Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1969/08/20 VILLAGE OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Minutes of the joint meeting of the Village Council and the Planning Commission, Village of Apple Valley, Dakota County, Minnesota on August 20, 1969. PRESENT Mayor Largen, Councilmen Hollenbeck and Pearsall, Administrator Curtis E. Olsen and Deputy Clerk, members of the Planning Commission Ulrich, Dean, Nelson Carroll and Bouck ABSENT: Councilmen Garrison and Branning The meeting was called to order by the Mayor at 7•~0 P. M. Boundary Considerations Lakeville - nonincorporation Rosemount - incorporation Erwin Ulrich was asked to give the Council a little background on the previous proceedings of incorporation held in Rosemount. He said there were two previous petitions One to incorporate Lebanon as Lebanon, and then that was withdrawn and a new petition was submitted to incorporate all of Lebanon and Rosemount into one. Mr. Ulrich was in favor of the last petition and he testified in favor of that, using some of the following points. 1. Good highway access 2. Three rail lines 3. River access Common school district 5. Large area (like those of constellation cities, which Metro Council favors) Herb Bouck mentioned the new airport. The Mayor made an overlay of the proposed expansion of Farmington andchscussed it with the Council and Commission members. They discussed the proposed boundaries of each area. The Mayor said we have two items to discuss• 1. Lakeville - our southern boundary - what are our interest in the Farmington- Lakeville doings? 2. Rosemount - our eastern boundary - what are our interests in the Rosemount-Rosemount Township incorporation? Jim Nelson said Valley Park was not built to our standards, but he does think it fits better into our area than into Lakeville. Mr. Bonestroo suggested that we not use sewer, water or the treatment plant in any argument for obtaining this area. Bob Hollenbeck thought we might need the area for industrial or commercial development. Erwin Ulrich said industry probably would not move down there. Mention was made of a discussion made with members of the Lakeville Council. They agreed then that Lakeville was split into three parts; the Apple Valley section, the Farmington section, and the Lakeville section. VILLAGE OF APPLE VALLEY Minutes of the meeting of August 20, 1969 Page 2 Mr. Ulrich asked for a poll of the members of the Planning Commission who had not yet had their chance to speak. Bill Carroll thought we should try to obtain this area. Herb Bouck thought we should work with Lakeville in annexing this portion of Lakeville. MOTION• of Ulrich, seconded by Nelson, that the Council include the recommendations of the Planning Commission in a petition to annex Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 12, 11, 10, 9 and the E2 of Sections 5 and 8 all in Lakeville Township. Those in favor Nelson, Carroll, Bouck, Ulrich and Dean. Opposed - none. Motion carried. Mr. Ulrich suggested that we propose a joint community for Rosemount and Apple Valley, but ask that any decision be delayed until after the airport site has been selected. Jim Nelson said that Rosemount is the center of activity for the community, especially for the young people. Phil Pearsall agreed. MOTION• by Nelson, seconded by Bouck, to recommend that any action on the Rosemount- Rosemount Township incorporation be tabled until action is passed on the airport site. Secondly, the Village of Apple Valley wishes to incorporated Rosemount, Rosemount Town- ship and the Village of Apple Valley into one as it has one community of interest. Such items of mutual interest are those on a list of Mr. Ulrich and are attached to these minutes. Tn favor Nelson, Carroll, Bouck, Ulrich and Dean. Opposed - none. Motion carried. Valley Commercial Park John Voss presented the final plat and commented on a development agreement. He noted that he thought all street assessments should be made and paid by 1980 regardless of the time each stage of construction is started. He also recommended that the development contract require completion of the urban section by October of 1972. The bonding should also be outlined in the development contract. Storm drainage cannot be put in until the adjacent area is developed. There were some problems still unsolved regarding frontage roads, access to lots and easements ~r underground services. MOTION; by Nelson, seconded by Carroll to table the final plat on Valley Commercial Fark until such time as the developer resolves these problems and submits a new plat. Those in favor Nelson, Carroll, Bouck, Ulrich and Dean. Opposed-none. Motion carried. The Village Council and the Planning Commission then separated and went on with their own separate meetir~s. The meeting of the Village Council began at 9:ID0 P. M. Receipt of bids for trunk sewer, Garden View Drive and laterals, Palomino Hills Lakeshore Addition. The engineer recommends we awar~dthe bid to the low bidder, Peter Lametti Construction Company in the amount of $158,379.00 and that we delete the alternate bid of $6,700.00 as he has talked to Lametti anal it is possible for the work to be done this fall anyway. They would at least be able to have temporary service. Mr. Olsen commented on the contingencies involved in this construction. This construction is presently unfinanced and contingent on a future bond issue, Construction can proceed with funds being advanced by Palomino Development and we can draw unused funds temporarily VILLAGE OF APPLE VALLEY Minutes of the meeting of August 20, 1968 Page 3 from other projects. Funds will be needed for Palomino Hills 4th, Addition also. Wally Dornfeld of Juran & Moody was then introduced. Mr. Dornfeld advised the Council that his firm would purchase bonds issued to finance this project shou~id no other bids be received. There were six conditions mentioned that needed. firming up 1. Payment of the $60,000.00 2. Title to park to be cleared and delivered. 3. Development Contract for Palomino Hills 4th Addition. 4. Grading and finishing of streets in 3rd Addition which have been postponed from year-to-year. 5. Palomino Development wants a commitment from the Village on the extension of the trunk line on Garden View Drive into the Country Club Addition. 6. Surfacing of Reflection Road per Village standards. Attorney Crawford representing Palomino Development Corporation said he had talked with our attorney today and they suggested issuing a letter of credit to us, which we could fraw from fQr our disbursements. There was some discussion on the differences in opinion as to when construction actually began. The Mayor went to the minutes and read the motion regarding that made on June 11, 1969. • There was also discussion on the question of a time limit for hooking up to Village water and the ordering of the plans and specs for the 4th Addition of Palomino Hills. MOTION• of Pearsall, seconded by Hollenbeck, that we award the contract to Peter Lametti Construction Company in the amount of $158,279.00, the base bid. Those in favor Hollenbeck, Pearsall and Largen. Opposed - none. Motion carried. MOTION• of Pearsall, seconded by Hollenbeck, that the contract not be executed until a check for $60,000 be received from Palomino Development Corporation and that at such time as Palomino. Development Petitions for it the Country Club Addition trunk will be extended. Those in favor Pearsall, Largen and. Hollenbeck. Opposed - none. Motion carried. Motion of Pearsall, seconded by Ho].~enbeck, to set a public hearing on curbs and gutters on Reflection Road and Rimrock Drive for Wednesday, September 24, 1969. Thosein favor Largen, Hollenbeck and Pearsall. Opposed - none. Motion carried. MOTION: of Largen, seconded by Hollenbeck, that the motion of Garrison on August 13, 1969 for the plans and specs for sanitary sewer and water fv~ Palomino-Hills 4th Addition be amended to add storm sewer. Those in favor Largen, Hollenbeck and Pearsall. Opposed - none. Motion carried. There was some discussion on having another bond issue. MOTION. of Hollenbeck, seconded by Pearsall, that the staff work up of a new band issue with our engineer, financial consultant, attorney and administrator participating. Those in favor Hollenbeck, Pearsall and Largen. Opposed - none. Motion carried. VII,LA.GE OF APPLE VALLEY Minutes of the meeting of August 20, 1969 Page Mayor Largen advised that Valley Community Church has bought property dust west of the Village and they have asked for water and sewer service from us. It is located in Burnsville. The Mayor submitted a proposed resolution stating Burnsville has waived its rights to levy special assessments and user charges aga~Dnst the property and that the Village of Apple Valley accepts this 5 acre tract for services and that it be contingent upon certain connection charges and user charges. MOTION: of Pearsall, seconded by Hollenbeck that we adopt said resolution. Those in favor Pearsall, Hollenbeck and Largen. Opposed - none. Motion carried. See resolution attached, There was some discussion of the new access road in front of Glenn's Market. The county was requested to barricade it, but now refuses to do it. The Council directed that the Village barricade said access until such time as proper traffic controls can be developed and signs installed. MOTION: of Hollenbeck, seconded by Pearsall that the Village attorney represent Apple Valley at the Rosemount incorporation hearing, asking the M.M.C. to table the Rosemount- Rosemount Township incorporation for the fallowing reasons: 1. The pending airport decision 2. We would like the M.M.C. to consider Apple Valley, Rosemount, and Rosemount Township being incorporated into one community under a common name. 3. That they take a look at the overall concept of relocation of boundary limits. Those in favor Hollenbeck, Pearsall and Largen. Opposed - none. Motion carried. MOTION: of Largen, seconded by Pearsall, to instruct the Village Attorney to represent the Village of Apple Valley in the Farmington-Lakeville discussion, expressing our interest in Sections 1, 2, 3, 12, 11, 10,.9 and the E2 of Sections 5 and 8 of Lakeville Township before the M.M.C. Those in favor Largen, Pearsall and Hollenbeck. Opposed - none. Motion carried. Hollenbeck presented a format for the Village borchure. He would like to have the Village Planner work on it with the industrial committee. The Mayor said they should postpone it until t}a,e rest of the members of the Council could look it over with, them. MOTION: of Hollenbeck, seconded by Pearsall that we authorize the payroll expenditure at the end of the month in case there is no other meeting. Those in favor Hollenbeck, Pearsall and Largen. Opposed - none. Motion enrried. George Hecker and Harry l~rers of the Urban Affairs Committee were present. They stated they had met only once this summer. The chairman, Don Adamson, has had to resign: temporarily because of his fob. Mr. Hecker would like more members and a wetting to get organized again. Bob Hollenbeck said he would work on getting new members and he would meet with them on Wednesday, August 30 at the Village Hall. The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 P. M. Curti s E. Olsen, Administrator - ~ t..eir k- R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, the American Baptist Churches of Minnesota is the owner of the following described land situated in The Village of Burnsville, Dakota County, Minnesota: The South 5 acres of that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SE 1/4 of SW 1/4) of Section Twenty-nine (29), Township One Hundred Fifteen (115), Range Twenty (20), lying North of County Road No. 42 and East of a line parallel with and 1,980 feet East of the West line of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of said Section 29, the land above described containing 5 acres according to the Government Survey thereof, and WHEREAS, said owner has represented to The Village of Apple Valley that The Village of Burnsville has waived its rights to levy special assessments and/or user charges against said 5 acre tract for municipal water and sanitary sewer service, said waiver to continue perpetually, and WHEREAS, said 5 acre tract abutts on the West line of The Village of Apple Valley, is presently accessible to the municipal water and sanitary sewer systems of The Village of Apple Valley, and WHEREAS, it is feasible, from an engineering s•t~ndpoint, because of the elevation of said 5 acre tract with reference to said water and sanitary sewer systems, to serve said tract with water and sanitary sewer service from the Apple Valley system. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. That The Village of Apple Valley hereby accepts the 5 acre tract hereinbefore described for service by said Village with municipal water and sanitary sewer. 2. That the initiation of service to said tract is contingent upon the payment by the owner to the Village of Apple Valley of the following connection charges, as reimbursement to the Village by the owner for the owners fair share of the cost of the systems: a. Municipal water $2,250.00 b. Sanitary Sewer system 1,500.00 Total $3,750.00 3. In addition to the above charges, the continuation of service is contingent upon the owner, or its successors in interest, paying user charges as may be established and changed from time to time by the Vil-page of Apple'VJa1Iey, said user charges to be based on similar charges made by the Village to other customers in the system. C E R T I F I C A T E I, the undersigned, being the duly appointed and acting Clerk of the Village of Apple Valley, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a Resolution duly passed and adopted by the Village Council of said Village at a meeting duly held on the 20th day of August, 1969. DATED at Apple Valley, Minnesota this 21st day of August, 1969. - Curtis E. Olsen - Village Clerk ~ EXTRACT QF MINUTES OF M(RETING QF VILLAGE COUNCIL pF THE VILLAGE OF ,APPLE VALLEY DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA iiELA AUGUST ~OTN, 1968 A special meeting of the Village Council of the Village of Apple Valley, pakota County, Minnesota, was duly held at the Municipal Building in said Village on August lath, 1869 at 7.30 o'c]ock P.M, The following members were present; Largen, Pearsall, Branning, Hol1enbeck and Garrison and the following were absent; None Member Pearsall introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for sanitary sewer extensions in Palomino Lake Shore Addition, bids were received, opened and tabulated accord- ing to law and the fol]owng bids were received complying with the advertisement; Peter Lametti Construction Company $158,379.00 B_arbaross.a ~ Sons, Fnc 158,893.00 Hoffman Brothers, Inc. 165,315.81 Erwin Montgomery Construction Company 167,57$.40 Sandstrom ~ Iiafner, Cnc. ]78,153.00 Erickson ~ Erickson, Inc 182;403..00 Nodland Association, Inc. 206,500.00 ANA WHEREAS, it appears- that Peter Lametti Construction Company of 615 Arake Avenue, St. Paul, M%nnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder. • NQW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF APPLE VALLEY, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA: 1, That the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter Into a contract with Peter Lametti Construction Company of St. Paul, Minnesota, in the name of Apple. Val'l:ey for the comp1et~on of sanitary sewer extensions from Apple Valley Additions to Palomino Lake Shore Addition, according to the plans and specifications, therefore approved by the Village Council and on file in the off%ce of the Village Clerk. 2. The Village Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to ail bidders the deposits. made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder s:itall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted by the Vi:tlage Council this 20th day of August, lg6g. Fred J amen -Mayor ATTEST. w~~~ ~ Curtis E. Olsen C1ej- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member Ho1lertbeck and on vote being taken thereon, the followin0 members voted in favor thereof: Largen, Pearsall, t3ranni.ng and Garrison and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said resolution was declared passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor and his signature attested by the Village Clerk. STATE OF MINNESOTA . ss. COUNTY 0~ DAKOTA ) the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Village Clerk of the Village of Apple Valley heret~y attest and certify that. (ri) as such officer, t have the legal custody of the original records from which the attached and foregoing extract was transcribed; (2) [have carefully compared said extract with said original records; • c3) [ find said extract to 6e a true, correct and complete transcript from the original- minutes of the meeting of the Village Council of said Village held on the date indicated in said extract, insofar as it relates to public improvements of the V-illage; (l+) sa%d meeting was duly held, pursuant to call and notice thereof as required by law. WITNESS MY NAND officially as such Village Clerk this 20th day of August, 1969. ~t s E Olsen - Clerk r RECOMN~IDATIOTd BY VILLAGE QF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMNIIS.SION FOR CONSOLIDATION WITH CERTAIN SECTIONS OF LAKEVILLE AND THE 3l~WNSHTP AND VIKL,AGE OF ROSEMOUNI' 1~'btian by Neison+ seconded by Bouck to recomnnend to the Village Council that the Vil- lage of Apple Valley, Miruiesvta, petition the Minnesota Municipal Commission to con- sol~:date and ineor~porate the Village Bf Apple Valley with; (a) approximately the northern most tyro miles of Lakeville Township (Section I,2,3,b, E-112 of 5, 12, 11, 10, 9, ar~ci E-1/2 of 8.) along a boundary consistent with that proposed by the Vil- lage of Farmington in it's eor~olidation petition and (b) Rosemount Town.Shi {c} the Village of Rosemount, ' P, and In recommending the above eonsolidat~.on the P~.anning Commission noted certain primary advantages offered by this area; namely, (1} Hi w Access: The area would have a very good highway access served by: fate I~ighways 3, 52, 5~. Interstate 35E. Historic Dodd Road, Cedar Ave., and Pilot Knob Road. State Aid County Roads East and West, 3$ and 42. {2) Rail Service: The area would be served by 3 rail lines. {3) River Access: The area would have access to the Mississippi River. (4) Scher A common school district would serve virtually all of the area. (5} Tax Base: The area, which includes the industrial area in Pins Bend, has a potent ally strong tax base which would enable the development of high quality public services such as fireA.and police protection for the residential, industrial and eortamercial areas as well aas for the anticipated development of the University Research area, (6) Post Office: The area, is currently served by the Post Office located in the ~1'~"a~e of"~osemount , (7) Drama e: The area is primarily in one watershed area which is drained by the Vei~m~on River, Access to Care Cities: The area has good access to either I+fiinneapolis or St. aul, alth somewhgt better to the Witter, -2- (9) Constellation Cit : The area has been designated in the Metropolitan Area Land Use an .C.) for a t?Onstellat~.on City (Cedar Ave. and Highway 42) and planning with land use c©ntrola for this urge area would aid in achieving that goal. (10) Varie~Housi The area hay a ark" a • or eve areas so that a vax~3.ety,bbdth h of rollir~ hill country could be n~commradated. ~ and low value housing, (11) Industrial Devela rent: ~e area hoe gnod highway access, rail services and flat 1""an+c~~suit~able for 1 arge industrial assembly plants or similar uses. ~ (l2) Labor Market; The potential far resident~l. development described above s at ract a wide variety of laborers to staff expected commercial and industrial development. (13) S_~ S~ A community of interest would be served when commonly p ng and providing sanitary sewer to the area. (14) Historic Ties: The historic ties of the entire area are to the Village of mound. Other reasons cited far the consolidation and incorporation of this area were (1) Burnsville to the West is already incorporated and has no desire to~annex Apple Valley or Palomino developments. (2) Eagan Township to the North appears to have the necessary balance to in- corporate as now constituted. (3) Inver Grove Heights to the Northeast is also already incorporated with a fairly large area. f4) Access to the river is needed for balanced development within the existing concepts of municipal growth. Without Pine Bend Area, the Village of Apple Valley and the Village of Rosemount would became landlocked. (5) There are many opportunities far three other neighboMng corrr,~a,~nities to ultimately establish their awn well-balanced comrn~nities. i.e. T,akeville, Farml.ngton and Hastings adjacent to our proposed boundaries. cc: Erwin Ulrich The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Largen Bev Dean Curtis Olson Ed. McMenomy August 20, 1969