under no circumstances, however, shall a Requesting or Responding Agency by required to pay on behalf of itself and other parties to this Agreement any amounts in excess of the limits of liability established in Minn. Stat. Ch. 466 applicable to any one party. The limits of liability for some or all of the parties may not be added together to determine the maximum amount of liability for any one party. 13. Parties. The parties to this agreement shall consist of as many of the following entities that approve this agreement and execute a separate signature page to become parties: County of Dakota; City of Apple Valley; City of Burnsville; City of Cottage Grove; City of Eagan; City of Farmington; City of Hastings; City of Inver Grove Heights; City of Lakeville; City of Mendota Heights; City of Northfield; City of Rosemount; City of South Saint Paul; City of West Saint Paul; Metropolitan Airports Commission; and Metropolitan Council. An executed signature page shall be sent to the Dakota County Sheriff, together with a certified copy of the documentation evidencing approval of the agreement by the entity. Approval of this agreement shall be evidenced by (a) for a city, a resolution adopted by the governing body; or (b) for any other entity, a resolution adopted by the governing body or a letter executed by an official with sufficient authority to bind that party, which recites the basis of that authority. 14. Effective Date. This agreement shall be effective as of the date that any two parties have executed a signature page as provided in paragraph 13 and have provided the necessary documents to the Dakota County Sheriff. Dakota County Sheriff will send copies of executed signature pages to the other parties but shall maintain the original signature pages in his department. This agreement shall remain in effect as to any party until such time as a party withdraws pursuant to paragraph 15 or until this agreement is terminated by operation of law or until the number of parties K/K02-151 JPA Page 4 of 21 Agreement unless that Assistance continues for a period exceeding 48 hours. If assistance provided pursuant to this Agreement continues for more than 48 hours, and the Assistance is not provided in connection with a criminal investigation, the Responding Agency shall submit to the Requesting Agency an itemized bill for the actual cost of any Assistance provided, including salaries, overtime, materials and supplies. The Requesting Agency shall reimburse the Responding Agency for that amount. 9. Compensation for Equipment and Supplies. When a Responding Agency provides equipment to a Requesting Agency, the Requesting Agency shall provide all routine fueling and servicing of the Responding Agency's equipment. The Requesting Agency shall return to the Responding Agency any equipment provided pursuant to this agreement as well as any unused materials, either pursuant to a request pursuant to paragraph 5 above or upon resolution of the conditions giving rise to the request for Assistance. 10. Workers' Compensation. Each party to this agreement shall be responsible for injuries to or death of its own personnel. Each party shall maintain workers' compensation coverage or self- insurance coverage, covering its own personnel while they are providing Assistance pursuant to this agreement. Each party to this agreement waives the right to sue any other party for any workers' compensation benefits paid to its own employee or their dependents, even if the injuries were caused wholly or partially by the negligence of any other party or its officers, employees or agents. 11. Damage to Equipment. Each party shall be responsible for damage to or loss of its own equipment. Each party waives the right to sue any other party for any damages to or loss of its equipment, even if the damages or losses were caused wholly or partially by the negligence of any other party or its officers, employees or agents. 12. Liabilitv. (1) For purposes of the Minnesota Municipal Tort Liability Act (Minn. Stat. Ch. 466), the employees and officers of the Responding Agency are deemed to be employees of the Requesting Agency. (2) The Requesting Agency agrees to defend and indemnify the Responding K/K02-151 JPA Page 3 of 21 falls to less than two. On the date than a party executes a signature page pursuant to paragraph 13, this agreement shall supersede for that party the Agreement Between Dakota County and Municipalities For Joint and Cooperative Use of Police Personnel and Equipment (1991). 15. Withdrawal. Any party may withdraw from this agreement upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the other parties as provided in paragraph 16. Withdrawal by any party shall not terminate this agreement with respect to any parties who have not withdrawn. Withdrawal shall not act to discharge any liability incurred by any party prior to withdrawal. Such liability shall continue until discharged by law or agreement. 16. Notice. Notice of withdrawal shall be provided by first class mail to the following: Dakota County Sheriff Inver Grove Heights Director of Public Law Enforcement Center Safety 1580 Highway 55 8150 Barbara Avenue Hastings, MN 55033 Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077 Apple Valley Chief of Police 7100 147th Street West Apple Valley, MN 55124 Burnsville Chief of Police 100 Civic Center Parkway Burnsville, MN 55337 Cottage Grove Chief of Police 7516 South 80t` Street Cottage Grove, MN 55016 Eagan Chief of Police 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Farmington Chief of Police 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Hasti ys Chief of Police 150 3r Street East Hastings, MN 55033 K/x02-151.rna Page 5 of 21 Lakeville Chief of Police 20110 Holyoke Avenue South Lakeville, MN 55044 Mendota Heights Chief of Police 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Northfield Chief of Police 300 West 5th Street Northfield, MN 55057 Rosemount Chief of Police 2875 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 South St. Paul Chief of Police 125 3rd Avenue North South St. Paul, MN 55075 West St. Paul Chief of Police 1616 Humboldt Avenue West St. Paul, MN 55118 Executive Director General Manager Metropolitan Airports Commission Metropolitan Council Transit Airport Police Department Operations LT — 3255 Metropolitan Council St. Paul, MN 55111 Metropolitan Transit Police Department 2425 Minnehaha Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 17. Final Agreement. This agreement is intended to supersede any prior agreement among any of the parties hereto for the provision of law enforcement services to one another during periods of Disaster or Emergency. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the dates indicated below. Approved as to form: Assistant County Attorney/Date DAKOTA COUNTY Donald Gudmundson Dakota County Sheriff Date of Signature K/K02-151 JPA Page 6 of 21 s K/K02-151 JPA CITY OF ROSEMOUNT Name Title Date of Signature Page 17 of 21 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC PURPOSE EXPENDITURE POLICY AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT PREPARED BY: PAULA A. GRAFF, AGENDA IM #6 L HUMAN RESOURCES COORDINATOR ATTACHMENTS: FINAL POLICY APPROVED BY: y4l� Attached is the final policy regarding Public Purpose Expenditures. The policy addresses expenditures made by the City regarding employees, groups and elected officials and clarifies which expenditures the City Council considers to be appropriate. This policy was reviewed at the March Committee of the Whole meeting. Minor changes that were discussed at that meeting have been made in the final version of this policy. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO APPROVE THE PUBLIC PURPOSE EXPENDITURE POLICY. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT PUBLIC PURPOSE EXPENDITURE POLICY POLICY Pursuant to the statutes and laws of the State of Minnesota which permit and require the expenditure of public funds for public purposes, the Rosemount City Council believes it necessary and appropriate to provide assistance and guidance to the officials, employees and representatives of Rosemount to aid in the determination of when public funds may be spent for a public purpose. To provide that assistance and guidance, the Rosemount City Council adopted these public purpose guidelines for the establishment of operating policies and procedures and the appropriate expenditures of public funds. Based on these guidelines, the City Council authorizes the City Administrator, elected officials and appointed department heads to establish administrative policies and procedures that are consistent with these guidelines and the adopted City policies which implement these guidelines. Definition: A public purpose expenditure is one which relates to the purpose for which the City of Rosemount exists and the duties and responsibilities of Rosemount, its elected and appointed officials, employees and other representatives. PUBLIC PURPOSE GUIDELINES Training and development programs for Rosemount employees and its official representatives serve a public purpose when those training and development programs are directly related to the performance of the employees' and the officials job-related duties and are directly related to the programs/services for which the City is responsible. 2. Payment of employee work-related expenses, including travel, lodging and meal expenses, serves a public purpose when those expenses are necessarily incurred by Rosemount employees and its official representatives in connection with their actual work assignments or official duties and those expenses are directly related to the performance of the governmental functions for which Rosemount has responsibility. 3. Appropriate safety and health programs for Rosemount employees serve a public purpose because they result in healthier and more productive employees and reduce certain costs to the City and the taxpayers of Rosemount, including various costs associated with workers compensation and disability benefit claims, insurance premiums, and lost time from employee absences. 4. Public expenditures for appropriate Rosemount employee and volunteer recognition programs serve a public purpose because formally recognizing employees and volunteers who make significant contributions and demonstrate their commitment during the performance of their duties result in higher morale and productivity among all Rosemount employees and volunteers, and therefore help the City to fulfill its responsibilities efficiently and more cost effectively. 5. Public expenditures for food and refreshments associated with official Rosemount functions serve a public purpose when the provision of food or refreshments is an integral part of an official Rosemount function and the provision of food or refreshment is necessary to ensure meaningful participation by the participants. 6. Public expenditures for appropriate community and customer outreach and similar activities serve a public purpose when those expenditures are necessary for Rosemount to ensure the efficient operation of its programs/services, promote the availability and use of City resources, and promote coordinated, cooperative planning activities among and between the public and the private sectors. SPECIFIC PROGRAMS AND EXPENDITURES Every City of Rosemount expenditure must be valid based upon the public purpose for which it is purchased. The following items are deemed to meet the Council definition of public purpose expenditures. EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION PROGRAM The City of Rosemount City Council recognizes the hard work and service performed by the employees of the City of Rosemount through a formal Employee Recognition Program. The City Council believes the benefits of attracting, retaining and motivating employees through an Employee Recognition Program support employee job satisfaction, which in turn impacts cooperation and productivity. The result is to provide excellent public and customer service to better serve the interests of the citizens of the community. The Employee Recognition Program is considered "additional compensation" for work performed by employees but is entirely dependent on receiving funding from year-to-year. No provisions of this policy, or its administration, shall be subject to review under the grievance or arbitration provisions of any collective bargaining agreement. The Program will include: 1. Annually the City will sponsor an Employee Recognition Luncheon for City employees. The City may also sponsor an annual employee picnic or a Holiday Party. 2. An employee will receive an award for service at the Employee Recognition Luncheon. New employees receive a City Pin and employees completing 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, and 35 years of service receive a gift certificate for a designated amount. The recognition year runs concurrently with the calendar year (January 1 to December 31 of the current year). In addition to awards, employees shall receive a "Certificate of Recognition" for the number of years being recognized. Awards given are as follows: New Employee City Pin 5 years $25.00 10 years $50.00 15 years $75.00 20 years $100.00 25 years $150.00 30 years $200.00 35 years $250.00 Retirement City Flag Wooden Plaque Recognition awards will go to all full-time and permanent part-time employees based strictly upon longevity and will in no way be connected to performance. The award will be based on "continuous" service with the City from the employee's initial start date whether it be part-time or full-time. The recognition will be based on the concept of peers honoring peers. 3. The City will also send flowers if one the following occurs: • Death of the employee (if still working for the City); • Death of the employee if they left employment due to a health condition and they were employed by the City at least three years; • Serious accident or illness to employee while still employed; • Surgery (once per year, otherwise a card if more than once); • Birth of a child while employed by the City; • Death of a family member while employed including spouse, parent/in-laws, child, grandparent or grandchild. 4. The City will send a card in the event of one of the following occurrences: • Serious accident or illness to an immediate family member (spouse, parent/in- laws, child, grandparent or grandchild); • Death of a former employee; • Death of a former City employee's spouse, parent or child. 5. The City will provide a cake or comparable food item when a permanent City employee in good standing leaves City employment. 6. The City supports other events that are planned and paid for by employees. Examples of such events include the employee potluck dinners, golf and bowling tournaments. 7. The City supports recognition plaques in recognition of long-time service or retirement. Amounts expended on these items shall be reasonable in nature considering the normal costs of good and services. The cost of the elements of the Employee Recognition Program will be included as a separate line item in the City of Rosemount Budget. This line -item will be approved annually by the City Council as a part of the overall budget approval process which includes a public hearing on the proposed budget. EMPLOYEE SAFETY PROGRAMS The City Council recognizes the importance of employee health and safety as it relates to the overall work and life satisfaction of the employee and the overall impact on the City's health insurance program. The Employee Safety Program is funded by the departmental budgets. The City supports programs created by the Safety Committee to promote and retain and safe work environment. MEETING FOOD/MEALS The City Council recognizes that situations in which City business needs to be discussed can and do occur during meal hours (i.e. luncheon meetings). In addition, there are public and employee meetings and events in which reasonable refreshments may add to the success of the meeting and/or event and create a more productive work force. The following items are deemed to meet the Council definition of public purpose expenditures in regards to food and meals. Meals and refreshments are allowed at City meetings and events that have a purpose of discussing City issues. These meetings would normally have a pre -planned agenda. 2. Meals and refreshments are allowed at employee meetings and events that have a purpose of discussing City issues or are a part of an employee training. These meetings would also normally have a pre -planned agenda. These meetings could include new employee receptions to introduce new employees to existing employees, provide an orientation to the City, and promote teamwork and cooperation. This does not include routine staff meetings. 3. Meals and refreshments are allowed when they are part of a breakfast/lunch/dinner meeting for official city business when it is the only practical time to meet. Usually these meals involve meeting with City Council members, Committee/Commission members, or local business/fraternal organizations. Payment for fees relating to a special event, such as a Chamber of Commerce event may also be allowed where approved by the City Administrator and when attendance is deemed to meet the public purpose guidelines for community or customer outreach and marketing of the City. 4. During official meetings of the City Council, council committees, advisory boards/commissions, and taskforces. 5. Travel expenses for employees are outlined in the Rosemount Personnel Policy. 6. Meals and refreshments are allowed where employees or volunteers are participating in a City -sponsored special event, participating in an outside event as an official representative of the City, or working additional hours and where the department heads deems appropriate as recognition of efforts above those normally required. Because emergency personnel are often called to perform for extended periods of time and duties where refreshments are important to duty performance, emergency response personnel may be provided refreshments or food when it is deemed appropriate by the City Administrator or Department Head to assure the delivery of quality emergency response service. 7. No purchase of alcoholic beverages is allowed The cost of these meals or fees is included in the departments' travel/conferences line -item in the Rosemount Operational Budget. These line -items are approved annually by the City Council as a part of the overall budget approval process which includes a public hearing on the proposed budget. MEMBERSHIP, DUES, AND DONATIONS The City Council has determined that the City will fund memberships and dues (individual or organization) in professional organizations and City social and community organizations when the purpose is to promote, advertise, improve or develop the City's resources and advantages and not personal interest or gain. The cost of memberships/dues is included in the departments' dues and subscriptions line -item in the Rosemount Operational Budget. These line -items are approved annually by the City Council as a part of the overall budget approval process which includes a public hearing on the proposed budget. All donations must be approved by the City Council during the annual budget process and/or by City resolution. Donations provided by the City must be for programs that serve our citizens and are deemed to meet the public purpose guidelines. EDUCATION REIMBURSEMENT The City of Rosemount Personnel Policy contains guidelines for an education reimbursement program. Job related advanced education meets the public purpose guidelines of this policy. The amount available for this program shall be considered annually. The cost of this program is contained in the Rosemount City Council budget. CLOTHING AND OTHER SUNDRY ITEMS Employees may receive T-shirts, and other sundry items of nominal value ($5.00) when these items are made available to the general public or if these items are determined by the City Administrator to be important to the successful involvement of employees in special city -sponsored or city -supported events (i.e. National Night Out, Safety Camp, etc.). Employees may be supplied with uniforms, clothing, boots and other gear necessary for the performance of their job. CONCLUSION The Rosemount City Council has determined that the above expenditures are valid expenditures and serve a public purpose. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: HIRING OF ASSISTANT PLANNER AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT PREPARED BY: PAULA GRAFF, HUMAN AGEND J*W "6 RESOURCES COORDINATOR ATTACHMENTS: NONE APPROVED BY: For City Council consideration is a recommendation to hire Liz Van Zomeren for the position of Assistant Planner. The City received 74 applications for this position. Eight candidates were interviewed during an initial interview, and three finalists were interviewed for a second time. Liz has a degree in Community and Regional Planning and over 16 years of public sector planning experience. It is anticipated that Liz will start work April 7, 2003 pending Council approval. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO APPROVE THE HIRING OF LIZ VAN ZOMEREN FOR THE POSITION OF ASSISTANT PLANNER. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: AUTHORIZE RESIDENT SURVEY AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT PREPARED BY: PAULA GRAFF, AGENDAf" #6 N HUMAN RESOURCES COORDINATOR ATTACHMENTS: SURVEY RESEARCH PROPOSAL APPROVED BY: Attached is a proposal from Decision Resources outlining a plan to conduct a resident survey over the next few months. Surveys have traditionally been conducted every two years or so. The last survey was conducted in 2001 and currently there is $12,000 in the Council's budget to conduct another survey this year. Authorization of the survey will allow staff to enter into agreement with Decision Resources to proceed with the survey once the Council completes a final review of the survey questions. This is done in the interest of saving time since a delay past the end of the school year will substantially increase the amount of time needed for Decision Resources to complete the survey due to more people being away on vacation. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE 2003 ROSEMOUNT RESIDENT SURVEY AND TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT WITH DECISION RESOURCES TO CONDUCT THE SURVEY UPON COUNCIL REVIEW OF FINAL DRAFT OF SURVEY QUESTIONS. COUNCIL ACTION: DECISION RESOURCES, LTD. 3128 Dean Court Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 612-920-2401 612-920-1069 (fax) wmorris@drlmpls.com March 22, 2003 Ms. Paula Graff Human Resources/Communications Coordinator City of Rosemount 2875 145"' Street West Rosemount, Minnesota 55068-4997 Dear Ms. Graff: Decision Resources, Ltd., is pleased to present this survey research proposal to you for the City of Rosemount. This prospectus is organized in three parts: a discussion of the goals of the research; a potential design and schedule; and, estimated project costs. As you will see, I am certain that DRL can provide the City of Rosemount with the information it seeks in both a cost- effective and timely manner. GOALS OF THE RESEARCH: The survey would assess the attitudes and opinions of residents of the City of Rosemount on four separate, but interrelated issues: 1. Evaluation of City Programs and Services How informed are residents about the current services and programs provided by the City? How do they rate these services and programs? What services and programs, if any, would they expand, modify, or terminate? Do they consider city services a good value for the property taxes they pay? How do they rate the level of current property taxes in comparison with other areas? How much contact have residents had with the City Council and Staff? How would they rate the job performance of City Council and Staff? City of Rosemount Survey Research Proposal March, 2003 2. General Perceptions of the Quality of Life in the City of Rosemount: What do they like most about living in the City? What do they consider to be the most serious issues facing the City? How are residents viewing changes during the past few years? What attributes of the City would residents prioritize for preservation? What changes would they welcome or at least accept? 3. Issues facing the City: What are residential preferences about the ways to address current issues? In particular, what are their perceptions about development and redevelopment? What are their priorities for development and redevelopment? How do they rate the quality of customer service provided by the City, both by observation and in direct interaction? 4. Demographic Changes and Issue Concerns: What are the demographic characteristics of residents moving into the community? How do "newer" residents compare demographically and issue -wise from residents who have lived in Rosemount for longer periods of time? Do the trends in the demographic backgrounds of "new -comers" suggest future policy directions? How do residents of varying longevity obtain their information about City government and its activities? How connected are residents to the City? In view of diminishing resources from the State, DRL can also test opinions and attitudes toward taxes and city services. In the past, our surveys have ascertained budget priorities from residents, trade-off choices when cuts have been examined, and specific and acceptable service reductions or changes. DESIGN AND SCHEDULE OF THE RESEARCH.• Decision Resources, Ltd., proposes to conduct a telephone survey of 400 randomly selected households in the City of Rosemount. A sample of 400 residents would provide results projectable to the entire city adult population within ± 5.0 percent in 95 out of 100 cases. The sample is also of sufficient size to permit the community to be divided into a maximum of four or five categories for more detailed analysis, such as age, mobility, home ownership, location of residence, presence of children, and other demographic characteristics. To insure the integrity of the sample, DRL places the most exacting sampling standards in the industry on our procedures. Before an alternate household is substituted for a designated target, at least ten tries are made to contact the initial households during a three day period. The telephone calls take place during various times on weekday evenings and during the weekend. Our interviewers are also instructed to seek convenient appointments with interviewees, cutting our non -contact rate to less than five percent on average. An unbiased selection process is also used to identify the adult member of the household to be interviewed. To validate the completed Page 2 City of Rosemount Survey Research Proposal March, 2003 sample, the latest United States Census updated population characteristics are utilized as a standard of comparison. The questionnaire would be administered by DRL trained and supervised personnel. The computer analysis will be obtained from our in-house C -MENTOR and SPSS statistical analysis systems, insuring both access to the most current analysis programs and confidentiality of the data set. The City of Rosemount will be presented with two bound copies of the final report highlighting all the major findings of the study. DRL will also speak to any major differences from and similarities with the past study of the community, when applicable, in addition to other "mature" communities. A volume of all computer generated cross tabulations and other multivariate statistical techniques will also be included. 1. Planning with City Council Members, City Staff, and/or relevant individuals to establish the topics to be covered in the survey. Based on these topic concepts, DRL would word specific, neutral questions. This activity can be completed by a meeting, telephone and/or fax, depending on client wishes, within two weeks of the initiation of the contract. 2. Structuring of questions and final approval of the survey instrument. These activities to be completed within three weeks of the initiation of the contract. 3. Final determination of the field dates for interviewing. 4. Pre -testing and, if needed, approval of resulting revisions. This activity to be completed by the second day of fieldwork. 5. Completion of all fieldwork within a three -to -four week period. 6. Computer analysis and preparation of written report. All analytical tests and commentary will be available within three weeks after completion of the field work. 7. Delivery of the final written report to the City of Rosemount and presentation at a formal or workshop meeting of the results and implications. Afterwards, telephone consultation, as the need arises, will be provided about the study's findings and implications. Page 3 City of Rosemount Survey Research Proposal March, 2003 PROJECT COSTS: The cost of a survey is driven by two factors: sample size and questionnaire length. A study whose parameters are a maximum of 60 questions administered to a 400 household random sample of the City of Rosemount would cost $9,800.00. Each additional question unit beyond the initial allotment would be $135.00. The typical suburban multi-purpose quality of life survey undertaken by our recent clients has average an overall cost of approximately $15,000.00. As company policy, DRL requires one-half of the cost prior to the commencement of field work; the remainder is due upon delivery of the -final written report. Unless otherwise arranged, DRL invoices clients for the initial payment at the time of the initiation of the contract; the remainder is due at the time of the receipt of the final written report. If you require any further information from us, feel free to contact either my partner, Diane Traxler, Peter Leatherman, or me. We look forward to the opportunity to work with the City of Rosemount once again, but, in any case, wish you well with this project. Sincerely, William D. Morris, Ph.D. President Page 4 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Meeting Date: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Receive Letter of Appeal and set public hearing AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner AGENDAJfW # 6 'u&"h ATTACHMENTS: Letter from Brian Alton, Attorney for Michael APPROVED BY: Kulhanek SUMMARY The Board of Appeals and Adjustments on March 11, 2003 denied Mr. Kulhanek's variance petition. He has exercised his right to appeal with the attached letter. A public hearing is required to hear the appeal. Staff suggests that the public hearing be scheduled for April 17, 2003. The next possible date would be May 6, 2003. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to receive the letter of appeal from Michael Kulhanek and schedule a public hearing for April 17, 2003. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Sent -By: McClay-Alton Attorneys; 651 290 2502; Mar -14-03 11:43; Page 2/2 ROBERT M. M.CCLAY BRIAN D. ALTON" 'Also Licensed in Wisconsin WCLAY • ALTON; ATTORNEYS March 14, 2003 VIA FACSIMILE Rick Pearson, City Planner City of Rosemount 2875 1451h Street West Rosemount, MN 55068-4997 Re: Variance to Accessory Structure Standards Michael Kulhanek 12355 Blanca Avenue Dear Mr. Pearson: 951 GRAND AVENUE 51 PAUL, MN 55105 FAX 651/290-2502 e-mail: lawomc d ay -al to n. corn 651 /290-0301 On behalf of Michael Kulhanek we wish to appeal the denial of the variance by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments to the City Council. We would appreciate it if you would provide to our office the information necessary to properly prefect the appeal. In addition, we would appreciate a copy of the resolution denying the variance and the Minutes of the Meeting. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, Brian D. Alton BD ks Enclosure cc: Mike Kulhanek r CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Meeting Date: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Lot Combination between Dakota Enterprises and Tom Engelmeier AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner AGENDA TEa 6 ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution, Location map, Survey APPROVED BY: 97 1 Applicant & Property Owner: Tom & Chuck Engelmeier, Dakota Enterprises LLP Location: 15953 Biscayne Ave. Nature of Request: Combine two adjacent five acre parcels into one ten acre parcel. SUMMARY Tom & Chuck Engelmeier own two five acre parcels at the northwest corner of Biscayne Ave. and 160t' Street West (County Road 46). The southerly parcel is developed with the Dakota Fence building and outdoor -storage area. Future plans would expand the building and storage onto the northerly parcel. Combination of the lots eliminates the resulting setback / encroachment problems that would otherwise be created with the common boundary line separating the two parcels. Lot Combinations are an exception in the subdivision ordinance and do not require public hearings or Planning Commission review. In this case, two ordinance -consistent 5 acre parcels are being combined into one ordinance -consistent 10 acre parcel. Currently, Tom and Chuck Engelmeier ar listed as the fee owners of the site of Dakota Fence, and Dakota Enterprises LLP, is the current fee owner for the parcel to the north. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the lot combination between Dakota Enterprises and Tom Engelmeier. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LOT COMBINATION BETWEEN DAKOTA ENTERPRISES AND TOM ENGELMEIER WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application from Dakota Fence and Tom Engelmeier for approval of lot combinations concerning property located at 15953 Biscayne Way, legally described as follows, to -wit: Existing 1: That part of the South 327.84 feet of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the west 1976.99 feet of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter. Containing 5 acres Existing 2: That part of the north 328.30 feet of the south 656.14 feet of the South half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the west 1976.99 feet of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter. Containing 5 acres WHEREAS, on April 3, 2003, the City Council reviewed the lot combinations for Dakota Fence and Tom Engelmeier. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the lot combinations for Dakota Fence and Tom Engelmeier, resulting in the following legal description: That part of the south 656.14 feet of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the west 1976.99 feet of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter. Containing 10 acres. Subject to public road easements and all other easements, if any. ADOPTED this 3ra day of April, 2003. ATTEST: Linda J. Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against:_ Member absent: William H. Droste, Mayor Seconded by: PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 34-03210-050-85 FEE OWNER: DAKOTA ENTERPRISES LTD 15953 BISCAYNE AVE ROSEMOUNT MN 55068-1601 PAYABLE 2003 TAXES NET TAX: ONNEW SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS: NOW TOTAL TAX 8 SA PAYABLE 2004 ASMNT USAGE:AG NOTE: Dimensions rounded to nearest foot Copyright 2003, Dakota County - SITE, MAP 2003 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2004) LAND: dNOW LOT SIZE BUILDING: TOTAL: %IN" 217,825 TOTAL SO FT 5.00 TOTAL ACRES SCHOOL DISTRICT: 196 10,835 ROAD R/W SO FT LOCATION: SE1/4 SE1/4 SECTION 32-115-19 PAYABLE 2004 HOMESTEAD STATUS: NON HOMESTEAD WATERSHED DISTRICT: VERMILLION RIVER LAST QUALIFIED SALE: DATE: AMOUNT: This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, and state offices and other sources, affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. Dakota County is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepancies are found, please contact Dakota County Survey and Land Information Department. Map Date: March 26, 2003 Parcels Updated: 3/21/2003 Aerial Photography: 1990 2003 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2004): NO DATA AVAILABLE PA Y --TA FENct TWO FARCE L -5 To BE axiai eo PLAT NAME: SECTION 32 TWN 115 RANGE 19 TAX DESCRIPTION: PT OF N 328.30 FT OF S 656.14 FT OF S 1/2 OF SE 1/4 LYING E OF W 1976.99 FT OF SAID SE 1/4 SUBJ TO PAR 4A DAKOTA CO RNV MAP 257 3211519 Description For: •Dakota Fence DELMAR H. SCHWANZ LAND SURVEYORS. INC. Registered Under Laws of Th Stats of Minnesota 14750 SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA 55068 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE Description To Combine The Following Descriptions: 6511423-1769 Parcel 1: That part of the South 327.84 feet of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the west 1976.99 feet of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter. Containing 5 acres Parcel 2: That part of the north328.30 feet of the south 656.14 feet of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the west 1976.99 feet of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter. Containing 5 acres Description of Combined Parcels: That part of the south 656.14 feet of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the west 1976.99 feet of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter. Containing 10 acres. Subject to public road easements and all other easements, if any. s Hereby certify that this surve y, plan, or report was _ DELMAR H. = prepared by me or under my direct supervision and = , r �CHWANZ _ that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under j the laws of the State of Minnesota. 8625 Dated 03-18-03 ............�® Delmar H. Schwanz ✓,,� E° w_�gi�? ° Minnesota Registration No. 8626 Certificate of Description For: ' Rm Real Estate Partnership Computer = RCD Plot File = RCDA DELMAR 4- SCHWAMZ _ LARU SURVEYORS. IHC RpinrW UnMr L�r� e11M 9r.� el Hinnwel� 14750 SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL ROSEMOUNT• MINNESOTA 55088 651.'423-1789 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE N00'06'58'E 328.32 r— —— EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1976.99 FEET OF THE S1/2 OF SEI/4 656.14 326.30 ti N pM,�7Fq{ c hh "G M ' PO c n I m b 'No Co r to w ro o m N J m m R.7 N Z m WW �f j1 N o ..-. C rr 14 rr m r m OI 5• C Ot C73n o N w to w Nrillrt ov c �p n h t O loll a m R 0 P h0r M N N I ELj O fO,NMO to M ttrr rn ..... v to FA H G�^ (D M D t>r r — — w W S00'01'59'E 328.31 w -B I -K A-YN E- - - - - ---A V -B UE n r I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was \q\\1141101111i1l11.11/1 m /� �/ / prepared by me or under my direct euDerviRlon and \;"gni?........., ,?J �. pr5. that 1 am a duly Reglttered L. Surveyor under _•`` +;' •''•;7'�- Z \\� �� the laws of the State of Mlnneeote. - -37r'- '•; %L z. _ DELMAR H. ., Domer 14r 2000 SCHWANZ _ m Delmer H. Schwan: Dated _ - —6625— • a Minnesota Registration ho. 8825 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: 2003 Agreement for Solid Waste and Recycling Services AGENDA SECTION: Consent. PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P. E., City Engineer AGEN Itum # 6 ATTACHMENTS: 2003 Agreement APPROVED BY: 17 This annual Agreement is for the purpose of providing solid waste and recycling services to City Hall, the Public Works facilities and the City parks. The Agreement provides the City with weekly service collections at the designated locations outlined in the Agreement. Collections are conducted weekly or as necessary to maintain clean and waste -free sites. This Agreement is renewed annually based on the performance of the services provided for the prior year. Staff recommends renewing the Agreement for the City of Rosemount's Solid Waste Disposal and Recycling Collection with Highland Sanitation, Inc. from April 1, 2003 to March 31, 2004. RECOMMENDED ACTION: MOTION TO APPROVE THE 2003 AGREEMENT WITH HIGHLAND SANITATION AND RECYCLING, INC. FOR THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF REFUSE AND RECYCLABLES AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY SIGNATURES. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT — HIGHLAND SANITATION AND RECYCLING, INC. AGREEMENT FOR COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF REFUSE AND RECYCLABLES THIS AGREEMENT is made this `_D�_'= day of r'y-\ a r c1ti of 2003, by and between THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, Minnesota, a statutory city and municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota (the "City") and Highland Sanitation and Recycling, Inc. (the "Contractor"). The City and Contractor agree as follows: 1. Term of Agreement This agreement will be in full force and effect for the period beginning April 1, 2003, and ending March 31, 2004. 2. Definitions For purpose of this Contract, the following terms shall have the following meanings: A. Collection Service. Collections Service means the picking up of all Refuse and Recyclables at the Designated Sites. B. Designated Sites. Designated Sites means the locations from which the Contractor will collect Refuse and Recyclables pursuant to this Agreement. The Designated Sites are listed on Exhibit A to this Agreement. C. Recyclables. Recyclables means newsprint, unsorted glass (food and beverage containers), unsorted aluminum, steel, "tin" cans (food and beverage containers), bottle -grade plastic containers, batteries, "office" paper, Tyvek-type paper, and other materials as mutually agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. D. Refuse. Refuse means all solid waste other than Recyclables. 3. General Description of Services The contractor will provide Collection Services to all Designated Sites. 4. Containers The Contractor will provide adequate containers, approved by the City, for the disposal and storage of Refuse and Recyclables at Designated Sites pending collection by the Contractor. 5. Frequency The Contractor will provide Collection Services at each Designated Site at the frequencies shown on Exhibit A. 6. Additional Collection Services Upon request by the City, the Contractor will provide Collection Services at the Designated Sties more often than at the frequencies shown on Exhibit A. The Contractor will be compensated for these additional Collection Services at the rate of $20.00 for each additional K - Cart picked up. . 7. Administration The Contractor shall maintain an office equipped with telephones and staffed with sufficient personnel to handle complaints and/or to receive instructions. The Contractor will keep complete and accurate records in accordance with generally accepted accounting practices and shall make available for inspection by the City, at any reasonable time within the term of the Agreement plus six months after the termination of the Contract, any and all such records pertinent to all services provided under this Contract. 8. Price and Terms of Payment for Work Performed Under This Contract A. Price. The City will pay to the Contractor $17,448.00 payable in monthly installations for the Contractor's performance of the Collection Services. B. Terms. The Contractor will invoice the City monthly for the amount due for the Contractor's performance of the Collection Services. The City will make payment to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice submitted by the Contractor. Invoices submitted for payment by the City will be for work completed under this Contract. No payment will be made to the Contractor in advance for any work to be performed as part of this Contract. 9. Insurance A. Liability Insurance. The Contractor will keep all trucks and motor vehicles used in the performance of this Agreement insured with a minimum public liability insurance of $500,000 for any one person; $1,000,000 for any one accident; $500,000 for property damage, together with Contractor's public liability insurance of $500,000 for any one person, $1,000,000 for any one accident; and property damage of $300,000. Certificates of Insurance shall be provided to the City by the Contractor. (1) The policy must be a standard form policy provided for by a carrier approved by the State of Minnesota and shall not contain any exclusions that will restrict coverage on any operations performed by the Contractor or any subcontractors thereof. (2) The policy must fully provide insurance to cover all of the Contractor's operating exposures including the picking up of the Recyclables and the operation of vehicles. (3) Approval of the insurance by the City will not in any way relieve or decrease the liability of the Contractor hereunder, and it is expressly understood that the City does V' not in any way represent that the above specified insurance or limits of liability are sufficient or adequate to protect the Contractor's interest or liabilities. (4) The City must be named as an additional insured in these policies for coverage needed only for work as specified in this Contract, and the policies must provide that the coverage may not be terminated or changed by the insurer except upon 30 days written notice to the City. (5) Any insurance agency writing a policy under this section must have in force for any coverage provided by this Agreement, errors and omissions coverage with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate. B. Workers' Compensation Insurance The Contractor will at all times keep fully insured, at its own expense, all persons employed by it in connection with the performance of this Agreement as required by the laws of the State of Minnesota relating to Workers' Compensation Insurance and will hold the City free and harmless from all liability from any cause that may arise by reason of injuries to any employee of the Contractor or its agents who may be injured while performing work or labor necessary to carry out the provisions of this Contract. The Contractor will supply to the City proof of coverage. C. Property Insurance. All responsibility for maintaining property insurance on any premises or structures owned or operated by the Contractor remains solely with the Contractor, which may at its option insure against any other perils, and such responsibility will remain with the Contractor until such time as this Agreement is terminated. D. Nothing in this Agreement will be construed to waive any limitation of liability to which the City is entitled. 10. Performance of Contract A. Supply Necessary Items. The Contractor will supply all labor, material, and equipment necessary for the carrying out of this contract. B. No Claims. The Contractor will pay all persons doing work or furnishing skill, tools, machinery, materials, insurance premiums, equipment, or supplies in and about the performance of this Contract. C. Indemnification. The Contractor agrees to take all precautions to protect the public against injury and to save the City harmless from all damages and claims of damages to persons or property that may arise from the performance of this Agreement by the Contractor, its agents, or employees, and will indemnify the City against all claims for liens, for work, tools, machinery, materials, or insurance premiums or equipment or supplies, and against all loss by reason of the failure of the Contractor in any respect to fully perform all obligations of this Contract. I 1. Contractor's Operations A. Missed Collections. Whenever the City notifies the Contractor of Designated Sites that have not received scheduled Collection Services, the Contractor will service such Designated Sites before 6:00 p.m. of the same day when notified prior to noon. When notified after noon, the Contractor will service such Designated Sites not later than 10:00 a.m. of the following day. The Contractor's failure to comply with the terms of this Section will be cause for the City to deduct from its next payment to the Contractor the amount that would otherwise be due for the collection that was not timely performed. In addition, the City shall deduct $25 per occurrence from the next payment to the Contractor for each time a collection is missed at a Designated Site. B. Site Collection The Contractor must use the appropriate collection method at the designated location to avoid impacts to City or private property. The City's Solid Waste Coordinator must approve collection methods. The Contractor must contact the Solid Waste Coordinator prior to the scheduled time of collection in the event that the appropriate collection method is unavoidable. C. Handling of Containers. The Contractor's employees will handle all the containers used for the storage and collection of Refuse and Recyclables at Designated Sites with reasonable care to avoid damage, will replace all containers in an upright position in an easily accessible location, and will immediately clean up and dispose of any contents which may be spilled. D. Disposal of Refuse. As one of the material terms of this Agreement, the Contractor agrees that all Refuse will be disposed of at the Northern States Power Resource Recovery facility in Newport, Minnesota. 12. Contract Performance A. Evaluation. The Contractor will be subject to a ninety (90) day performance evaluation for services and labor provided in relation to this contract. 13. Filing of Reports A. The contractor will provide to the City receipt of the total weight of Recyclables collected, including a statement of verification that the scale receipts reflect Recyclables only collected at the Designated Sites for the particular quarter in which payment under this Agreement is being requested. A copy of each weight ticket must be included as part of the billing sent to the city each quarter. The Contractor will also include a report of the total tons of Recyclables collected and the percentage of the total that each type of recyclable material represents. The City may require other reports it reasonably deems necessary. All such reports must be in a form acceptable to the City. The Contractor will comply with all reporting requirements mandated by Dakota County. 4 B. The Contractor will list on each invoice the size of the containers emptied at each Designated Site during the period for which the invoice applies. C. The Contractor will provide to the City receipt of the total weight of Refuse collected and delivered to the Northern States Power Resource Recovery facility in Newport, Minnesota, including a statement of verification that the scale receipts reflect Refuse collected at the Designated Sites for the particular quarter in which payment under this Agreement is being requested. A copy of each weight ticket must be included as part of the billing sent to the City each quarter. The Contractor will comply with all reporting requirements mandated by Dakota County and by the Northern States Power Resource Recovery facility in Newport, Minnesota. 14. Correction of Deficiencies in Agreement of Performance A. Failure to Conform to Agreement Provisions Failure of the Contractor to conform with the provisions of this Agreement may result in the filing of compensatory claims by the City against the Contractor. B. Written Notice. Prior to the claim, the City will give written notice delivered by hand or certified mail to the Contractor detailing all deficiencies in the Contractor's performance under this Agreement. C. Correction of Deficiencies. Upon receipt of said notice and claim, the Contractor will be allowed 72 hours to provide the City written assurance of the intent to meet the provisions of this Agreement, including a work plan describing the completion of the deficiencies as outlined by the City. D. Failure to Correct Listed Deficiencies. Upon failure of the Contractor to correct the listed deficiencies upon the next scheduled collection and the elapse of the referenced 72 -hour time period, the City may terminate the Contract, and the Contractor will be held liable for the total cost incurred in completion or correction of the work, including contract and administrative costs and attorney fees. 15. Equipment A. Vehicles. The Contractor will make all collections of Recyclables in watertight receptacles having tight fitting lids or tarps. There will be separate receptacles for each type of Recyclable Material. B. Cleaning. All vehicles must be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. C. Maintenance. The trucks must be maintained in good working order, equipped to meet all federal, state, and municipal regulations concerning vehicles used on public roads and maintained to meet these standards. 67 D. Description of Vehicles. The Contractor will furnish the City with a written description of all vehicles and equipment to be used within the boundaries of the City Service Area and in the performance of this Agreement and will advise the City in writing of any withdrawal of a part of such equipment or of any change therein within one (1) week of the time of making such change. E. Safety. Equipment. Each collection vehicle must have a flashing light warning system, fire extinguisher (CO2 type) and proper backup alarms as approved by the City. 16. Personnel Requirements A. Responsibility. (1) There will be no limitation on the size of the Contractor's collection crew, so long as they are sufficient to fulfill the requirements of the Contract. (2) Each collection crew will adhere to all applicable Ordinances of the City. B. Driver. (1) The driver must be properly licensed to drive the vehicles used to collect Refuse and Recyclables. (2) The driver must adhere to all traffic laws. C. Collector. (1) The driver and/or collector(s) must at all times conduct themselves in a courteous manner with the general public. (2) The driver and/or collector(s) must be of sound character, competent, and sober throughout the entire workday. (3) The driver and/or collector(s) must be able to service their assigned collection route(s) in accordance with the provisions of this Contract. (4) The driver and/or collector(s) must make a concerted effort to have at all times a presentable appearance. (5) The collector(s) on each crew must be physically able to perform their duties. 6 (6) The collector(s) must perform their work in a neat and a quiet manner and clean up all Recyclables spilled in the collection under any circumstances. (7) Damage to containers or other property must be avoided. (8) Consumption of any beverages containing alcohol is forbidden during or before work hours of any collection day. 17. Safety The Contractor will provide and maintain all sanitary and safety accommodations for the use and protection of its employees as may be necessary to provide for their health and welfare, and comply with federal, state, and local codes and regulations, as well as those of other bodies and tribunals having jurisdiction. Without limitation of the foregoing, the Contractor assumes all responsibility for compliance with any applicable federal or state laws pertaining to drug or alcohol testing of drivers and collectors. 18. Subcontractors A. The Contractor will inform the City in writing of the use of all subcontractors prior to their involvement. B. The City reserves the right to reject the use of any proposed subcontractor at any time during the terms of the Agreement without affecting the Agreement cost. 19. Marketing of Recyclables A. Contractor Responsibility. The Contractor is responsible for the processing, distribution, and marketing of Recyclables. B. Prohibition Against Landfilling of Recyclables. It will be a violation of this Agreement for the Contractor to deposit any Recyclables in a sanitary landfill. 20. Nondiscrimination The Contractor agrees that, during the life of this Agreement, the Contractor will not, discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of color, creed, national origin, or ancestry, and will include a similar provision in all subcontracts entered into for the performance thereof This Agreement may be canceled or terminated by the City, and all money due or to become due hereunder may be forfeited for a second or subsequent violation of the terms and conditions of this paragraph. In addition, violation of the provisions of this paragraph is a misdemeanor. This paragraph is inserted in this Agreement to comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 181.59. 21. Health Regulations and Ordinances The. Contractor will comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations and ordinance. 22. Governing Law This Agreement is governed in all respects by the laws of the State of Minnesota, and all obligations are enforceable in accordance therewith. 23. Notice Except as otherwise herein provided, all notices required to be served by either party on the other shall be in writing by certified mail to the principal office of the party to which notice is given as follows: City of Rosemount 2875 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 Highland Sanitation and Recycling, Inc 20700 Donnelly Dr. Farmington, MN 55024 All such notices will be effective when received. 24. Successors and Assigns The Contractor binds itself jointly and severally, its successors, executors, administrators and assigns to the City in respect to all covenants of this Contract, except that the Contractor will not assign or transfer any part of its interest in this Agreement or subcontract in part or in whole, nor will the Contractor assign any monies due, or to become due, without the City's written consent. 25. Severability All parts and provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any part or provision shall be held invalid, the remainder of this Agreement will remain in effect. 26. Independent Contractor The Contractor is an independent contractor, and nothing in this Contract shall be construed to create the relationship of employer and employee between the City and the Contractor or its agents, officers or employees. 27. City Authority 8 The City retains full authority to modify, establish, or eliminate any Collection Service function not specifically established by this Agreement. 28. Street Improvements This Agreement is subject to the right of the State of Minnesota or any Minnesota municipality to improve its highways, streets and alleys. The Contractor accepts the risk that such improvements may prevent the Contractor from traveling its accustomed collection route or routes for and will not make any claim for compensation against the City for such interference. 29. Termination A. Immediate Termination. The City will have the right to immediately terminate this agreement in the event: (1) of fraud, misrepresentation, or breach of any material term of this Agreement by the Contractor; or (2) the Contractor does not have all insurance coverage required under this Agreement in full force at all times during the term of this Agreement; or (3) there is a transfer of interest in, or ownership of, the Contractor greater than forty-five (45) percent the Contractor hereby agreeing to notify the City of any change in ownership of the Contractor or transfer of any equity interest in the Contractor. Termination under this paragraph will be effective immediately upon notice to the Contractor. B. Change in Law. Either party may immediately terminate this Agreement if a change in state or federal law or in the ordinances of Dakota County makes it impossible for the party to comply with both the material terms of this Agreement and the requirements of the state or federal or county ordinance. Termination under this paragraph will be effective immediately upon notice to the non -terminating party. C. Other Termination. Not withstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, the City may terminate this agreement, for any cause or no cause, upon 30 days notice to the Contractor. D. Effect of Termination. Upon expiration or termination of this Contract, neither party will have any further obligation to the other. 30. Renewal This Agreement may be renewed with written approval of both parties. 9 31. Entire Agreement This agreement with Exhibits incorporated herein by reference is the entire agreement between the parties. No modification of this Agreement will be valid or effective, unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT HIGHLAND SANITATION AND RECYCLING, INC Bill Droste, Mayor By: Linda Jentink, City Clerk 10 By:.Cr,t- Susan Stewart, Area Sales Manager Date: 3 - —�3 EXHIBIT A PICK-UP LOCATIONS, FREQUENCIES AND CONTAINER SIZES PARKS Size Frequency Biscayne 2- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Bloomfield 1- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Camfield 2- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Central Park 3- 90 gal 2- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday 1 per week- Friday (recycling) Charlies 2- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Chippendale 2- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Claret 1- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Connemara 2- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Dallara 2- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Jaycee 5- 90 gal 5- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday 1 per week- Friday (recycling) Kidder 2- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Lions 1- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Old City Hall 2 — 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Schwarz 4- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Shannon 10- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Twin Puddles N. 1- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Twin Puddles S. 1- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Winds Crossing 2- 90 gal 1 per week- Friday Erickson 1- 6 yd 17- 90 gal 1 per week- Monday 2 per week- Monday & Friday Decorative Bins Along 145th 6- 65 gal 1 per week- Thursday 11 BUILDINGS Size Frequency Arena 1- 8 yd 2 per week- Monday & Thursday Community Center 1- 8 yd 4- 90 gal recycling 2 per week- Monday & Thursday 1 per week- Friday City Hall 1- 3 yd 3- 90 gal recycling 1 per week- Friday 1 per week- Friday Garages 1- 8 yd 2 per week- Monday & Thursday (may be temporary) Fire Station #1 1- 1.5 yd (on Shannon) 1 1 per week 12 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Meeting Date: April 3, 2003 AGENDA ITEM: Biscayne Pointe Fifth Addition Final Plat Heritage Development AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner; AGEND fIN -a 6 R Andy Brotzler, City Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution, Subdivision Development APPROVED BY: Agreement, Location map, Final Plat reductions, Correspondence, PC Minutes (2- 11-03) Applicant & Property Owner(s): Heritage Development Location: Northeast of new Church of St. Joseph, North of projected Connemara Trail. Area in Acres: Approximately 12 Number of Lots: 31 Comp. Guide Plan Desig: Urban Residential Current Zoning: R-1, Low Density Residential Planning Commission Action: Recommendation of Approval (4-0) SUMMARY This final plat is the last step in the planning process that creates single-family lots for sale. The plat has been checked for conformance to R-1, Low Density Residential standards as well as the preliminary plat. No issues have been identified. No public hearing is required, as it is consistent with the preliminary plat. Any significant deviation would trigger an amendment process which includes a public hearing. It should be noted that this plat is dependant on the construction of Connemara Trail east of Biscayne Avenue anticipated in late 2003. Therefore, it is likely that lots will not be available until 2004. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW On February 11, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed the final plat and had no concerns. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the final plat for Biscayne Pointe Fifth Addition; And Motion to authorize the execution of the Subdivision Development Agreement for Biscayne Pointe Fifth Addition CITY COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT FOR BISCAYNE POINTE 5TH ADDITION WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application for final plat approval submitted by Heritage Development for Biscayne Pointe 5th Addition, as required by ordinance, pertaining to land legally described as: Outlot B, BISCAYNE POINTE FOURTH ADDITION, according the recorded plat thereof WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount reviewed the final plat application for Biscayne Pointe 5th Addition at their regular meeting on February 11, 2003; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend approval of the final plat to the City Council as required by the Subdivision Ordinance, subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the final plat application as required by the Subdivision Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the final plat for Biscayne Pointe 5th Addition, subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and private improvements. 2. Incorporation of recommendations by the City Engineer regarding drainage, grading, easements, streets, and utilities. 3. Payment of all platting and development fees as established in the current fee resolution. 4. Conformance with all of the conditions of preliminary plat. ADOPTED this 3rd day of April, 2003, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. William H. Droste, Mayor ATTEST: Linda J. Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Voted in favor: Voted against:_ Member absent: Seconded by: SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT Biscayne Pointe 5' Addition AGREEMENT dated day of , 2003, by and between the CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, a Minnesota municipal corporation, ("City"), and HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT OF MINNESOTA, INC.. a Minnesota Corporation, (the "Developer"). 1. Request for Plat Approval. The Developer has asked the City to approve the subdivision of land and a plat of land to be known as Biscayne Pointe 5`h Addition, which land is legally described on Attachment One, attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof (hereinafter referred to as the "subject property"). 2. Conditions of Plat Approval. The City has approved the subdivision and the plat on the following conditions: a. Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer concerning design and installation of public infrastructure and including grading, erosion control, streets and utilities. b. Execution of a Subdivision or Development Agreement to secure the public and private improvements. c. Payment of all applicable fees including G.I.S., Park Dedication and other fees identified in the current fee schedule. d. Incorporation of any easements necessary to accommodate drainage, ponding, streets and utilities 3. Phased Development. The City may refuse to approve final plats of subsequent additions of the plat if the Developer has breached this Contract and the breach has not been remedied. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed until Subdivision Agreements for such phases are approved by the City. 4. Effect of Subdivision Approval. For two (2) years from the date of this Agreement, no amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan, except an amendment placing the plat in the current urban service area, or official controls shall apply to or affect the use, development density, lot size, lot layout or dedications of the approved plat unless required by state or federal law or agreed to in writing by the City and the Developer. Thereafter, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, to the full extent permitted by state law the City may require compliance with any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan, official controls, platting or dedication requirements enacted after the date of this Agreement. 5. Development Plans. The subject property shall be developed in accordance with the following plans, original copies of which are on file with the City Public Works Director. The plans may be prepared, subject to City approval, after entering this Agreement, but before commencement of any work on the Subject Property. If the plans vary from the written terms of this Agreement, the written terms shall control. The plans are: Plan A -- Plat Plan B -- Soil Erosion Control Plan and Schedule Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/25/03 Plan C -- Drainage and Storm Water Runoff Plan Plan D -- Plans and Specifications for Public Improvements Plan E -- Grading Plan and House Pad Elevations Plan F -- Street Lights Plan G-- Landscape Improvements 6. Installation by Developer. The Developer shall install or cause to be installed and pay for the following: A. Street Lights B. Setting of Lot and Block Monuments C. Surveying and Staking of work required to be performed by the Developer. D. Gas, Electric, Telephone, and Cable Lines E. Site Grading F. Landscaping (Hereinafter referred to as the "Developer Improvements") And other items as necessary to complete the development as stipulated herein or in other agreements. 7. Time of Performance. The Developer shall install all required improvements enumerated in Paragraph 6 which will serve the subject property by December 31, 2004. The Developer may, however, request an extension of time from the City. If an extension is granted, it shall be conditioned upon updating the security posted by the Developer to reflect cost increases and the extended completion date. 8. Public Infrastructure. The following improvements, known as City Project #367, shall be designed, inspected, surveyed and administered by the City and installed in the Subject Property at Developer expense by a Contractor selected by the City through the public bidding process: A. Sanitary Sewer B. Watermain C. Storm Sewer D. Streets E. Sidewalks/Pathways (Hereinafter referred to as "Public Infrastructure Improvements") The attached figure shows the area within which the Public Infrastructure Improvements will be constructed pursuant to this Paragraph. Contracts shall provide for construction in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by the City or its consultants. The City will not enter into such contracts until all conditions of plat and subdivision approval have been met, the plat is recorded and 2 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/25/03 the City has received the bonds and security required by this agreement. The City will not enter into such contracts until Connemara Trail is constructed and substantially complete as part of City Project #343. The City will obtain any necessary permits from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Department of Health and all other agencies before proceeding with construction. 9. Deposit for Cost of Public Infrastructure Improvements. For the purpose of financing the construction, installation and maintenance of the Public Infrastructure Improvements, Developer shall promptly make payments to the City of sums deemed necessary by the City to make timely payments to its contractor as follows: a. Prior to the receipt by the City of bids for the Public Infrastructure Improvements, Developer will pay to the City a cash deposit in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000) to cover one or more periodic payments to the City's contractor. Such deposit and later payments to the deposit as provided in this paragraph will be held by the City and used to pay the City's contractor for Public Infrastructure Improvements and no other purpose. b. From time to time as the City's construction of the Public Infrastructure Improvements proceeds and the amount held in the Developer's deposit is diminished by payments to the City's contractor, the City will give written notice specifying an amount due from the Developer to replenish the deposit, as determined by the City to be necessary to cover one or more periodic payments to the City's contractor. Payments shall be due no later than five (5) working days after receipt of notice by the Developer. C. No interest will be paid or credited to Developer on funds held by the City in the deposit. Following final payment for Public Infrastructure Improvements the City will return any unused funds in the deposit to Developer. d. Upon execution of this Agreement, Developer will provide a letter of credit in form satisfactory to the City in the amount of Two Hundred Sixty-seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($267,500) (which is 110% of the estimated construction costs ($425,000) less the initial deposit), conditioned on the prompt and faithful performance by Developer of its obligations under this paragraph 9. This letter of credit may be combined with any other letter of credit given to secure performance under this Agreement provided the form thereof is approved by the City. e. In the event City does not recover its costs for completing the Public Infrastructure Improvements under the provisions of this paragraph, as an additional remedy, City may, at its option, assess the Subject Property in the manner provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and Developer hereby consents to the levy of such special assessments without notice or hearing and waives its rights to appeal such assessments pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081, provided the amount levied, together with the funds deposited with the City under this paragraph, does not exceed the expenses actually incurred by the City in the completion of the Public Infrastructure Improvements. 3 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 10. Security for Developer Improvements. To guarantee compliance with the terms of this Agreement, payment of the costs of all Developer Improvements and construction of all Developer Improvements (as noted in Paragraph 6), the Developer shall furnish the City with a cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit from a bank ("security") for $131,450, which is 110% of the estimated cost of the Developer Improvements. The amount of the security was calculated as follows: Refer to Exhibit A for an explanation of each item. The bank and form of the letter of credit or other security shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The letter of credit shall be automatically renewable until the City releases the developer from responsibility. The letter of credit shall secure compliance with the terms of this Agreement and all obligations of the Developer under it. The City may draw down on the letter of credit without notice if the obligations of the Developer have not been completed as required by this Agreement. In the event of a default under this Subdivision Agreement by the Developer, the City shall furnish the Developer with written notice by certified mail of Developers default(s) under the terms of this Subdivision Agreement. If the Developer does not remove said default(s) within two (2) weeks of receiving notice; the City may draw on the letter of credit. With City approval the letter of credit may be reduced from time to time as financial obligations are paid and developer installed improvements completed to the City's requirements. 11. Grading Plan/Site Grading. Site grading shall be completed by the developer at its cost and approved by the City Public Works Director. The completion of grading activities will need to be coordinated by the City in conjunction with the installation of utilities. Developer shall furnish the City Public Works Director satisfactory proof of payment for the site grading work and shall submit a certificate of survey of the development to the City as the site grading is completed by phase, with street and lot grades. If the installation of utilities is occurring simultaneously with the grading, the utility contractor shall have preference over the grading activities. No substantial grading activities can be completed over installed utilities unless otherwise protected. All improvements to the lots 4 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 Cost 1110% Grading & Erosion Control $25,000 $27,500 Pond Restoration and Erosion Control Removal $25,000 $27,500 Survey Monumentation $15,500 $17,050 Landscaping $30,000 $33,000 Retaining Walls -0- -0- Street Lighting (6 lights) $24,000 $26,400 Buffer Monumentation -0- -0- Park Equipment/Improvements -0- -0- Wetland Restoration/Mitigation -0- -0- Wetland Monitoring -0- -0- Total $119,500 $131,450 Refer to Exhibit A for an explanation of each item. The bank and form of the letter of credit or other security shall be subject to the approval of the City Administrator. The letter of credit shall be automatically renewable until the City releases the developer from responsibility. The letter of credit shall secure compliance with the terms of this Agreement and all obligations of the Developer under it. The City may draw down on the letter of credit without notice if the obligations of the Developer have not been completed as required by this Agreement. In the event of a default under this Subdivision Agreement by the Developer, the City shall furnish the Developer with written notice by certified mail of Developers default(s) under the terms of this Subdivision Agreement. If the Developer does not remove said default(s) within two (2) weeks of receiving notice; the City may draw on the letter of credit. With City approval the letter of credit may be reduced from time to time as financial obligations are paid and developer installed improvements completed to the City's requirements. 11. Grading Plan/Site Grading. Site grading shall be completed by the developer at its cost and approved by the City Public Works Director. The completion of grading activities will need to be coordinated by the City in conjunction with the installation of utilities. Developer shall furnish the City Public Works Director satisfactory proof of payment for the site grading work and shall submit a certificate of survey of the development to the City as the site grading is completed by phase, with street and lot grades. If the installation of utilities is occurring simultaneously with the grading, the utility contractor shall have preference over the grading activities. No substantial grading activities can be completed over installed utilities unless otherwise protected. All improvements to the lots 4 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 and the final grading shall comply with the grading plan as submitted and shall be the responsibility of the Developer. 12. License. The Developer hereby grants the City, its agents, employees, officers and contractors a license to enter the Subject Property to perform all work and inspections deemed appropriate by the City during the installation of Public Infrastructure Improvements. 13. Erosion Control. Prior to site grading, and before any utility construction is commenced or building permits are issued, the erosion control plan, Plan B, shall be implemented, inspected and approved by the City. All areas disturbed by the excavation and backfilling operations shall be reseeded within 72 hours after the completion of the work in that area. Except as otherwise provided in the erosion control plan, seed shall be rye grass or other fast-growing seed suitable to the existing soil to provide a temporary ground cover as rapidly as possible. All seeded areas shall be mulched and disc anchored as necessary for seed retention. All basement and/or foundation excavation spoil piles shall be kept completely off City right-of-way and shall be completely surrounded with an approved erosion control silt fence. Approved erosion control fencing shall be installed around the perimeter of each lot or at City approved locations at the time of building permit issuance and remain in place until the lot is seeded or sodded. A 20 -foot opening will be allowed on each lot for construction deliveries. The parties recognize that time is of the essence in controlling erosion. If development does not comply with the erosion control plan and schedule or supplementary instructions received from the City, the City may take such action as it deems appropriate to control erosion. This right also applies to the required erosion control for basement and/or foundation excavation spoil piles. The City will endeavor to notify the Developer in advance of any proposed action, but failure of the City to do so will not affect the Developer's or City's rights or obligations hereunder. If the Developer does not reimburse the City for any cost the City incurred for such work within thirty (30) days, the City may draw down the letter of credit to pay any costs. No development will be allowed and no building permits will be issued unless the Subject Property is in full compliance with the erosion control requirements. 14. Planting and Seeding. Landscaping shall be in accordance with Landscape Plans approved by the City Planner. 15. Clean up. The Developer shall clean streets of dirt and debris that has resulted from construction work by the Developer, its agents or assigns. The City will inspect the site on a weekly basis and determine whether it is necessary to take additional measures to clean dirt and debris from the streets. After 24 hours verbal notice to the Developer, the City will complete or contract to complete the clean up at the Developer's expense in accordance with the procedures specified in Paragraph 13. The Developer shall inspect and if necessary clean all catch basins, sumps, and ponding areas of erosion/siltation and restore to the original condition at the end of home construction within this development. All silt fence and other erosion control should be removed following the establishment of turf. These items are to be secured through the letter of credit as is noted in Exhibit A. 5 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 16. Ownership of Improvements. Upon completion and City acceptance of the work and construction required by this Agreement, the public improvements lying within public rights-of- way and easements shall become City property without further notice or action unless the improvements are slated as private infrastructure. 17. Warranty. The Developer warrants all work required to be performed by it against poor material and faulty workmanship for a period of two (2) years after its completion and acceptance by the City. All trees, grass and sod shall be warranted to be alive, of good quality and disease free for twelve (12) months after planting. 18. Responsibility for Costs. A. Except as otherwise specified herein, the Developer shall pay all costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the development of the Subject Property including, but not limited to, Soil and Water Conservation District charges, legal, planning, engineering and inspection expenses incurred in connection with approval and acceptance of the subdivision and the plat, the preparation of this Agreement and any amendments hereto, and all costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting development of the Subject Property. B. The Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from claims made by itself and third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from plat or subdivision approval and development of the Subject Property. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and employees for all costs, damages or expenses which the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims, including attorney's fees. C. The Developer shall reimburse the City for costs incurred in the preparation and enforcement of this Agreement, including engineering and attorney's fees. The estimated City fees of $104,620 shall be deposited with the City at the time this Agreement is signed, and represent the following estimates: $ 72,250 Engineering Fees $ 2,000 Attorney Fees $ 21,250 5% City Fees $ 720 Street Light Energy Cost $ 8,400 Seal Coating $104,620 If the City fees exceed this estimate, the Developer shall pay the additional costs to the City within 10 days of the request. D. The Developer shall pay in full all bills submitted to it by the City for obligations incurred under this Agreement within thirty (30) days after receipt. If the bills are not paid on time, the City may halt development work and construction including, but not limited to, the issuance of building permits for lots which the Developer may or may not have sold, until the 6 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 bills are paid in full. Bills not paid within thirty (30) days shall accrue interest at the rate of nine percent (9%) per year. E. The Developer shall pay all energy costs for street lights installed within the Subject Property for 24 -months at a cost of $5/month/light. After that, the City will assume the energy costs. F. The Developer will pay the cost of sealcoating the streets within the development at a cost of $0.60/SY. The sealcoating will be completed within two (2) years following wear course placement. 19. Developer agrees to pay fees, charges and assessments set forth in this Section prior to, or at the time of, execution of any plat by the City: A. Park dedication fees in the amount of $55,800. B. Geographic Information System (GIS) fees in the amount of $1,705. C. Storm Sewer Trunk Area Charges in the amount of $42,865. D. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area Charges in the amount of $11,761. E. Watermain Trunk Area Charges in the amount of $45,611. Or such other amounts for such fees as in effect at the time of plat approval. 20. Developer understands that builders will be required to pay for the Subject Property the fees, charges and assessments in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. The rates for each of these items will be set according to the current rate structure at the time the building permit is received. The fees, charges, and assessments in effect as of this agreement are: A. Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Availability Charges per SAC unit (current rate is $1,275). B. Storm Sewer Connection Charges per single family unit and per multiple family unit (currently at $1,135). C. Sanitary Sewer Availability Charges per SAC unit (currently at $1,090/SAC unit). D. Water Availability Charges per SAC unit (currently at $1,275/SAC unit for single family residential and multi -family residential). 21. Building Permits. No occupancy permits shall be issued until: A. The site grading is completed and approved by the City. B. All public utilities are tested, approved by the City Engineer, and in service. 7 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 C. All curbing is installed and backfilled. D. The first lift of bituminous is in place and approved by the City. E. All building permit fees are paid in full. F. No early building permits will be issued. The Developer, in executing this Agreement, assumes all liability and costs for damage or delays, incurred by the City, in the construction of public improvements, caused by the Developer, its employees, contractors, subcontractors, materialmen or agents. No occupancy permits shall be issued until the public streets and utilities referred to in paragraph 6 and 8 are in and approved by the City, unless otherwise authorized in writing by the City Public Works Director. 22. Developer's Default. In the event of default by the Developer as to any of the work to be performed by it hereunder, the City may, at its option, perform the work and the Developer shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense incurred by the City, provided the Developer is first given notice of the work in default, not less than 48 hours in advance. This Agreement is a license for the City to act, and it shall not be necessary for the City to seek a court order for permission to enter the land. When the City does any such work, the City may, in addition to its other remedies, levy the cost in whole or in part as a special assessment against the Subject Property. Developer waives its rights to notice of hearing and hearing on such assessments and its right to appeal such assessments pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.081. 23. Miscellaneous. A. The Developer represents to the City that the development of the Subject Property, the subdivision and the plat comply with all city, county, metropolitan, state and federal laws and regulations including, but not limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances and environmental regulations. If the City determines that the subdivision or the plat or the development of the Subject Property does not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow construction or development work on the Subject Property until the Developer does comply. Upon the City's demand, the Developer shall cease work until there is compliance. B. Third parties shall have no recourse against the City under this Agreement. C. Breach of the terms of this Agreement by the Developer shall be grounds for denial of building permits, including lots sold to third parties. D. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or phase of this Agreement is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement. E. If building permits are issued prior to the completion and acceptance of public improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and costs resulting in delays in completion 8 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 of public improvements and damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, its contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents or third parties. F. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the provisions of this Agreement. To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Agreement shall not be a waiver or release. G. This Agreement shall run with the land and may be recorded against the title to the property. The Developer shall take such steps, including execution of amendments to this Agreement, as are necessary to effect the recording hereof. After the Developer has completed the work required of it under this Contract, at the Developer's request, the City will execute and deliver to the Developer a release. H. Each right, power or remedy herein conferred upon the City is cumulative and in addition to every other right, power or remedy, express or implied, now or hereafter arising, available to the City, at law or in equity, or under any other agreement, and each and every right, power and remedy herein set forth or otherwise so exciting may be exercised from time to time as often and in such order as may be deemed expedient by the City and shall not be a waiver of the right to exercise at any time thereafter any other right, power or remedy. The Developer may not assign this Agreement without the written permission of the City Council. 24. Notices. Required notices to the Developer shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Developer, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Developer by registered mail at the following address: Heritage Development of Minnesota, LLC 422 East County Road D St. Paul, MN 55117 Notices to the City shall be in writing and shall be either hand delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by registered mail in care of the City Administrator at the following address: City Administrator, Rosemount City Hall, 2875 145`h Street West, Rosemount, Minnesota 55068. 9 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands the day and year first above written. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT BY: William H. Droste, Mayor BY: Linda Jentink, City Clerk BY: _ Its BY: Its STATE OF MINNESOTA SS COUNTY OF DAKOTA The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2003, by William H. Droste, Mayor, and Linda Jentink, City Clerk, of the City of Rosemount, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA SS COUNTY OF DAKOTA The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2003 by , and a , on behalf of the said Drafted By: City of Rosemount 2875145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 Notary Public 10 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 EXHIBIT A The following clarifies the various portions of the letter of credit for Developer Improvements that are outlined in the Subdivision Agreement: Grading & Erosion Control — A restoration and erosion control bond to ensure revegetation and erosion control ($3,500/acre). Note: The minimum bond amount is set at $25,000. Pond Restoration/Erosion Removal — A security to allow for cleaning of sedimentation ponds prior to City acceptance and removing any installed erosion control measures such as silt fence and woodfiber blanket following development of 75 percent of adjoining lots (estimated Lump Sum). Survey Monumentation — An amount equal to 110% of the cost to monument all lots within the development. Landscaping — An amount equal to 110% of the cost to complete the minimum required landscaping. If additional landscaping is planned, a bond for that cost is not required. Retaining Walls — An amount equal to 110% of the cost to complete the retaining wall construction. Street Lighting — An amount equal to 110% of the cost to complete the minimum required lighting. If additional lighting is planned, a bond for that cost is not required ($4,000 per light has been used to calculate this cost). Buffer Monumentation — An amount equal to 110% of the cost to manufacture and install the necessary buffer monumentation signs around all ponds and wetlands ($50 per sign has been used to calculate this cost). Park Equipment — An amount equal to 110% of the cost of improvements agreed upon to be completed in the park areas. Wetland Monitoring — An amount equal to 110% of the cost to hire a wetland specialist to monitor the mitigation areas for 5 years to ensure their proper creation. This wetland specialist will be hired by the City. Wetland Restoration/Mitigation — An amount equal to 110% of the cost to develop new wetlands should the mitigation not be effective ($20,000 per acre of mitigation). 11 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 ATTACHMENT ONE (Legal Description) 12 Biscayne Pointe 5th 03/2503 SITE MAP NOTE: Dimensions rounded to nearest foot. Copyright 2003, Dakota County - This drawing is neither o legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, and state offices and other sources, affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. Dakota County is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepancies are found, please contact Dakota County Survey and Land Information Department. Map Date: February 7, 2003 Parcels Updated: 1/30/2003 Aerial Photography: i i 657.04 S60.50'40N1 A r---------� s m -----I I ZZ c EHH- I I I� Ip I I ®§ a I 657.04 S60.50'40N1 Ds06'53.36' R+015.00 142.02 o,o.a, rvarovrnc I cc'Js1EMARA TRAL I � �._._-------------. A r---------� r ------I -----I I - I I I� Ip I I N I II II II II g L -------I L ------J L ------J L ------J L -----1i `-��-------� 136TH STREET a r -- ex ---T� � _ I ,-r--- nano__, I J L 'arU U �sew.g'src_ _ _,3+4asia'�gbn _ J L _ _,ss.gpsgo�•.ssrc_ _ L —>� ffi Soo r------ 1 I I I r--------- i------ I I I I I_v I I i I I U v asr3gLt_ J Eu•bb I I A I 44 L--Fq Ll — L— —t}'.W -1--.j s r -------i no I I 1 I� A L_Im'ffi wvu%j o,3x.m sb•�e'srt ° e L---iss.oy--_J n �>ao) sem•+,3'6t[— J I I I N 1 Io t I A ' Z J 'A s,\ q� L_ .o --as— o •b �� , e=o y+;Y` x s: �o —_ss.00 mao xiao i fi A o �e o� x� W KIK ax / / v.• 11 I I I a°'°Oysy� -+ '° I L —,-.aa u'3tc, tiA I I I � I I Y I I w. ,o '---------- n e d L — — — — — J L-----�-� I `-L •-----' Ds06'53.36' R+015.00 142.02 o,o.a, rvarovrnc I cc'Js1EMARA TRAL I � �._._-------------. A m m 0 n m m --I U) -1 1 L- -j L 657.94 S89 -50-4M Iwo of 2gfl —_—_—_—_—_-----9—_ 136TH STREET — - — - — - — - — - — -- tz 1-4 D1-4 ;uz g M-3 01 cn 0 0 8 oA >� <1 m z o - — - — - — - — - — - — - — 9 --- CIL 95.00 z 142.02 515.27 N89 -50-49-E CO"245:11-AARA TRAM. I __---------------- -------- -------000 n7z:P 000 z z -0 L- -j February 18, 2003 Chris Ockwig Probe Engineering 1000 E. 146th Street Burnsville, MN 55337 RE: Plat Review Biscayne Pointe Fifth Addition City Project #367 Mr. Ockwig: After reviewing the plat for Biscayne Pointe Fifth Addition, the City has the following comments: 1. A 20 -foot drainage and utility easement is needed between Lots 1-2, Block 5. 2. Label easement widths between Lots 1-3 and 7-9, Block 4. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 651-322-2724. Sincerely, Anthony A. Aderhold Project Engineer Cc: Andrew J. Brotzler, City Engineer Rick Pearson, City Planner Steve Bona, Heritage Development Planning Commission Meeting Minutes February 11, 2003 Page 6 Tracy Dougherty, asked is she would be able to speak at the meeting on February 25, 2003. airperson Weisensel stated she could speak tonight or at the next eting. Mr. Pearson stated the plicant had hoped that all public comment would be defe for two weeks so they could have opportunity to respond. Ms. Dougherty asked how ch he wanted to fill and if the study th had prepared a few years ago would apply to at Mr. Kulhanek is asking for now.. Mr. Pearso stated he believed Mr. Kulhanek was as g to fill about 1500 square feet and that the study does ave merit and gives the Planning mmission and City Council more information on th roperty. That study was v y instrumental in the City Council modifying the variance granted. Th lanning Commi/Sgioto, acting as theBoard of Appeals and Adjustments, has not yet made a decisi and are hopeceive additional information from the applicant. MOTION by Anderson toconte the public hearing until February 25, 2003. Second by Messner. Ayes: Messner, And so Napper, Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel a ed that the ne acket include a copy of the study prepared, a copy of the meeting minutes w en the variance was anted and any information the City took into consideration to ov urn that variance. Mr. Pe son stated that most of this information is being reviewed by Ch Donnelly, our Wetland Resourc Engineer. Mr. Pearson also stated he is expecting Mr onnelly to put together a package. Chairp on adjourned the Board of Appeals and Adjustmentmeeting and Reconvened the Plagming Commission Meeting. Old $ysiness: None. New Busine Bloomfield 5th Final Plat Update Mr. Pearson info the Commission that the final or Bloomfield 5th Addition extended the lot lines on the east all the way across t roperty over a significant ponding basin. Refined design work for the po 'ng basi s been completed and includes a planting plan. The final plat is being modified on commendation of the City Engineer so that the opposite sides of the ponds from the�byarsof the is would not have to be maintained by the owners of those lots. modification will create a tlot for the perimeter of that pond. Mr. Pearson wanted nform the Commission for when the my come in and look different than the ap r final plat. New Business: Biscayne Pointe 5th Final Plat This final plat is the last step in the planning process to create single family lots for sale. The plat is in conformance to the R-1, Low Density Residential standards and preliminary plat. This development is east of Biscayne Avenue and north of the Connemara Trail alignment. There are 31 lots on approximately 12 acres. Steve Bona of Heritage Development is present to answer any questions. Staff is recommending approval subject to the four conditions. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Biscayne Pointe 5t1'. Addition subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and private improvements. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes February 11, 2003 Page 7 2. Incorporation of recommendations by the City Engineer regarding drainage, grading, easements, streets and utilities. 3. Payment of all platting and development fees as established in the current fee resolution. 4. Conformance with all of the conditions of the preliminary plat. Second by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Mr. Pearson stated this will go to City Council when the development agreement is prepared and signed by the developer. That might not occur until March 20, 2003 but Staff will be in contact with Mr. Bona. Dii- is Report: City Planner Pearson me . e the correspondence from the Met Council that was pa out before the meetin ey are going to be reviewing the 2030 blueprint and he expects there wi evera etings scheduled in the future. There being no er business to e before this Commission, upon Motion by Weisensel, and upo animous decision, the meetin as adjourned at 7:43 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary `------------- -Mu /* L4 co __j L — — — — — R I Dove Dom E-4 I IN --J" L ----JJ_ L------- r1l2.OF.W MIT, 01 ZI 6 o 1 I Q 8 z 0 ---J L ---------J i z r 7�� -1 7 PL4 9 r1xuc.R -min- 112 1-4 L-- WiF, w7mr - — H19C L- — - — 9 GWJ - L ---------J AA.W9.69S "'M 4 p all R — — — — — — — --- `------------- -Mu /* L4 co __j L — — — — — R I Dove Dom E-4 I IN --J" L ----JJ_ L------- r1l2.OF.W MIT, 01 ZI 6 o 1 I Q 8 z 0 ---J L ---------J i z r 7�� -1 7 PL4 9 r1xuc.R -min- 112 1-4 L-- WiF, w7mr - — H19C L- — - — 9 GWJ - L ---------J AA.W9.69S "'M 4 p all R N CA IIT Ir VI fll5CAYNE A I i f I 90.50 O I I O 135.01 - I�-10 L DRAINAGE AND UnUTY EASEMENT--= I I I L_13248 S89'4S'STE- J 30 li 30- 0 1 p I I I N I I I I � ----- I----- r------, ao 8 I I I r 4 R I I N >q0z99 sp� 9 I i f I 90.50 u I I O 135.01 - I�-10 L DRAINAGE AND UnUTY EASEMENT--= I I I L_13248 S89'4S'STE- J 30 li 30- 0 1 p I I I N I I I I � ----- I----- r------, ao I I-lo I 4 sp� 9 I i f I 90.50 u I I O 135.01 - I�-10 L DRAINAGE AND UnUTY EASEMENT--= I I I L_13248 S89'4S'STE- J 30 li 30- 0 1 p I I I N I I I I � ----- I----- r------, ao I I-lo I 4 C 3 I I N � I I I I irziii I rroQ9� W� gl IP I 657.94 S89°50'49"W 91.43 90.50 90.50 90.50 100.00 30.00 (`1 30.00 135.01 - o 7.62 Ir�•-----, DRAINAGE AND UnUTY EASEMENT--= 'r - `` I I L_13248 S89'4S'STE- J 30 li 30- 0 I I I I I I I N I I I ----- ----- ----- II r------, ao I I II I m I V 11 cyl 1 P N p1 I iii irziii / � / is- - - - - - L --135.00 589'4S'S7'E - J L - -135.00 S88'45'37'E - J I I I' N I I w I I A I I 0� I ImZI Im I I I MS I Im I I� cti.4' I",to �o/ N L -------J I I I I I I I I I "� �r--y- I$ w 18 -�--�obJ'•°o I L------1 L ------J L ------J L ------J L---- = -------- - 90.50 90.50 10. 136THSTREET 330.00 ----- 857.6'37W--------�--- 35 r ----a T\ I L- 35 �'po. 3p�iA4i, n �. N ,32.07 S8945'S7'E 7.62 Ir�•-----, N I � X11 I I L_13248 S89'4S'STE- J O 1 I I I I I I I N I I I oti`6 III 35 LJ324533 S89''57"E-J 0 II r------, ao 0 i+ Z g I m I 02 s w I I N I 813220 S89'45'57"E 8 / � / is- - - - - - 90.50 90.50 10. 136THSTREET 330.00 ----- 857.6'37W--------�--- I 35 I n �. N ,32.07 S8945'S7'E 7.62 Ir�•-----, W � X11 O 1 Q I I oti`6 III �I� � I 90.50 90.50 10. 136THSTREET 330.00 ----- 857.6'37W--------�--- •98 CIO 0/ �4 B+ ,10 55.00 110.00 110.00 I 40 �. ,o,------,----- r -----r\ � X11 / I I oti`6 III �I� � w w.'a• V r------, ao 0 i+ I I I I Im � a� I ' 8w ( I L -135.00 S89'4WLrEJ I / � / IN 118 L --135.00 589'4S'S7'E - J L - -135.00 S88'45'37'E - J r- --- ---- -, r------.----� I I I ImZI Im : .y/ ep B''W 11 S89'45'S7"E '_ I L - -35.00 589'45'57"E - J L - - _ J r------ --- f----- I",to �o/ N L -------J I I Im I I� 1 ,I I -4 I$ w 18 w L - - se9'45_57'E - - _ '0 I 135.00 YE I - �_---- �j 135.00 ",---J = 95_00 moo 95.00 110 lor I I I I -A- I O I I I I I I v m cl m o°a - ---,°O Po, �tl wl at I I I I \ --- J10'GL p0' -----J IOL ----� 000.00 I °O 10g _ _ _ _250_00 589'45_57'E_ _ _ --- JII •98 CIO 0/ �4 B+ ,10 55.00 80.00 70.00 40 �. ,o,------,----- r -----r\ � X11 / I I oti`6 III �I� � w w.'a• V r------, ao 0 i+ I I I I Im � a� I ' 8w ( I L -135.00 S89'4WLrEJ I / � / IN 118 II I / I Io I to I " : .y/ ep B''W 11 go I",to �o/ N L -------J I I 1 - - L-- -� L ----J "fir N 22.89 12238 80.00 70.17 p=08°53'36" R=915.00 142.02 515.27 N89°50'49"E CC;?v'V�:?�9ARA TRAL � I I I I I I I C, �I w I 30 II 30 I 1! 110_00, 40 j --- 40 I I I I �I I L -135.00 s59'45'S7•EJ I I I I L -135.00 S89'45'S7'Ej V r------, ao 0 i+ I I I I Z Q mo I w I �I I ' 8w ( I L -135.00 S89'4WLrEJ m I NI II I I � L , ------J 9 135.00 S89'45'57•E A L, -135.00 S89'0577EJ 40 I I I I I I 133.00 S89'45'S72EJ I tr I �I I eI -4 I Iq R I e _�_ ?J•00 40 a w Z LTJ U y 1-4 O z m L - - e