The URL can be used to link to this page

04/17/2012 - City Council RegularAGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING APRIL 17, 2012 6:30 P.M. I. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE p,-5 II. ADOPT AGENDA III. RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS IV. CONSENT AGENDA (Consent items are acted on with one motion unless a request is made for an item to be pulled for discussion) P.4 A. APPROVE MINUTES P-%5 B. PERSONNEL ITEMS �. is C. APPROVE Check Registers P.19 D. DIRECT preparation of an ordinance amendment to City Code Chapter 4 relative to recreational fires 1 :RD E. APPROVE Plans & Specs for Contract 11 -09 (Denmark & Yankee Doodle Rd — Traffic Operations) and Authorize Ad for Bids F. APPROVE Easement Agreement for Project 905R (Long Acres /Lebanon Hills Regional Park — Storm Sewer Improvements) f'.2-4 G. AWARD Contract 12 -02, City -Wide Street Overlay Improvements P. 2(o H. APPROVE Clean Water Partnership Grant Agreement with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (Neighborhood Lakes Management Plan) & Authorize Consultant to prepare plans 17.lt I. APPROVE MnWARN Mutual Aid Agreement (Mn Water/Wastewater Agency Response Network) p .y1} J. Approve Change Order No. 5 for Contract 09 -18 (Duckwood Drive Overpass — Bridge Improvement) F.45 K. APPROVE Dakota County Service Agreement for One -Stop Permit System (Right -of -Way Permitting) R 4b L. AWARD bid for Contract 12 -08 Conduit/Fiber Installation and direct the City Attorney's Office to prepare the necessary contract P• 5Z. M. APPROVE Final Subdivision and Final Planned Development for Stonehaven 3rd Addition P. 56 N. APPROVE additional house plans for Stonehaven development P•75 O. APPROVE Resolution to accept donations from Genisys Credit Union and Minnesota Pork. p. 77P. APPROVE Resolution to accept a grant from the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council in the amount of $5,000 for a Community Arts Grant and authorize the necessary budget adjustment 'P.^?9 Q. APPROVE Resolution to proclaim May 20 as Arbor Day and the month of May 2012 as Arbor Month in the City of Eagan 17. t. APPROVE Resolution to temporarily extend the licensed premise of Cuz, Inc. DBA LaFonda de los Lobos located at 3365 Sibley Memorial Highway S(Cs. APPROVE Exempt Permit for Pinewood Community School Parent Teacher Organization to hold a raffle May 18, 2012 P g ea/. APPOINTMENT OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MEMBERS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS P.c17, A. Oakwood Heights Townhomes - Drainage & Utility Easement Vacation - p. 9 B. VARIANCE - Gregory Stewart / Homeowner - A Variance of 25 feet to the required 30 foot setback for a deck located at 901 Oakwood Heights Circle. 1 I 1 C. VARIANCE — Neil Hetherington / Homeowner - A Variance of 8.7 feet to the required 30 foot setback for a deck located at 903 Oakwood Heights Circle. VII. OLD BUSINESS )25 A. REZONING, PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, and a FINAL PLAT — Eagan Car Club / Kurt Manley- A Rezoning for approximately 6 acres from NB, Neighborhood Business to PD, Planned Development and A Preliminary Planned Development of approximately 6 acres to allow 76 vehicle storage units and a club house and a Final Plat of approximately 6 acres to create one lot located just North of Valley Black Top Sewer service claim, 4321 Stirrup St. — Review the recommendation of the Public Works Committee VIII. NEW BUSINESS IX. LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE X. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (There are no EDA items to be considered at this time) XI. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA 17.173 B . A. City Attorney B. City Council Comments C. City Administrator D. Director of Public Works E. Director of Community Development XII. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on the agenda) XIII. CLOSED SESSION XIV. ADJOURNMENT z 41 City of Eaaali MeMo TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: APRIL 13, 2012 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR APRIL 17, 2012 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADOPT AGENDA After approval is given to the April 17, 2012 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration. 3 Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA The following items referred to as consent items require one (1) motion by the City Council. If the City Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further detail, those items should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Old or New Business unless the discussion required is brief. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: A. APPROVE MINUTES To approve the minutes of the April 3, 2012 Regular City Council meeting and the minutes of the March 13, 2012 and April 10, 2012 Special City Council meeting as presented or modified. ATTACHMENTS: • Minutes of A ril 3, 2012 Regular City Council meeting are enclosed on page 5 through . • Minutes of March 13, 2012 Special City Council meeting are enclosed on page through . • Minutes of April 10, 2012 Special City Council meeting are enclosed on page I LI . MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Eagan, Minnesota April 3, 2012 A Listening Session was held at 6:00 p.m. prior to the regular City Council meeting. Present were Mayor Maguire and Councilmembers Bakken, Fields, Hansen and Tilley. There were no members of the public in attendance. A regular meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on Tuesday, April 3, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Maguire, Councilmembers Bakken, Fields, Hansen and Tilley. Also present were City Administrator Hedges, Assistant City Administrator Miller, Community Development Director Hohenstein, City Planner Ridley, Communications Director Garrison, Public Works Director Colbert, Police Chief McDonald, Fire Chief Scott, Director of Parks and Recreation Seydell Johnson, City Engineer Matthys, Superintendent of Utilities Eaton, and Assistant City Engineer Gorder. AGENDA Administrator Hedges noted the applicant for Eagan Car Club (New Business item B) has requested the item be continued to the April 17, 2012 City Council meeting. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Bakken seconded a motion to continue New Business Item. B to the April 17, 2012 City Council meeting. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Maguire thanked the 2012 Market Fest sponsors, and noted a special thanks to Think Bank for their sponsorship of the 2012 MarketFest entertainment. Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to approve the Consent Agenda, with item K pulled for separate consideration. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 A. It was recommended to approve the minutes of the March 20, 2012 Regular City Council meeting as presented B. PERSONNEL ITEMS 1. It was recommended to accept the resignation of Susan Sheridan, Accountant I 2. It was recommended to accept the resignation of Sergeant Linda Myhre effective May 17, 2012 and authorize her replacement 3. It was recommended to appoint Police Officer Danielle Anselment to Sergeant effective May 20, 2012 4. It was recommended to accept the resignation from Detective Lori Tripp effective May 31, 2012 and authorize her replacement 5. It was recommended to authorize the promotion of IT Specialist Mark Holm to Systems/Network Administrator and authorize the replacement of one full -time IT Specialist position 6. It was recommended to approve the hiring of seasonal employees in Parks & Recreation C. It was recommended to approve check registers dated March 15, 2012 and March 22, 2012 as presented D. It was recommended to approve a resolution to accept donations to the Fire Department from Alerus Financial and Florence Gilloth E. It was recommended to approve a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of Taxable General Obligation Housing Improvement Bonds, Series 2012A, and General Obligation Equipment Certificates of Indebtedness, Series 2012B F. It was recommended to set the interest rate for special assessments levied in 2012 at 3.5% G. It was recommended to approve the new lease agreement between the City of Eagan and St. Croix Harley- Davidson for two 2012 Harley- Davidson motorcycles City Council Meeting Minutes April 3, 2012 2 page H. It was recommended to approve a resolution to accept a Community Forest Bonding Grant from the Department of Natural Resources in the amount of $20,974.22 and authorize the necessary budget adjustment I. It was recommended to approve a resolution to accept donations from Think Mutual Bank and Health Partners for 2012 Parks and Recreation Programs J. It was recommended to approve an Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement with Ballantrae Associates for Lot 1, Block 1, Ballantrae 2 Addition, and authorize Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents L. It was recommended to set a public hearing date for May 1, 2012 to consider the final assessment of the delinquent utility bills and certify them to Dakota County for collection with property taxes M. It was recommended to set a public hearing for May 1, 2012 to consider the final assessment of the delinquent false alarm bills and certify them to Dakota County for collection with property taxes N. It was recommended to set a public hearing date for May 1, 2012 to consider the final assessment of the delinquent noxious weeds, mowing, refuse removal, and board -up bills and certify them to Dakota County for collection with property taxes O. It was recommended to approve the Temporary On -sale Liquor License and waive the license fee for Trinity School at River Ridge's Spring Benefit Dinner on April 28, 2012 P. It was recommended to approve the Temporary On -Sale Liquor License for People of Praise MN, Inc.'s Community Social on June 23, 2012 Q. It was recommended to adopt a resolution stating the City's findings for a Negative Declaration on the need for a Lockheed Martin Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the property located at 3333 Pilot Knob Road R. It was recommended to authorize an amendment of the City's 2008 Community Development Block Grant budget to fund a portion of Northwoods Workforce Rental Project property acquisition with refunding to the City's CDBG fund upon the resale of the project S. It was recommended to approve a resolution to modify the 2012 Redistricting Plan T. It was recommended to approve a resolution approving an Exempt Permit for the Eagan Athletic Association to conduct a raffle on May 13, 2012 at the Lexington /Diffley Athletic Fields, 4201 Lexington Avenue U. It was recommended to approve Change Order No. 6 to Project 11 -14 to install four additional conduits at Yankee Doodle Road and Federal Drive and four additional conduits at Pilot Knob Road and Crestridge Lane for future fiber connectivity growth at these major intersections Consent Item K. Receive the bids for Contract 12 -01 (Citywide Street Improvements) and award the Contract 12 -01 Mike McNamara of McNamara, Inc. addressed the Council with concern about the City's use of Best Value Contracting, particularly given McNamara's lower base bid for Contract 12 -01. Public Works Director Colbert summarized the Best Value Contracting process and the City Attorney spoke to the legality of the process and the options available to the Council of rejecting all bids and re- advertising or awarding in accordance with the current bid specifications. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to receive the bids for Contract 12- 01 (Citywide Street Improvements) and award the contract to Bituminous Roadways, Inc. in the base bid amount of $1,892,166.95 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PUBLIC HEARINGS PROJECT 1054 FAIRWAY HILLS ULTRA HIGH PRESSURE ZONE (WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS) AND CONSIDERATION OF PLANS, SPECS & AD FOR BIDS, CONTRACT 11 -05 Mayor Maguire recused himself given that he is a resident in the neighborhood in which the project will occur. Acting Mayor Bakken chaired the item. City Council Meeting Minutes April 3, 2012 3 page City Administrator Hedges introduced the item regarding Project 1054 Fairway Hills Ultra High Pressure Zone water system improvements and noted an informational neighborhood meeting was held on March 15, 2012 for adjacent property owners of which residents of 4 properties attended. Public Works Director Colbert provided an introduction to the item. WSTB Consulting Engineer Nancy Zeigler presented the feasibility study and discussed improvements relative to creating an Ultra -High Pressure Zone in the water distribution system for the Fairway Hills Neighborhood. Acting Mayor Bakken opened the public hearing. Scott Haugdahl, 1377 Grace Drive, presented a question regarding the inclusion of ongoing booster pump electrical and maintenance costs to the homeowner as part of the project's total cost estimate. Public Works Director Colbert responded referring to the contingency indentified in the cost estimate. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve Project 1054, Ultra High Pressure Zone Improvements and to approve the plans, specifications and advertise for bids for Contract 11 -05 with a bid opening scheduled for 10:30 a.m. on Friday, May 4, 2012. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 Abstention: Mayor Maguire There were no Old Business items. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — RICHARD CASPER City Administrator Hedges introduced the item regarding a conditional use permit to allow outdoor patio dining in conjunction with the Class I Cherokee Sirloin Room and Sports Bar restaurant located at 4625 Nicols Road. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report and background on the item. Applicant Rick Casper addressed the Council regarding his plan for the restaurant. Councilmember Hansen moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve a conditional use permit to allow outdoor patio dining in conjunction with the Class I Cherokee Sirloin Room and Sports Bar located at 4625 Nicols Road, legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Durnings Subdivision, subject to the following conditions: Aye: 5 Nay: 0 1. This conditional use permit shall be recorded at Dakota County within 60 days of approval by the City Council. 2. The on -sale alcohol license shall include and permit the service of alcoholic beverages in the outdoor dining area. 3. This approval incorporated the agreement tied to the Variance approval on May 15, 2001. 4. The outdoor dining area is subject to City Code requirements including sewer availability charges imposed as a result of the additional seating in the outdoor dining area. 5. A Building Permit shall be obtained for the satellite bar and patio extension. 6. Site Lighting shall be downcast and shielded to prevent glare and shall not be visible from the public right -of -way. 7. Existing landscape material shall remain and no additional landscaping shall be removed from the property. 8. The Site Plan shall be revised to address the parking concerns and resubmitted for approval by City Staff prior to the operation of business within the outdoor dining area. 9. The two emergency gates located near the south property line shall provide access at all times and cannot be locked. City Council Meeting Minutes April 3, 2012 4 page REZONING, PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND FINAL PLAT — EAGAN CAR CLUB City Administrator Hedges noted the City Council action at the time of Agenda Adoption to continue the rezoning, preliminary planned development and final plat for Eagan Car Club to the April 17, 2012 regular City Council meeting. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT - CHERRYBERRY City Administrator Hedges introduced the item regarding a planned development amendment to allow a 2,030 square foot yogurt shop and monument sign at 1298 Promenade Place. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report and background on the item. The applicant was present and available for questions. Thomas Giguere, 3616 Tanglewood Court, owner of Dairy Queen, spoke in opposition of the monument sign, noting if approved he would like a monument sign for the Dairy Queen. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve a planned development amendment to allow a 2,030 square foot yogurt shop at 1298 Promenade Place, subject to the following conditions: Aye: 5 Nay: 0 1. A Planned Development Amendment Agreement shall be executed and recorded at the Dakota County Recorder's Office prior to issuance of a building permit. The following plants are required for the agreement: • Site Plan • Building Sign Plan 2. The site shall be developed in conformance with the approved plans: • Site Plan received March 8, 2012 • Building Sign Plan received February 15, 2012 3. As prescribed by the Promenade PD, all building signs shall be individual channel letters. 4. A sign permit is required prior to the installation of any sign, and signage is subject to all other requirements of the City Code. 5. Screening of mechanical units shall comply with the City's mechanical screening ordinance and screening of individual units may be required if necessary to achieve compliance. 6. There shall be no grease ducts and /or Power Rooftop Ventilation installed and utilized with this tenant space. 7. Outdoor dining is prohibited. Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to deny a monument sign at 1298 Promenade Place, and approve building signage on the east and west elevation of the building, per the graphic provided by the applicant. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 REZONING — DIVERSIFIED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES City Administrator Hedges introduced the item regarding a rezoning from Planned Development to Limited Industrial for property located at 2871 West Service Road. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report and background on the item. The applicant was present and available for questions. Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve a rezoning from Planned Development (PD) to Limited Industrial (I -1) upon approximately 6.17 acres located at 2871 West Service Road. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 City Council Meeting Minutes April 3, 2012 5 page REZONING AND FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT — NORTHWOOD EQUITY, LLC City Administrator Hedges introduced the item regarding a rezoning from Business Park to Planned Development and a Final Planned Development to permit an approximately 47,525 s.f. office /warehouse building with outdoor storage of up to 16 commercial vehicles, upon approximately 4.8 acres located at 3265 Northwood Circle. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report and background on the item. The applicant was present and available for questions. Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve a rezoning from Business Park (BP) to Planned Development (PD) upon approximately 4.8 acres located at 3265 Northwood Circle, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Northwood Business Park 3` Addition. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve a Final Planned Development to permit an approximately 47,525 s.f. office /warehouse building with outdoor storage of up to 16 commercial vehicles, upon approximately 4.8 acres located at 3265 Northwood Circle, subject to the following conditions: Aye: 5 Nay: 0 1. A written Final Planned Development Agreement shall be executed and recorded with the County Recorder's officer. The following exhibits are necessary for the Final PD Agreement: • Final Site Plan 2. This Planned Development Agreement allows for up to 16 stall for the outdoor storage of commercial vehicles consisting of buses, vans, trucks and the like. 3. The outdoor storage shall occur only in the locations identified on the Final Site Plan. 4. Both Interim Use Permits currently in place for the property will be terminated with the execution and recording of the Final Planned Development Agreement. 5. The three stalls in the northeast corner of the site shall be related or this storage reduced to two spaces to provide a minimum 24' drive aisle between the vehicle storage and the trash enclosure /island. Alternatively, the trash enclosure shall be relocated to accomplish the same. 6. The widening of the concrete entrance apron of Northwood Circle and the service driveway curb, and associated catch basin structure relocations, shall be completed in accordance with City engineering standards. 7. A City permit to work in the right -of -way shall be obtained for the proposed work in Northwood Circle. A City grading permit is required if the parking lot and service drive modifications exceed 10,000 square feet in construction disturbance. 8. Additional landscaping shall be installed along the north side of the storage area to provide additional screening from the adjacent property. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA SUSPENSION /TERMINATION OF CONTRACT 11 -08 (CEDAR GROVE BOULEVARD — STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS) Public Works Director Colbert gave a brief staff report and background regarding the need for suspension /termination of Contract 11-08 Cedar Grove Boulevard Street and Utility Improvements. Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Fields seconded to approve the suspension of Contract 11 -08 (Cedar Grove Boulevard — Street & Utility Improvements) for a maximum of 90 days with the condition that the Contractor shall suspend all orders and subcontracts relating to the suspended part of the contract until the end of said suspension, and authorize City staff to Terminate said contract if the Contractor does not comply with the aforementioned condition of Suspension or upon City Council Final Approval of the Paragon Outlets proposal and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 There were no visitors to be heard. VISITORS TO BE HEARD 4 City Council Meeting Minutes April 3, 2012 6 page Date Mayor City Clerk ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 1 0 MINUTES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 2012 5:30 P.M. EAGAN ROOM — EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER City Council members present: Mayor Maguire, Councilmembers Bakken, Fields, Hansen and Tilley. City Staff present: City Administrator Hedges, Assistant City Administrator Miller, Director of Administrative Services VanOverbeke, City Planner Ridley, City Clerk Scipioni, ECC Fitness Coordinator Grange, Director of Communications Garrison, and Director of Parks and Recreation Seydell Johnson. I. ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to adopt the agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD There were no visitors to be heard. III. RESTAURANT DEFINITIONS AND ALCOHOL LICENSING City Administrator Hedges stated that in December, the City Council directed City Staff to review on -sale alcohol licensing requirements in light of three restaurants failing to meet the requirement in City Code that at least 50 percent of their gross profits are derived from the sale of food. Hedges added that as the staff reviewed the history of on -sale alcohol licensing requirements and the practices of neighboring cities, it became apparent there was a need to review the review the restaurant definitions in Chapter 5 (Alcohol Licensing) and Chapter 11 (Zoning), given the evolution of the restaurant's service models. Assistant City Administrator Miller provided an overview of the public policy questions before the City Council. City Planner Ridley highlighted the proposed changes to the Chapter 11 restaurant definitions. City Clerk Scipioni summarized the Chapter 5 traditional and casual restaurant definition options, as well as food service requirement options. There was City Council consensus to proceed with an ordinance amendment to amend the restaurant definitions of Chapter 11 (Zoning) & Chapter 5 (Licensing) as proposed. The City Council discussed the 50% food service requirements and options for addressing the issue. There was City Council consensus to remove the 50% food service requirement from the City Code and to prepare an ordinance amendment accordingly. IV. REVIEW PROPOSED 2012 PRECINCT BOUNDARIES Special City Council Minutes March 13, 2012 Page 2 City Administrator Hedges stated that the proposed 2012 precinct boundaries are in response to the redistricting that occurred at the State level, and that the City is required to take formal action to establish its precincts by April 3, 2012. City Clerk Scipioni highlighted the draft 2012 proposed changes to precincts and voting locations, noting that the new legislative boundaries necessitated a change to 15 of Eagan's precincts and, with the locations of available polling places, made it necessary to decrease the total number of polling places from 21 to 20. Scipioni noted that boundaries may follow school district boundaries, but that two precincts split by a school district must use a naming convention to indicate this relationship, such as 5A and 5B. The City Council discussed the statutory requirement and need of the A and B designations. There was also discussion of the necessity for clearly communicating the polling places, in addition to what the County provides. Per City Council direction, the proposed 2012 precinct boundaries will be placed under New Business at the City Council meeting on March 20, 2012. V. HEALTHY AND ACTIVE LIVING RESOLUTION City Administrator Hedges introduced the item, noting that the City had been approached with a request to adopt a "Healthy Community Resolution." Hedges noted that the Council had referred the matter to the Advisory Parks Commission for research and recommendation. Hedges introduced Laurie Halverson, Chairperson of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission, and Director of Parks and Recreation Seydell Johnson. Chairperson Halverson introduced and summarized the Healthy Eating and Active Living Community Resolution. The City Council discussed the proposed resolution. There was discussion regarding how the resolution can be customized to recognize and validate what the City is already doing to promote a healthy community. Discussion continued regarding existing partnerships and grants received for similar activities, such as Marketfest. Twin Cities Obesity Prevention Coalition Project Coordinator, Jennifer Anderson, commented on the proposed resolution. There was City Council consensus for staff to make revisions to the proposed resolution to be brought back to the City Council for review and consideration at an April City Council meeting. The City Council recessed at 7:16 P.M. The meeting resumed at 7:28 P.M. VI. CABLE FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS 101 City Administrator Hedges introduced the item, noting no formal action is requested; rather, guidance on several public policy questions is sought. Hedges noted that in January, the City of Eagan received a franchise renewal request letter from Comcast, officially opening the 3 -year renewal window. Special City Council Minutes March 13, 2012 Page 3 Communications Director Garrison introduced attorney Brian Grogan of Moss & Barnett, who provided a power point presentation further introducing the cable franchise renewal process. Grogan discussed the formal and informal processes for renewal, the needs assessment, franchise fee, PEG (Public, Educational and Governmental) fee, the renewal work plan, the PEG needs assessment, and the length of agreement. Director Garrison introduced the cable franchise public policy questions, which were discussed by the Council. The City Council directed Director Garrison and Attorney Grogan serve as the negotiating team and that the team would report to the Council's Finance Committee, who would report back to the City Council as a whole. The Council requested that they be kept apprised of the PEG needs assessment and negotiations. There was City Council consensus that a full spectrum of consultants and resources should be considered as the renewal process moves ahead, provided direction is given by the City Council at the appropriate times in the process. Director Garrison and Attorney Grogan reviewed the reporting frequency for the negotiating team to the Council. There was consensus that the team should report one more time possibly during summer 2012 regarding the work plan. There was no Other Business. VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to adjourn at 8:18 p.m. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 MINUTES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 2012 5:30 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOMS 2A &B — EAGAN MUNICIPAL CAMPUS I. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION City Council members present: Mayor Maguire, Councilmembers Bakken, Fields, and Hansen. Councilmember Tilley was absent. City Staff present: City Administrator Hedges. City Councilmember Hansen moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Aye: 5, Nay: 0 II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD There were no visitors to be heard. III. ADVISORY COMMISSION INTERVIEWS The City Council interviewed 14 Advisory Commission applicants, and noted that appointments would be made at the April 17, 2012 City Council meeting. It was noted that applicant Thomas Heaney had a work commitment and thus was unable to be interviewed. There was no other business. The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. IV. OTHER BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting B. PERSONNEL ITEMS Item 1. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve hiring of the IT Specialist position in the IT Department "to be named ". FACTS: • The City Council previously approved to fill this position on April 4, 2012. Item 2. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve hiring of the PT Clerical Technician 4 position in the Police Department "to be named ". FACTS: • The City Council previously approved to fill this position on February 8, 2012. Item 3. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve hiring of the Executive Assistant "to be named ". FACTS: The City Council previously approved to fill this position on March 6, 2012. Item 4. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Authorize Russ Matthys at Acting Public Works Director effective May 7, 2012. 15 FACTS: The Public Works Director is retiring on Friday, May 4, 2012. Staff is currently engaged in a recruitment effort to replace the position. Until a new Public Works Director is hired, it is recommended that the City Engineer serve as the Acting Public Works Director. Item 5. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the reclassification of the Human Resources Specialist to Human Resources Generalist. FACTS: • Since 2010, additional responsibilities have been added to the position to reflect the shift from an administrative support position to that of an HR Generalist position. Possession of an advanced degree is now a minimum qualification. • After documenting the additional duties and responsibilities and reviewing internal and external equity, it is recommended this position be reclassified from Level 6 to Level 8. • Effective date of the classification change will occur April 17, 2012 to coincide with the pay period. Item 6. Approve the reclassification of the Water Resources Coordinator to Water Resources Manager. FACTS: Item 7. • Since 2007 additional responsibilities, including federal and state mandates, have been added to the position. These mandates and responsibilities have a higher level of complexity. It is recommended that a classification change be made from Level 12 to Level 13. • Effective date of the classification change will occur April 17, 2012 to coincide with the pay period. Approve the reclassification of the Transportation Operations Engineer. lip FACTS: • The Transportation Engineer was reclassified to Transportation Operations Engineer on July 19, 2010. This occurred when the previous Streets Superintendent resigned. Essentially, this position encompasses duties from two positions. • When a new position is created, it is not uncommon for a review to be conducted later to ensure the classification assigned is appropriate. In this case, it makes sense to reclassify the position from a Level 14 to a Level 15 which better reflects the impact this position has on the organization in terms of the scope of decision making and problem solving and technical expertise that is required to successfully perform this position. • Effective date of the classification change will occur April 17, 2012 to coincide with the pay period. Item 8. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the hiring of Seasonal Employees in Parks & Recreation & Utilities: Name Division Job Title William Chinn Dan Streefland Robert Bade Jeff Kells Robert Rausch Jake Loesch Zach Miller Charlie Krause Tom Schoenecker Dave Jungers Civic Arena Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks Parks & Umpire Ballfield Attendant Forestry Technician Landscape Crew Park Laborer Park Laborer Park Maintenance Park Maintenance Park Maintenance Park Laborer Katie Lewandowski Rec Art Instructor II & III Jacob Grotta Utilities Utility Maintenance Seasonal 17 Lkp /adminrpt/coun ci 14.17.12 Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting C. RATIFY CHECK REGISTERS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To ratify the check registers dated March 30, 2012 and April 13, 2012 as presented. ATTACHMENTS: • Check registers dated March 30, 2012 and April 13, 2012 are enclosed without page number. Consent Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting D. DIRECT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT — CITY OF EAGAN ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Direct preparation of an ordinance amendment to City Code Chapter 4 relative to recreational fires. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Council Members Present FACTS: ➢ Each spring and fall the police and fire departments receive numerous complaints about recreational fires. ➢ The complaints usually consist of smoke that is created by recreational fires that some may consider being offensive. The complaints usually come in during late evening hours when neighbors might have their windows open and the smoke from a nearby recreational fire is entering their home. ➢ Staff have surveyed neighboring communities and have found that many communities have combated this complaint by setting hours that recreational fires are not allowed. For example, several neighboring cities have prohibited recreational fires after 1 l pm or midnight. ➢ Currently, the Eagan City Code does address where recreational fires can be, what can be burnt and under what type of conditions. We do not address allowable hours for recreational fires. ➢ We also do not currently address the requirements for outdoor fireplaces. Outdoor fireplaces are gaining popularity in many cities including Eagan. Other cities have amended their recreational fire ordinances to address the construction of and location of outdoor fireplaces. ➢ Staff would like to work with the City Attorney's office to draft an ordinance amendment. ATTACHMENTS: None Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting E. CONTRACT 11 -09, YANKEE DOODLE ROAD & DENMARK AVENUE STREET & TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the plans and specifications for Contract 11 -09 (Denmark Avenue & Yankee Doodle Road — Street & Traffic Signal Improvements) and authorize the advertisement for a bid opening to be held on Tuesday, May 8, 2012. FACTS: • Contract 11 -09 provides for street and traffic signal improvements on Yankee Doodle Road, between Denmark Avenue and Promenade Avenue, as represented in the Yankee Doodle Road (CSAH 28) Corridor and Access Management Study, and Denmark Avenue, from 700' south of Yankee Doodle Road to 700' north, as outlined and discussed in the feasibility report for Project 1085. • On March 20, 2007, the City Council provided consensus on the various proposed preferred alternatives for each of the three segments included in the final draft of the Yankee Doodle Road Corridor and Access Management Study. • On March 16, 2010, the Council approved an agreement with Dakota County (under Project 925) that provided for the Engineering Design, Right of Way acquisition and Construction of Yankee Doodle Road enhancements (West Segment of CSAH 28 Corridor Study), which included a signal at Yankee Doodle Road and Promenade Avenue with a new southerly extension of Promenade Avenue through the Blue Cross 10 story office complex to Town Center Drive. Due to the difficulties and expense of acquiring right of way, the new signal and street extension portion of Project 925 has been delayed /deleted by the County. • On December 6, 2011, the City Council held a public hearing for Project 1085. The Council approved the project and authorized preparation of detailed plans and specifications. • These projects are being combined under one contract for economies of scale in the competitive bidding process. The plans and specifications have been completed by the Dakota County Transportation Department and are being presented to the City Council for their approval and authorization for the advertisement of bids by Dakota County. All of the easements needed for the construction of said improvements have been acquired. • A $3,000 grant from the University of Minnesota will be applied to the installation of pedestrian countdown timers on the traffic signals. Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting F. PROJECT 905R, LEBANON HILLS REGIONAL PARK STORM SEWER EASEMENT ACQUISITION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve a Temporary Easement Agreement for Project 905R (Lebanon Hills Regional Park — Storm Sewer Improvements) on parcel 10- 02600 -53 -010 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • Project 905R provided for the installation of storm drainage facilities for the southeastern portion of Eagan through the Lebanon Hills Regional Park along Cliff Road to the Holland Lake Lift Station. This project constructed in 2009 required the acquisition of easements from several property owners along Cliff Road. • The City acquired all necessary easements except for three (3) property owners along Cliff Road near Holland Lake. Temporary rights of entry were granted with the understanding that temporary or permanent easements would subsequently be negotiated. The City and the County originally partnered in the acquisition and negotiations efforts for these three (3) easements with the County responsible for the full acquisition of the that portion of the parcels or easements south of Cliff Road. Appraisals were obtained for all required easements. • The County revised their acquisition efforts and instead acquired conservation easements over the portion of the parcels that incorporated Holland Lake. The conservation easements did not address the construction access rights needed for the installation of the storm sewer. • On October 19, 2010, the City Council approved an easement agreement with one of the three parcels (PIN 10- 02600 -54 -010), avoiding Eminent Domain proceedings, but did not proceed with the other two parcels as one parcel had not actually been impacted by construction and the other one was still negotiating with the County. • The owners of 1007 Cliff Road have completed their agreement with the County. The property owners have accepted the City's offer which concurs with the Council authorized range for a temporary construction easement approved for the adjacent property in a closed session on September 21, 2010. • An agreement between the City of Eagan and the owner of Parcel 10- 02600 -53 -010 has been prepared providing for the acquisition cost for the necessary temporary easement. • Engineering staff and the City Attorney's office have reviewed the agreement and found it to be in order for favorable Council action. ISSUES: • If the City Council would desire to discuss this item, it would be appropriate to direct any discussion to a Closed Session due to the pending litigation status of this easement acquisition. 2' Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting FACTS: CONSENT AGENDA: I. Minnesota Water Agency Response Network (MnWARN) Mutual Aid Agreement and Resolution. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve and adopt the Minnesota Water Agency Response Network (MnWARN) Mutual Aid Agreement and Resolution and Authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute all related documents. • MnWARN is a statewide water /wastewater agency response network of "utilities helping utilities" assist members with: ✓ emergency assessment, emergency response, and recovery ✓ mutual aid agreement for sharing emergency resources with members ✓ resources to help recover from a disaster • emergency contact network ✓ voluntary participation • MnWARN resources include personnel, equipment, materials and other associated services necessary to protect the health and welfare of the utilities' customers • There are 6 regions in the State of Minnesota; Eagan would be in Region 6. Other MnWARN members in Region 6 (a partial list) include Apple Valley, Bloomington, Burnsville, Fridley, Golden Valley, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, Prior Lake, Rosemount, Savage, Saint Paul, Shakopee, and St Louis Park. • The League of Minnesota Cities developed the standard agreement used by all communities. • Eagan will benefit by having a pre- established agreement among a network of utilities to complement and enhance our capabilities to prepare and respond to a broad range of threats and disasters, both natural and man -made. There is no cost to the City for membership. • The Agreement and Resolution has been reviewed by the City Attorney's office and Public Works Department and found to be in order for favorable Council consideration. ATTACHMENTS: • Mutual Aid Agreement Resolution, page 2-3 . • A copy of the 12 page Mutual Aid Document is available for review in the City Administrator's Office by request. EXHIBIT I RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN AUTHORIZING GOVERNMENTAL UNIT TO BE A PARTY TO MINNESOTA WATER AGENCY RESPONSE NETWORK (MnWARN) WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 authorizes governmental units by agreement of their governing bodies to jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to them; WHEREAS, MnWARN has been established by the adoption of a Mutual Aid Agreement (the Agreement) among Governmental Units to allow their water, wastewater and storm water utilities to assist each other in case of an emergency; WHEREAS, the Agreement allows other governmental units to become a party to the Agreement by the adoption of this Resolution and sending notice to the Secretary of the Statewide Committee for MnWARN; and WHEREAS, the governing body of the City of Eagan considers it to be in the best interest of the City to be a party to the Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Eagan: 1. Authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to sign this resolution evidencing the intent of City of Eagan to be a party to MnWARN; and 2. Clerk is directed to send a certified copy of this resolution and a completed membership information form to the Secretary of the Statewide Committee of MnWARN; and 3. City of Eagan agrees to comply with all terms of the Agreement. Motion by: CITY OF EAGAN Seconded by: CITY COUNCIL Those in favor: By: Those against: It's Mayor Date: April 17, 2012 Attest: CERTIFICATION It's Clerk I, Christina M. Scipioni, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 17 day of April, 2012. 23 City Clerk Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting G. CONTRACT 12 -02, CITYWIDE STREET IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the bids for Contract 12 -02 (Citywide Street Improvements) and award the contract to Hardrives, Inc. in the base bid amount of $2,485,109.40 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • The street improvements of: o Highview Acres (City Project 1057) o Oslund Timberline (Pine Ridge Drive, Project 1058) o Tesseract Place (Project 1060) o S & W Industrial Acres (Sibley Court, Project 1061) o Kings Wood/ Cutters Ridge/ Sherwood Downs (Project 1062) o Chatterton Ponds (Project 1063) o Hills of Stonebridge 1s 2 ° (Project 1064) o Coventry Pass 1s` -2n / Country Hollow (Project 1066) o Hawthorne Woods (Project 1067) o Lexington Pointe ls -2 ° (Project 1068) o Cliff Ridge (Project 1069) o Oak Chase 4 (Oak Chase Circle, Project 1070) o Signal Point/ Knob Hill Professional Park (Project 1071) o Boulder Ridge (Heine Court, Project 1072) o Great Oaks Lane/ Great Oaks Circle (Project 1075) are programmed for 2012 in the City's 5 -Year Capital Improvement Program (2012- 2016). • On January 3, 2012, the City Council authorized the street improvements for Projects 1060, 1061 & 1076. • On January 17, 2012, the City Council authorized the street improvements for Projects 1057, 1058, 1062, & 1073. • On February 8, 2012, the City Council authorized the street improvements for Projects 1063, 1064, 1067 & 1068. • On February 21, 2012, the City Council authorized the street improvements for Projects 1066, 1069, 1070, 1071, 1072 & 1075. • These projects have been combined under one contract (Citywide Street Improvements - Contract 12 -02), to increase economies of scale. On March 6, 2012, the Council approved the plans and authorized the advertisement for solicitation of competitive bids for Contract 12 -02. • On March 18, 2008, the Council approved the use of best -value solicitation of bids, as allowed by State statutes, providing for the consideration of bidders expected performance in relation to their submitted bid. At 10:30 a.m. on April 9, technical performance proposals from each bidder were received for this project. At 10:30 a.m. on April 12, formal bids from each bidder were received for this project. • All bids have been reviewed for compliance with the bid specifications and accuracy on unit price extensions and summations. The base bid and past performance of Hardrives, Inc. have been reviewed by the Engineering Division and found to provide the best value, and the base bid from Hardrives, Inc. is in order for favorable Council action. ATTACHMENTS: • Bid Summary Tabulation, page G✓ 211 HIGHVIEW ACRES PROJECT NO. 1057 Overlay OSLUND TIMBERLINE PROJECT NO 1058 Overlay TESSERACT PROJECT NO. 1060 Overlay 5 & W INDUSTRIAL PROJECT NO 1061 Overlay KINGS WOOD /CUTTERS RIDGE /SHERWOOD DOWNS PROJECT NO. 1062 Overlay CHATTERTON PONDS PROJECT NO 1063 Overlay HILLS OF STONEBRIDGE 2 &3 PROJECT NO. 1064 Overlay COVENTRY PASS 1 & 2 /COUNTRY HOLLOW PROJECT NO. 1066 Overlay HAWTHORNE WOODS PROJECT NO. 1067 Overlay XINGTON POINTE 1 & 2 "D PROJECT NO. 1068 Overlay CLIFF RIDGE PROJECT NO. 1069 Overlay OAK CHASE 4 PROJECT NO. 1070 Overlay SIGNAL POINT /KNOB HILL PROFESSIONAL PARK PROJECT NO. 1071 Overlay BOULDER RIDGE PROJECT NO. 1072 Overlay GREAT OAKS LANE /GREAT OAKS CIRCLE PROJECT NO. 1075 Overlay Profett" 1057 Low 'Base Bid $ 41,487 Feasibility Report Estimate $ 53,700 % Over /Under FR Estimate -22.7% Engineer's Estimate $ 44,400 % Over /Under I Eng Estimate -6.5% 1058 $ 49,954 $ 51,100 -2.2% $ 54,800 -8.8% 1060 $ 21,251 $ 25,800 -18.0% $25,300 -16.4% 1061 $ 37,502 $ 45,300 -17.2% $ 40,200 -6.7% 1062 $ 358,163 $ 372,000 -3.7% $ 337,800 +6.0% 1063 $ 75,263 $ 74,500 +0.1% $ 76,600 -1.7% 1064 $ 249,771 $ 290,100 -13.9% $ 250,700 -0.4% 1066 $ 608,360 $ 604,300 +0.7% $ 576,400 +5.5% 1067 $ 519,017 $ 545,200 -4.8% $ 499,800 +3.8% 1068 $ 327,711 $ 379,300 -13.6% $ 312,000 +5.0% 1069 $ 49,854 $ 60,000 -16.9% $ 50,200 -0.6% 1070 $ 31,316 $ 35,500 -11.8% $ 35,400 -11.5% 1071 $ 64,319 $ 73,200 -12.1% $ 65,900 -2.4% 1072 $ 18,245 $ 20,200 -9.7% $ 21,200 -13.9% 1075 $ 32,896 $ 39,200 -16.1% $ 37,400 -12.0% Totals $2,485,109 $2,649,200 - 6.2% $2,428,100 +2.3% Bid Date/ Time: 10:30 a.m., Thursday, April 12, 2012 Qualified Bidder 1. Hardrives, Inc. 2. Bituminous Roadways, Inc. Total Base Bid $ 2,485,109.45 $ 2,504,321.85 BID SUMMARY CITYWIDE STREET OVERLAYS CITY CONTRACT 12 -02 *Best -value contracting: Qualified Bidders with technical score of 7.5 or greater Technical Score* 8.46 8.96 25 Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting H. APPROVE CLEAN WATER PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT NEIGHBORHOOD LAKES MANAGEMENT PLANS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Clean Water Partnership Grant Agreement with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for a Neighborhood Lakes Management Plan project. FACTS: • In 1987, the Minnesota Legislature authorized the creation and funding of the Clean Water Partnership (CWP) program (Minn. Stat. §103F.701 to 103F.761) through MPCA. The program focuses on control of nonpoint source pollution through watershed management to protect and improve surface and groundwater in Minnesota. The program provides financial assistance through matching grants and loans and technical assistance to local units of government to implement pollution control projects. The CWP program supports studies of water bodies with pollution problems, development of action plans to address the problems, and plan implementation projects to fix the problems. CWP funds also are used for studies and projects to protect water bodies that meet Minnesota's water quality standards. • Nonpoint source pollution comes from many sources, such as construction sites, paved surfaces, failing septic systems, and over - fertilized lawns. These sources contribute huge quantities of phosphorus, bacteria, sediments, nitrates, and other pollutants to the environment. They represent the largest combined proportion (an estimated 86 percent) of the state's water pollution. • Since 1987, the Legislature has provided over $35 million to the CWP Program for grants to study water bodies with pollution problems and to develop and implement action plans to fix the problems. CWP grants and projects require large commitments of time and effort by participants. The program requires applicants to match grant money with cash or in -kind services. Local units of government must sponsor and act as fiscal agents of CWP projects. • To date, the MPCA has awarded City of Eagan approximately $200,000 for three CWP grants: 1) $93,974 for Schwanz Lake in 1994; 2) $48,985 for Fish Lake in 1995; and 3) $55,276 for Blackhawk and Thomas lakes in 2010. The city also acquired a no- interest, $51,250 CWP loan in 1997 to construct the Fish Lake alum treatment facility. • Eagan's Water Quality and Wetland Management Plan (2007) directs management plans be developed for city priority lakes. Responding to MPCA classification of top priority Fish and Schwanz lakes as impaired waters (i.e. excessive phosphorus), the city completed the required Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) plans in 2010, with support from a $90,000 TMDL grant from MPCA. (This TMDL grant is a different source and in addition to the previously mentioned 2010 CWP grant which developed management plans for Blackhawk and Thomas, the two next priority lakes.) • On December 6, 2011, the city council authorized submittal of applications to MPCA for two 2012 CWP grants: 1) "Blackhawk Lake Improvements" and 2) "Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans." Subsequently, MPCA determined the Blackhawk Lake proposal, although complete, could not be funded according to CWP grant rules because the 2010 Blackhawk and Thomas project on which it is based is not yet officially approved. With the project's expected approval this spring, city staff plans to request authorization to resubmit for MPCA consideration through next year's CWP program. • On February 16, MPCA awarded the city a $167,000 CWP grant for the "Neighborhood Lakes" project, which will focus on eight (8) priority lakes. Similar to Eagan's other recent efforts, the project will evaluate water quality, assess phosphorus, and develop implementation plans to address needs. The ultimate objectives are to put into practice priority system improvement projects and activities. • The city's matching cost share —from the Water Quality (Lakes & Wetlands) program —will include: $101,200 cash for some of a consultant's costs and for water quality analysis; and $62,600 in -kind staff services to help fulfill project objectives and administration. The project budget also includes $4,800 proposed cash from Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization for water quality analysis costs. ATTACHMENT: • Grant agreement for "Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans," pages Zen through q■. PROJECT ID NUMBER: PRJ07851 STATE GRANT SHARE: $167,000 GRANTEE SHARE: $168,600 TOTAL PROJECT COST: $335,600 STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY CLEAN WATER PARTNERSHIP PROJECT GRANT AGREEMENT CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 Summary PROJECT TITLE: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans GRANTEE /PROJECT SPONSOR: City of Eagan CONTACT: Eric Macbeth, 3830 Pilot Knob Rd, Eagan, MN 55122 651 - 675 -5300 emacbeth @citvofeagan.com This GRANT AGREEMENT (hereinafter Agreement or Contract), and amendments and supplements thereto, shall be interpreted pursuant to the laws of the State of Minnesota and is between the State of Minnesota acting through its Commissioner of the MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ( "State" or "MPCA "), 520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, MN 55155 -4194 and City of Eagan, 3830 Pilot Knob Rd, Eagan, MN 55122 (hereinafter "Grantee" or "Project Sponsor "). This Agreement shall be effective on the date the State obtains all required signatures under Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 2, and shall remain in effect for three years or until all obligations set forth in this Agreement have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first. Grantee must not begin work until this Agreement is fully executed and the Grantee has been notified by the State to begin work. The following Clauses survive the expiration, cancellation or termination of this Agreement: Liability; Records Maintenance; Government Data Practice; Intellectual Property; and Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 1 of 15 CR5573 Recitals CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 1. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 103F.701 to 103F.761, the State is empowered to make grant agreements to provide financial assistance to local governmental units for projects for the protection and improvement of surface and groundwater from nonpoint sources of water pollution. Administration of the program is governed by Minn. R. 7076.0100 to 7076.0290. 2. The Grantee is a local governmental unit eligible to enter into a Clean Water Partnership (CWP) Grant Agreement with the State according to the conditions of Minn. Stat. §§ 103F.701 to 103F.761 and Minn. R. 7076.0100 to 7076.0290. 3. The Grantee represents that it is duly qualified and willing to perform the services set forth herein, fulfilling the obligations of Grantee in accordance with Minn. R. 7076.0110, subp. 20, and as further defined herein. Grant Agreement 1. DEVELOPMENT AND INCORPORATION OF PROJECT WORK PLAN a) In order to continue this Project pursuant to Minn. R. 7076.0200, the Grantee shall submit for review and approval by the State a Project Implementation Work Plan (hereinafter "Work Plan" or "Project Work Plan "), which shall be: b) Applicable to the Project identified in the Sponsor's grant proposal; if applicable, developed in accordance with the Diagnostic Study and Implementation Plan approved by the MPCA; and in a format approved by the State. At least 60 percent of the local contribution (30 percent of total eligible project costs) to the Work Plan activities provided for by this Agreement shall come from nonstate and nonfederal sources. To be considered nonstate or nonfederal, a cash or in -kind contribution must be financed by funds that are either: 1) Derived exclusively from local sources (e.g., local property taxes, fees, private contributions). 2) Derived from revenue which, while not necessarily local in its sources, has become subject to the exclusive control of the Grantee or a Contributing Sponsor (other than a state or federal agency or instrumentality) and is not subject to the specific terms, conditions, or purposes of state or federal projects or programs, or activities conducted by state or federal agencies or instrumentalities. 3) Derived from loan assistance made available through the CWP, if applicable. 4) In order to be eligible for Project Grant funds, costs must be reasonable, necessary and allocable to the Project, and must include costs incurred only during the life of this Agreement. The Project Work Plan must be submitted to the MPCA within sixty (60) days following the Agreement effective date or the MPCA may exercise the right to cancel or rescind this Agreement. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 2 of 15 CR5573 Recitals 1. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 103F.701 to 103F.761, the State is empowered to make grant agreements to provide financial assistance to local governmental units for projects for the protection and improvement of surface and groundwater from nonpoint sources of water pollution. Administration of the program is governed by Minn. R. 7076.0100 to 7076.0290. 2. The Grantee is a local governmental unit eligible to enter into a Clean Water Partnership (CWP) Grant Agreement with the State according to the conditions of Minn. Stat. §§ 103F.701 to 103F.761 and Minn. R. 7076.0100 to 7076.0290. 3. The Grantee represents that it is duly qualified and willing to perform the services set forth herein, fulfilling the obligations of Grantee in accordance with Minn. R. 7076.0110, subp. 20, and as further defined herein. Grant Agreement CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 1. DEVELOPMENT AND INCORPORATION OF PROJECT WORK PLAN a) In order to continue this Project pursuant to Minn. R. 7076.0200, the Grantee shall submit for review and approval by the State a Project Implementation Work Plan (hereinafter "Work Plan" or "Project Work Plan "), which shall be: b) Applicable to the Project identified in the Sponsor's grant proposal; if applicable, developed in accordance with the Diagnostic Study and Implementation Plan approved by the MPCA; and in a format approved by the State. At least 60 percent of the local contribution (30 percent of total eligible project costs) to the Work Plan activities provided for by this Agreement shall come from nonstate and nonfederal sources. To be considered nonstate or nonfederal, a cash or in -kind contribution must be financed by funds that are either: 1) Derived exclusively from local sources (e.g., local property taxes, fees, private contributions). 2) Derived from revenue which, while not necessarily local in its sources, has become subject to the exclusive control of the Grantee or a Contributing Sponsor (other than a state or federal agency or instrumentality) and is not subject to the specific terms, conditions, or purposes of state or federal projects or programs, or activities conducted by state or federal agencies or instrumentalities. 3) Derived from loan assistance made available through the CWP, if applicable. 4) In order to be eligible for Project Grant funds, costs must be reasonable, necessary and allocable to the Project, and must include costs incurred only during the life of this Agreement. The Project Work Plan must be submitted to the MPCA within sixty (60) days following the Agreement effective date or the MPCA may exercise the right to cancel or rescind this Agreement. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 2 of 15 CR5573 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 d) Upon written approval by the State, the Project Work Plan and any subsequent amendments or revisions which are approved by the State in writing shall be incorporated into this Agreement by reference. e) The Grantee shall implement measures and activities identified in the approved Project Work Plan for the Project Waters of Concern and the Project Area. 2. CONSIDERATION AND TERMS OF PAYMENT a) The total obligation of the State for all compensation and reimbursements to the Grantee shall be consistent with the Work Plan Budget and shall be no more than fifty percent (50 %) of the total eligible project costs, and shall not exceed $167,000. b) Reimbursement for travel and subsistence expenses actually and necessarily incurred by the Grantee as a result of this Agreement shall be allowed. Grantee shall be reimbursed for travel and subsistence expenses in the same manner and in no greater amount than provided in the current "Commissioners Plan" promulgated by the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget office, which can be accessed on the internet at: http: / /www.mmd.admin. state .mn.us /commissionersplan.htm. The Grantee shall not be reimbursed for travel and subsistence expenses incurred outside the State of Minnesota unless the Grantee has received the State's prior written approval for out -of -state travel. Minnesota will be considered the home State for determining whether travel is out of state. c) Conditions of Payment. All services provided by the Grantee under this Agreement must be performed to the State's satisfaction, as determined at the sole discretion of its authorized agent, and in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. The Grantee shall not receive payment for work found by the State to be unsatisfactory, or performed in violation of federal, state or local law, ordinance, rule or regulation. 1) Initial Payment. Upon execution of this Agreement, the State shall make payment to the Grantee of twenty - five percent (25 %) of the State Grant Share provided for in this Agreement in the amount of $41,750. 2) Second Payment. Upon written approval by the State of the Work Plan required by this Agreement, the State shall make payment to the Grantee of thirty - five percent (35%) of the State Grant Share provided for in this Agreement in the amount of $58,450. 3) Third Payment and Withholding of Final Payment. Upon completion of the requirements of the Project Review of this Agreement, the State shall make payment to the Grantee as follows: i) If, as determined upon completion of the Project Review of this Agreement, the total project costs necessary to complete the Project is less than the total project cost identified in this Agreement, an amount equal to ten percent (10 %) of the State grant share of the total project cost so determined shall be withheld by the State until the State is satisfied that the project has been completed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 3 of 15 CR5573 2� CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 ii) If, as determined upon completion of the Project Review of this Agreement, the total project cost necessary to complete the Project is equal to or exceeds the total project cost identified in this Agreement, an amount equal to ten percent (10 %) of the State Grant Share provided for in this Agreement shall be withheld by the State until the State is satisfied that the project has been completed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. iii) Upon determination of the amount to be so withheld, the State shall make payment to the Grantee in an amount equal to the difference between the amount withheld and the balance of the State Grant Share provided for in this Agreement. 4) Final Payment. Upon completion and final approval of the project by the State in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the State shall make payment to the Grantee of an amount equal to that withheld according to the conditions listed above. d) Should the project sponsor accrue any interest on grant funds deposited in any project accounts during the life of this agreement, such interest must be used as local cash match for project activities outlined in the project work plan and such interest must be indicated on the project expenditure reports. 3. LIMITATIONS ON COST - SHARING a) In the event that the total expenditure necessary to accomplish the project objectives described in this Agreement is less than the total project cost provided for in this Agreement, actual costs incurred by the Grantee in accomplishing the project objectives shall be used to determine the amount of State financial participation. b) Cost overruns are the amount by which the actual cost expended to complete a particular objective, task, or subcontract exceeds approved project budget costs or subcontract costs according to the conditions of this Agreement, as amended and shall be the sole responsibility of the Grantee. 4. TIME The Grantee must comply with all the time requirements described in this Agreement. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence. 5. CANCELLATION The State may cancel this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the Grantee. Upon termination, the Grantee shall be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for work satisfactorily performed. The State may cancel this Agreement immediately if the State finds that there has been a failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement, that reasonable progress has not been made, or that the purposes for which the funds were granted have not been or will not be fulfilled. The State may take action to protect the interests of the State of Minnesota, including the refusal to disburse additional funds and requiring the return of all or part of the funds already disbursed. If the Grantee does not commence the Project within one year of the Execution Date of this Agreement, as evidenced by the incurrence of documented expenses for eligible workplan costs, the State reserves the right to cancel this Agreement. If the Grantee is not expending the funds in a timely manner, as evidenced by the incurrence of documented expenses for eligible workplan costs, the State reserves the right to cancel this Agreement and reallocate the funds. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 4 of 15 CR5573 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 ii) If, as determined upon completion of the Project Review of this Agreement, the total project cost necessary to complete the Project is equal to or exceeds the total project cost identified in this Agreement, an amount equal to ten percent (10 %) of the State Grant Share provided for in this Agreement shall be withheld by the State until the State is satisfied that the project has been completed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. iii) Upon determination of the amount to be so withheld, the State shall make payment to the Grantee in an amount equal to the difference between the amount withheld and the balance of the State Grant Share provided for in this Agreement. 4) Final Payment. Upon completion and final approval of the project by the State in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the State shall make payment to the Grantee of an amount equal to that withheld according to the conditions listed above. d) Should the project sponsor accrue any interest on grant funds deposited in any project accounts during the life of this agreement, such interest must be used as local cash match for project activities outlined in the project work plan and such interest must be indicated on the project expenditure reports. 3. LIMITATIONS ON COST - SHARING a) In the event that the total expenditure necessary to accomplish the project objectives described in this Agreement is less than the total project cost provided for in this Agreement, actual costs incurred by the Grantee in accomplishing the project objectives shall be used to determine the amount of State financial participation. b) Cost overruns are the amount by which the actual cost expended to complete a particular objective, task, or subcontract exceeds approved project budget costs or subcontract costs according to the conditions of this Agreement, as amended and shall be the sole responsibility of the Grantee. 4. TIME The Grantee must comply with all the time requirements described in this Agreement. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence. 5. CANCELLATION The State may cancel this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the Grantee. Upon termination, the Grantee shall be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for work satisfactorily performed. The State may cancel this Agreement immediately if the State finds that there has been a failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement, that reasonable progress has not been made, or that the purposes for which the funds were granted have not been or will not be fulfilled. The State may take action to protect the interests of the State of Minnesota, including the refusal to disburse additional funds and requiring the return of all or part of the funds already disbursed. If the Grantee does not commence the Project within one year of the Execution Date of this Agreement, as evidenced by the incurrence of documented expenses for eligible workplan costs, the State reserves the right to cancel this Agreement. If the Grantee is not expending the funds in a timely manner, as evidenced by the incurrence of documented expenses for eligible workplan costs, the State reserves the right to cancel this Agreement and reallocate the funds. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 4 of 15 CR5573 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 6. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES a) The State's Authorized Representative is Doug Wetzstein, or his successor, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, MN 55155, 651 - 757 -2819, and has the responsibility to monitor the Grantee's performance and the authority to accept the services provided under this Agreement. b) The Grantee's Authorized Representative is Eric Macbeth, 3830 Pilot Knob Rd, Eagan, MN 55122, 651 - 675 -5300, emacbeth@cityofeagan.com, or his successor. If the Grantee's Authorized Representative changes at any time during this Agreement, the Grantee must immediately notify the State. c) The State's Project Manager is Celine Lyman, 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155, 651 - 757 -2541, Celine.Lyman @state.mn.us, or her successor, and has the responsibility to monitor the Grantee's performance by evaluating and approving the satisfactory completion of objectives and tasks identified in this Agreement, ensuring compliance with all requirements of this Agreement and ensuring that invoiced totals are properly allocated to objectives and tasks in the Workplan and do not exceed the budgeted objective /task amounts. The State's Project Manager has the authority to approve the services provided under this Agreement and authorize payment for those services. If the services are satisfactory, the State's Project Manager will certify acceptance of each invoice submitted for payment. 7. ASSIGNMENT Grantee may neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior consent of the State and a fully executed Assignment Agreement, executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved this Agreement, or their successors in office, or as provided by law. 8. AMENDMENTS AND CHANGE ORDERS a) Amendments: Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and shall not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed the original Agreement or their successors in office. The Project Sponsor may apply to the State to amend this Agreement for the following purposes: 1) Increases or decreases in the State grant share 2) Increases or decreases in the scope of the project 3) Changes in the budget period of the project 4) Extension of the term of this Agreement Amendments to this Agreement that are mutually acceptable to the Project Sponsor and the State shall be effective upon the date that the last signature is obtained by the State, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 2, and shall remain in effect until the conclusion of the original budget period, or if amended, the conclusion of the amended budget period. b) Change Orders. If the State's Authorized Representative, or Project Manager, or the Contractor's Authorized Representative identifies a minor change needed in the Work Plan and budget, either party may initiate a Change Order using the Change Order Form provided by the MPCA. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 5 of 15 CR5573 31 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 Minor changes are defined as reallocating less than ten percent (10 %) or $50,000, whichever is less, of the overall contract, cumulatively, whether between or within tasks. Change Orders may not delay or jeopardize the success of the Project, alter the overall scope of the Project, increase or decrease the overall amount of the Contract, or cause an extension of the term of this Contract. Major changes or reallocations (over 10% or $50,000) require an Amendment rather than a Change Order. The State's Authorized Representative, or Project Manager, and the Contractor's Authorized Representative shall sign the Change Order Form in advance of doing the work, which will then become an integral and enforceable part of the Contract. 9. REPORTS a) Semi - Annual Progress Report. The Grantee shall submit for review and approval by the State a Semi - annual Progress Report for each six -month period beginning on January 1 and July 1 or for any part thereof during which this Agreement is in effect. The Semi - annual Progress Report shall be submitted to the State by February 1 and August 1 and shall include at least the following information for the six month time period: 1) A brief discussion of the relationship of the reporting year's activities to the overall goals and objectives of the project, and any proposed changes or modifications in the overall goals and objectives. 2) A discussion of project findings appropriate to the work conducted during the reporting year, including Work progress relative to the Project Work Plan milestone schedule, and difficulties encountered during the reporting year. 3) A summary of the reporting year's best management practices (BMPs) identifying the type, number and location of BMPs, funding levels or sources and the outcome of nonpoint source pollution control activities. This data shall be reported in a format prescribed by the State. 4) Monitoring Data Reporting (EQuIS). The water quality monitoring data collected during the project shall, through a cooperative arrangement with the State, be verified and entered into the Minnesota Water Monitoring System (EQuIS). The data shall be submitted annually by November 1. Monitoring data shall be reported in an EQuIS compatible format acceptable to the State. 5) Itemized Budget Expenditure Report. The Grantee shall provide a semi - annual update of project spending according to the approved, Itemized Budget indicating by each budget line item at least the following: i) Cumulative expenditures and in -kind contributions through previous reporting periods. ii) Expenditures and in -kind contributions for the current reporting period. iii) Total expenditures. This report shall be provided in a format acceptable to the State. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 6 of 15 CR5573 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 Minor changes are defined as reallocating less than ten percent (10 %) or $50,000, whichever is less, of the overall contract, cumulatively, whether between or within tasks. Change Orders may not delay or jeopardize the success of the Project, alter the overall scope of the Project, increase or decrease the overall amount of the Contract, or cause an extension of the term of this Contract. Major changes or reallocations (over 10% or $50,000) require an Amendment rather than a Change Order. The State's Authorized Representative, or Project Manager, and the Contractor's Authorized Representative shall sign the Change Order Form in advance of doing the work, which will then become an integral and enforceable part of the Contract. 9. REPORTS a) Semi - Annual Progress Report. The Grantee shall submit for review and approval by the State a Semi - annual Progress Report for each six - month period beginning on January 1 and July 1 or for any part thereof during which this Agreement is in effect. The Semi - annual Progress Report shall be submitted to the State by February 1 and August 1 and shall include at least the following information for the six month time period: 1) A brief discussion of the relationship of the reporting year's activities to the overall goals and objectives of the project, and any proposed changes or modifications in the overall goals and objectives. 2) A discussion of project findings appropriate to the work conducted during the reporting year, including Work progress relative to the Project Work Plan milestone schedule, and difficulties encountered during the reporting year. 3) A summary of the reporting year's best management practices (BMPs) identifying the type, number and location of BMPs, funding levels or sources and the outcome of nonpoint source pollution control activities. This data shall be reported in a format prescribed by the State. 4) Monitoring Data Reporting (EQuIS). The water quality monitoring data collected during the project shall, through a cooperative arrangement with the State, be verified and entered into the Minnesota Water Monitoring System (EQuIS). The data shall be submitted annually by November 1. Monitoring data shall be reported in an EQuIS compatible format acceptable to the State. 5) Itemized Budget Expenditure Report. The Grantee shall provide a semi - annual update of project spending according to the approved, Itemized Budget indicating by each budget line item at least the following: i) Cumulative expenditures and in -kind contributions through previous reporting periods. ii) Expenditures and in -kind contributions for the current reporting period. iii) Total expenditures. This report shall be provided in a format acceptable to the State. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 6 of 15 CR5573 �2, CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 The State may withhold payment until the Grantee submits and the State approves a Semi - Annual Report according to the conditions of this Agreement. b) Project Review and Budget Adjustment. Upon expenditure of fifty percent of total project costs by the Grantee, the Grantee shall, upon request of the State, make available to the State for review and approval: 1) A detailed summary of project expenditures and in -kind contributions, and completed work plan activities, according to the approved Itemized Budget and including: i. Invoices or payment vouchers indicating that the goods or services were received and paid for. ii. Listing of applicable labor hours, hourly rates, and indirect rates and costs. iii. Listing of material, supply, and equipment prices and costs. iv. Sufficient additional information to verify the nature and eligibility of the work plan activity. v. A specific description of the work product associated with each expenditure. vi. A revised, Itemized Budget which, indicates all previous project expenditures and in -kind contributions and the total eligible project costs necessary to complete the project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and Minn. R. 7076.0100 through 7076.0290. 2) The State shall: i. Review expenditures to verify cost eligibility and acceptable completion of Work Plan activities. ii. Review the revised Itemized Budget which indicates the total eligible project costs necessary to complete the project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and Minn. R. 7076.0100 through 7076.0290. iii. Review eligibility and methods of determining match. iv. Adjust the revised Itemized Budget to account for adjustments resulting from this project review and notify the Grantee of the adjusted Itemized Budget. If the corresponding State Grant Share of the adjusted Itemized Budget is Tess than the State Grant Share provided for in this Agreement, the State Grant Share available to the Grantee shall be subject to Limitations on Cost Sharing of this Agreement. If the corresponding State Grant Share of the adjusted Itemized Budget is greater than the State Grant Share provided for in this Agreement, the Grantee may request an amendment to this Agreement in accordance with the conditions of this Agreement. When the total State Grant Share authorized to complete the project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement is increased by means of an amendment of this Agreement, upon execution of said amendment the State shall make payment to the Grantee of the additional State Grant Share the Grantee is entitled to receive in accordance with this Agreement, as amended. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 7 of 15 CR5573 33 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 c) Final Report. Upon completing the requirements of the approved Project Work Plan, the Grantee shall develop and provide to the State a Final Report. The Final Report shall address at least the information required for the Semi - Annual Progress Report and shall summarize and evaluate such information for the entire duration of the Project. Upon project completion, the Grantee shall also submit a Final Financial Report showing the source and disposition of all grant and match funds, and in -kind contributions. All final report documents must be received at the MPCA within thirty (30) days following the end of this grant Agreement. Failure to submit the Final Report within 30 days may result in cancellation of the final payment or State action for the return of the total grant amount. 10. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES CONTINUING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN When applicable, within one (1) year of the execution of this Agreement, the Grantee shall prepare and submit to the State for review, a draft Best Management Practices Continuing Operation and Maintenance Plan, which shall address at least the following: a) Designation of responsibilities for the continuing operation and maintenance, as defined herein, of BMPs, including but not limited to: 1) Proposing minimum useful lives to be assigned to each particular type of BMP, where the minimum useful life is the minimum time period over which operation and maintenance, as defined herein, shall be undertaken. 2) Designation of responsibilities for the continuing operation and maintenance of BMPs, including: i. Identifying each step or task necessary to ensure the continuing efficient operation of each BMP and then designating who shall be responsible for each. ii. Describing the administrative, legal, financial or other commitments and responsibilities necessary to ensure the continuing efficient operation of each BMP. b) Where individual land managers, local governmental units, agencies, or organizations other than the Grantee shall be delegated complete or partial responsibility for the continuing operation and maintenance of BMPs as defined herein, the Grantee shall describe the administrative, legal and fiscal arrangements, including remedial action, which shall be available to the Grantee, to ensure continuing operation and maintenance, as defined herein, of BMPs. c) A procedure for monitoring and reporting the continuing operation of BMPs for at least the minimum useful life assigned to each BMP. e) The State may withhold any payment until such time as the Grantee submits a draft Best Management Practices Continuing Operation and Maintenance Plan, the State approves the Grantee's Best Management Practices Continuing Operation and Maintenance Plan, and the Grantee, or the appropriate delegated local governmental unit, implements and enacts the provisions (including administrative, legal and fiscal arrangements), of a "Best Management Practices Continuing Operation and Maintenance Plan" that has been approved by the State. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 8 of 15 CR5573 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 c) Final Report. Upon completing the requirements of the approved Project Work Plan, the Grantee shall develop and provide to the State a Final Report. The Final Report shall address at least the information required for the Semi - Annual Progress Report and shall summarize and evaluate such information for the entire duration of the Project. Upon project completion, the Grantee shall also submit a Final Financial Report showing the source and disposition of all grant and match funds, and in -kind contributions. All final report documents must be received at the MPCA within thirty (30) days following the end of this grant Agreement. Failure to submit the Final Report within 30 days may result in cancellation of the final payment or State action for the return of the total grant amount. 10. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES CONTINUING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN When applicable, within one (1) year of the execution of this Agreement, the Grantee shall prepare and submit to the State for review, a draft Best Management Practices Continuing Operation and Maintenance Plan, which shall address at least the following: a) Designation of responsibilities for the continuing operation and maintenance, as defined herein, of BMPs, including but not limited to: 1) Proposing minimum useful lives to be assigned to each particular type of BMP, where the minimum useful life is the minimum time period over which operation and maintenance, as defined herein, shall be undertaken. 2) Designation of responsibilities for the continuing operation and maintenance of BMPs, including: i. Identifying each step or task necessary to ensure the continuing efficient operation of each BMP and then designating who shall be responsible for each. ii. Describing the administrative, legal, financial or other commitments and responsibilities necessary to ensure the continuing efficient operation of each BMP. b) Where individual land managers, local governmental units, agencies, or organizations other than the Grantee shall be delegated complete or partial responsibility for the continuing operation and maintenance of BMPs as defined herein, the Grantee shall describe the administrative, legal and fiscal arrangements, including remedial action, which shall be available to the Grantee, to ensure continuing operation and maintenance, as defined herein, of BMPs. c) A procedure for monitoring and reporting the continuing operation of BMPs for at least the minimum useful life assigned to each BMP. e) The State may withhold any payment until such time as the Grantee submits a draft Best Management Practices Continuing Operation and Maintenance Plan, the State approves the Grantee's Best Management Practices Continuing Operation and Maintenance Plan, and the Grantee, or the appropriate delegated local governmental unit, implements and enacts the provisions (including administrative, legal and fiscal arrangements), of a "Best Management Practices Continuing Operation and Maintenance Plan" that has been approved by the State. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 8 of 15 CR5573 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 11. LIABILITY The Grantee must indemnify, save and hold the State, its agents, and employees harmless from any claims or causes of action, including attorney's fees incurred by the State, arising from the performance of this Agreement by the Grantee or the Grantee's agents or employees. This Clause shall not be construed to bar any legal remedies Grantee may have for the State's failure to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. 12. USE OF SUBCONTRACTORS If the Grantee decides to fulfill any of its obligations and duties under this Agreement through a subcontractor to be paid for by funds received under this grant, the Grantee shall not execute a contract with the subcontractor or otherwise enter into a binding agreement until it has first received written approval from the State's Authorized Representative, unless such subcontract is a specific part of an approved Project Workplan included in this Agreement. The State's Authorized Representative shall respond to requests from the Grantee for authorization to subcontract within ten (10) working days of receiving the request. All subcontracts shall reference this Agreement and require the subcontractor to comply with all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The Grantee shall be responsible for the satisfactory and timely completion of all work required under any subcontract and the Grantee shall be responsible for payment of such subcontracts. The Grantee shall pay all Subcontractors, less any retainage, within 10 calendar days of receipt of payment to the Grantee by the State for undisputed services provided by the Subcontractor and must pay interest at the rate of one and one -half percent per month or any part of a month to the Subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the Subcontractor. 13. RECORDS MAINTENANCE AND AUDITING The Grantee, subcontractors, and contributing sponsors with whom the Grantee enters into Agreements to perform any or all of the work required under the terms of this Agreement, shall maintain complete and accurate books, records, documents, and accounting procedures. Such books, records, documents, and accounting procedures shall fully disclose the amount and disposition of all State Grant funds disbursed under this Agreement, as well as funds and in -kind contributions used for match. Such records shall also account for: disposition of project expenditures, property purchased, program income, and documentation of compliance with applicable federal, state, or local laws, ordinances, rules or regulations, and the conditions of this Agreement. Under Minn. Stat § 16C.05, subd. 5, such records shall be available to authorized representatives of the State, including the State contracting department, the State Auditor and /or the Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for examination and audit and shall be maintained for a minimum of six (6) years after termination of this Agreement. If during the period when this Agreement, as amended, is effective or within six (6) years thereafter, the Grantee has an independent audit conducted that includes or addresses the activities of this Agreement, a copy of the audit shall be provided to the State. 14. NONDISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT During the performance of this Agreement, neither the Grantee, nor those with whom the Grantee subcontracts for all or part of the work to be performed under this Agreement shall, because of age, sexual preference, political affiliation, race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance or disability, discriminate against any person with respect to hire, tenure, compensation, terms of employment, upgrading of employment, facilities, privileges or conditions of employment; refuse to hire persons seeking employment; or, discharge an employee. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 9 of 15 CR5573 35 18. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 15. NONDISCRIMINATION IN AVAILABILITY AND USE OF FACILITIES Neither the Grantee, nor those with whom the Grantee subcontracts for all or a portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement shall exclude any person from participating in, deny them the benefits of, or discriminate against them on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, sexual preference, political affiliation, or status with regard to public assistance or disability. 16. ANTITRUST Grantee hereby assigns to the State of Minnesota any and all claims for overcharges as to goods and /or services provided in connection with this Agreement resulting from antitrust violations that arise under the antitrust laws of the United States and the antitrust laws of the State of Minnesota. 17. GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES ACT The Grantee and the State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. ch. 13, as it applies to all data provided by the State under this Agreement, and as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Grantee under this Agreement. The civil remedies of Minn. Stat. § 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this Clause by either the Grantee or the State. If the Grantee receives a request to release the data referred to in this Clause, the Grantee must immediately notify the State. The State shall give the Grantee instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released. a) Obligations. The State owns all rights, title and interest in all of the intellectual property rights, including copyrights, patents, trade secrets, trademarks, and service marks in the Works and Documents created and paid for under this Agreement. Works means all inventions, improvements, discoveries (whether or not patentable), databases, computer programs, reports, notes, studies, photographs, negatives, designs, drawings specifications, materials, tapes, and disks conceived, reduced to practice, created or originated by the Grantee, its employees, agents, and subcontractors, either individually or jointly with others in the performance of this Agreement. Works includes "Documents." Documents are the originals of any databases, computer programs, reports, notes studies, photographs, negatives, designs, drawings, specifications, materials, tapes, disks, or other materials, whether in tangible or electronic forms, prepared by the Grantee, its employees, agents, or subcontractors, in the performance of this Agreement. The Documents shall be the exclusive property of the State and all such Documents must be immediately returned to the State by the Grantee, at the Grantee's expense, upon the written request of the State, or upon completion, termination, or cancellation of this Agreement. To the extent possible, those Works eligible for copyright protection under the United State's Copyright Act will be deemed to be "works made for hire." The Grantee assigns all right, title, and interest it may have in the Works and the Documents to the State. The Grantee must, at the request of the State, execute all papers and perform all other acts necessary to transfer or record the State's ownership interest in the Works and Documents. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 10 of 15 CR5573 15. NONDISCRIMINATION IN AVAILABILITY AND USE OF FACILITIES Neither the Grantee, nor those with whom the Grantee subcontracts for all or a portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement shall exclude any person from participating in, deny them the benefits of, or discriminate against them on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, sexual preference, political affiliation, or status with regard to public assistance or disability. CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 16. ANTITRUST Grantee hereby assigns to the State of Minnesota any and all claims for overcharges as to goods and /or services provided in connection with this Agreement resulting from antitrust violations that arise under the antitrust laws of the United States and the antitrust laws of the State of Minnesota. 17. GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES ACT The Grantee and the State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. ch. 13, as it applies to all data provided by the State under this Agreement, and as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Grantee under this Agreement. The civil remedies of Minn. Stat. § 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this Clause by either the Grantee or the State. If the Grantee receives a request to release the data referred to in this Clause, the Grantee must immediately notify the State. The State shall give the Grantee instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released. 18. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS a) Obligations. The State owns all rights, title and interest in all of the intellectual property rights, including copyrights, patents, trade secrets, trademarks, and service marks in the Works and Documents created and paid for under this Agreement. Works means all inventions, improvements, discoveries (whether or not patentable), databases, computer programs, reports, notes, studies, photographs, negatives, designs, drawings specifications, materials, tapes, and disks conceived, reduced to practice, created or originated by the Grantee, its employees, agents, and subcontractors, either individually or jointly with others in the performance of this Agreement. Works includes "Documents." Documents are the originals of any databases, computer programs, reports, notes studies, photographs, negatives, designs, drawings, specifications, materials, tapes, disks, or other materials, whether in tangible or electronic forms, prepared by the Grantee, its employees, agents, or subcontractors, in the performance of this Agreement. The Documents shall be the exclusive property of the State and all such Documents must be immediately returned to the State by the Grantee, at the Grantee's expense, upon the written request of the State, or upon completion, termination, or cancellation of this Agreement. To the extent possible, those Works eligible for copyright protection under the United State's Copyright Act will be deemed to be "works made for hire." The Grantee assigns all right, title, and interest it may have in the Works and the Documents to the State. The Grantee must, at the request of the State, execute all papers and perform all other acts necessary to transfer or record the State's ownership interest in the Works and Documents. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 10 of 15 CR5573 3ta 37 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 b) Notification. Whenever any invention, improvement, or discovery (whether or not patentable) is made or conceived for the first time or actually or constructively reduced to practice by the Grantee, including its employees and subcontractors, in the performance of this Agreement, the Grantee shall immediately give the State's Authorized Representative written notice thereof, and must promptly furnish the Authorized Representative with complete information and /or disclosure thereon. c) Representation. The Grantee must perform all acts, and take all steps necessary to ensure that all intellectual property rights in the Works and Documents are the sole property of the State, and that neither Grantee nor its employees, agents, or subcontractors retain any interest in and to the Works and Documents. The Grantee represents and warrants that the Works and Documents do not and will not infringe upon any intellectual property rights of other persons or entities. Notwithstanding Clause XIII Liability, the Grantee shall indemnify, defend, to the extent permitted by the Attorney General, and hold harmless the State, at the Grantee's expense, from any action or claim brought against the State to the extent that it is based on a claim that all or part of the Works or Documents infringe upon the intellectual property rights of others. The Grantee will be responsible for payment of any and all such claims, demands, obligations, liabilities, costs, and damages, including, but not limited to, attorney fees. If such a claim or action arises or in Grantee's or the State's opinion is likely to arise, the Grantee must, at the State's discretion, either procure for the State the right or license to use the intellectual property rights at issue or replace or modify the allegedly infringing Works or Documents as necessary and appropriate to obviate the infringement claim. This remedy of the State will be in addition to and not exclusive of other remedies provided by law. d) License. The State hereby grants a limited, no -fee, noncommercial license to the Grantee to enable the Grantee's employees engaged in research and scholarly pursuits to make, have made, reproduce, modify, distribute, perform, and otherwise use the Works, including Documents, for research activities or to publish in scholarly or professional journals, provided that any existing or future intellectual property rights in the Works or Documents (including patents, licenses, trade or service marks, trade secrets, or copyrights) are not prejudiced or infringed upon, that the Minnesota Data Practices Act is complied with, and that individual rights to privacy are not violated. The Grantee shall indemnify and hold harmless the State for any claim or action based on the Grantee's use of the Works or Documents under the provisions of Clause XVI.B.2. Said license is subject to the State's publicity and acknowledgement requirements set forth in this Agreement. The Grantee may reproduce and retain a copy of the Documents for research and academic use. The Grantee is responsible for security of the Grantee's copy of the Documents. A copy of any articles, materials or documents produced by the Grantee's employees, in any form, using or derived from the subject matter of this license, shall be promptly delivered without cost to the State. e) Acknowledgement. The Grantee shall acknowledge the State's funding of any resulting publications, data, or other material, whether subject to copyright or not, with the following language: Funding for this publication (or document, paper, data, etc.) was provided by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency through a Grant from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency from the State's Clean Water Partnership Grant Fund or the State's Clean Water Fund. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 11 of 15 CR5573 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 f) Publicity. Any publicity regarding the subject matter of this Agreement must identify the State as the sponsoring agency and shall not be released, unless such release is a specific part of an approved Project Workplan included in this Agreement, prior to written approval by the State's Authorized Representative. For the purposes of this Clause, publicity includes notices, informational pamphlets, press releases, research, reports, signs and similar public notices prepared by or for the Grantee, individually or jointly with others, or any subcontractors, with respect to the Project, publications, or work funded by this Agreement. The Grantee must not claim that the State endorses its products or services. 19. WORKERS COMPENSATION AND LABOR The Grantee certifies that it is in compliance with Minn. Stat. § 176.181, subd. 2., pertaining to workers' compensation insurance coverage. The Grantee's employees and agents shall not be considered State employees. Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act on behalf of these employees and any claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of these employees are in no way the State's obligation or responsibility. The Grantee shall comply with the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 181.59, Discrimination on account of race, creed, or color prohibited in contract, as applicable. The Grantee shall ensure that all personnel involved in the performance of this Agreement are properly qualified, trained, and competent, and shall be, where applicable, appropriately medically monitored during the Project. 20. PREVAILING WAGE Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 177.41 to 177.44 and corresponding Minn. R. 5200.1000 to 5200.1120, this Contract is subject to the prevailing wages as established by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry during the period of October 31 through December 30, 2011. These prevailing wages can be found on the MPCA website at http: / /www.pca. state .mn.us /index.php /water /water- types- and - programs/ water - nonpoint- source - issues / clean - water - partnership /financial - assistance- for-nonpoint- source - water - pollution - projects - clean - water - partnership- and - section -319- programs.html. Specifically, all contractors and subcontractors must pay all laborers and mechanics the established prevailing wages for work performed under the Contract. Failure to comply with the aforementioned may result in civil or criminal penalties. 21. PROJECT SIGNS The State shall provide the Grantee with guidance regarding official Project Signs. The Grantee shall construct one or more Project Signs consistent with the most recent applicable guidance provided by the State. The Grantee shall erect such Signs as appropriate sites adjacent to the Waters of Concern or at appropriate locations along major roadways within the Project area. 22. ACQUISITION OF PERMITS The Grantee shall be responsible for acquisition of all permits necessary to undertake Project activities and shall acquire such permits from appropriate federal, state, and local agencies and jurisdictions. This provision shall apply to permits issued by the MPCA. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 12 of 15 CR5573 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 f) Publicity. Any publicity regarding the subject matter of this Agreement must identify the State as the sponsoring agency and shall not be released, unless such release is a specific part of an approved Project Workplan included in this Agreement, prior to written approval by the State's Authorized Representative. For the purposes of this Clause, publicity includes notices, informational pamphlets, press releases, research, reports, signs and similar public notices prepared by or for the Grantee, individually or jointly with others, or any subcontractors, with respect to the Project, publications, or work funded by this Agreement. The Grantee must not claim that the State endorses its products or services. 19. WORKERS COMPENSATION AND LABOR The Grantee certifies that it is in compliance with Minn. Stat. § 176.181, subd. 2., pertaining to workers' compensation insurance coverage. The Grantee's employees and agents shall not be considered State employees. Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act on behalf of these employees and any claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of these employees are in no way the State's obligation or responsibility. The Grantee shall comply with the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 181.59, Discrimination on account of race, creed, or color prohibited in contract, as applicable. The Grantee shall ensure that all personnel involved in the performance of this Agreement are properly qualified, trained, and competent, and shall be, where applicable, appropriately medically monitored during the Project. 20. PREVAILING WAGE Pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 177.41 to 177.44 and corresponding Minn. R. 5200.1000 to 5200.1120, this Contract is subject to the prevailing wages as established by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry during the period of October 31 through December 30, 2011. These prevailing wages can be found on the MPCA website at http: / /www.pca. state .mn.us /index.php /water /water- types- and - programs /water - nonpoint -sou rce- issues /clean- water - partnership /financial- assistance for- nonpoint- source - water - pollution - projects- clean- water - partnership and - section -319- programs.html. Specifically, all contractors and subcontractors must pay all laborers and mechanics the established prevailing wages for work performed under the Contract. Failure to comply with the aforementioned may result in civil or criminal penalties. 21. PROJECT SIGNS The State shall provide the Grantee with guidance regarding official Project Signs. The Grantee shall construct one or more Project Signs consistent with the most recent applicable guidance provided by the State. The Grantee shall erect such Signs as appropriate sites adjacent to the Waters of Concern or at appropriate locations along major roadways within the Project area. 22. ACQUISITION OF PERMITS The Grantee shall be responsible for acquisition of all permits necessary to undertake Project activities and shall acquire such permits from appropriate federal, state, and local agencies and jurisdictions. This provision shall apply to permits issued by the MPCA. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 12 of 15 CR5573 3P) CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 23. EQUIPMENT Equipment purchased with grant funds must be used for Project purposes for the duration of the Project or the equipment's useful life, whichever comes first. If the Grantee no longer needs a piece of equipment for Project purposes, the Grantee shall so notify the MPCA in writing. The MPCA shall determine the disposition of such equipment. The MPCA may direct that the equipment be used on another project, be sold and the proceeds used for Project purposes, or that it be used for some other water quality purpose. 24. EQUIPMENT INSURANCE The Grantee shall be responsible to procure and maintain adequate insurance coverage for any equipment used on the Project, whether purchased with Project or any other funds, lent or given by any agency, organization or person. or procured in any other manner. 25. PRECEDENCE OF MINN. R. 7076.0100 TO 7076.0290 In the event that any provision of this Agreement is not consistent with the provisions of Minn. R. 7076.0100 to 7076.0290, the Rule supersedes the inconsistent provision. 26. WAIVER If the State fails to enforce any provision of this Agreement, that failure does not waive the provision or its right to enforce it. 27. GOVERNING LAW, JURISDICTION AND VENUE Minnesota law, without regard to its choice -of -law provisions, governs this Agreement. Venue for all legal proceedings out of this Agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 28. RIGHT OF SETOFF Under Minn. Stat. § 270C.65, and other applicable law, the Grantee consents to disclosure of its social security number, federal tax identification number, and /or Minnesota tax identification number, already provided to the State, to Federal and State tax agencies and State personnel involved in the payment of State obligations. These identification numbers may be used in the enforcement of Federal and State tax laws, which could result in action requiring the Grantee to file State tax returns and pay delinquent State tax liabilities, if any, or pay other State liabilities. 29. DEFINITIONS The terms used in this Agreement have the meanings defined in Minn. Stat. §§ 103F.701 to 103F.761 and Minn. R. 7076.0110. Notwithstanding the definitions referenced above, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below: Best Management Practices (BMPs) - Practices, techniques, and measures that prevent or reduce water pollution from nonpoint sources by using the most effective and practicable means of achieving water quality goals. BMPs include official controls, structural and nonstructural measures, and operation and maintenance procedures necessary for the continuing, efficient, operation of structural measures. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 13 of 15 CR5573 69 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 Contributing Sponsor - Local governmental units, state or federal agencies, associations and organizations - other than the Grantee - contributing an identifiable level of financial assistance to the local share of project support. Such assistance may be a cash contribution, in -kind services, or a combination of cash and in -kind services. Eligible Project Costs - Those project costs that are reasonable, necessary and allocable to the project, permitted by appropriate State cost principles, approved by the State and determined to be eligible pursuant to Minn. R. 7076.0130 and this Agreement. Equipment - Any item or system having an initial cost of $300 or more and having a useful life of two years or more. Equipment Replacement - Obtaining and installing equipment, structures, accessories, or appurtenances which are necessary during the useful life of the BMPs to maintain the capacity and performance for which such practices were designed, implemented and constructed. Grantee or Project Sponsor - A Local governmental unit entering into a grant contract with the State to carry out the purposes of the Minnesota CWP financial assistance program to local governmental units pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 103F.701 to 103F.761 and Minn. Rules 7076.0100 to 7076.0290. In - Kind Contribution - The value of a non -cash contribution to meet the cost sharing obligation of the Grantee. Subject to approval of the State, an in -kind contribution may consist of reasonable charges for real property and equipment or the reasonable value of goods and services directly benefiting the project. Local Governmental Unit or Local Unit - A statutory or home rule charter city, town, county, soil and water conservation district, watershed district, an organization formed for the joint exercise of powers under Minn. Stat. § 471.59 and any other special purpose district or authority exercising authority in water and related land resources management at the local level. Nonpoint Source - A land management activity or land use activity that contributes or may contribute to ground and surface water pollution as a result of runoff, seepage, or percolation and that is not defined as a point source in Minn. Stat. § 115.01, subd. 11. Nonpoint sources include, but are not limited to, rural and urban land management activities and land use activities and specialty land use activities such as transportation. Official Controls - Ordinances and regulations that control the physical development of the whole or a part of a local government unit or that implement the general objectives of the local government unit. Operation and Maintenance - Activities required to provide for the dependable and economical functioning of a BMP during its useful life. Operation means effective and efficient control of the processes and equipment, structures, facilities, accessories or appurtenances which make up the BMP, including, but not limited to, financial and personnel management, record keeping, laboratory processes, and planning. Maintenance means the preservation of functional integrity and efficiency and includes preventative maintenance, corrective maintenance, and equipment replacement. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 14 of 15 CR5573 CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 Contributing Sponsor - Local governmental units, state or federal agencies, associations and organizations - other than the Grantee - contributing an identifiable level of financial assistance to the local share of project support. Such assistance may be a cash contribution, in -kind services, or a combination of cash and in -kind services. Eligible Project Costs - Those project costs that are reasonable, necessary and allocable to the project, permitted by appropriate State cost principles, approved by the State and determined to be eligible pursuant to Minn. R. 7076.0130 and this Agreement. Equipment - Any item or system having an initial cost of $300 or more and having a useful life of two years or more. Equipment Replacement - Obtaining and installing equipment, structures, accessories, or appurtenances which are necessary during the useful life of the BMPs to maintain the capacity and performance for which such practices were designed, implemented and constructed. Grantee or Project Sponsor - A Local governmental unit entering into a grant contract with the State to carry out the purposes of the Minnesota CWP financial assistance program to local governmental units pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 103F.701 to 103F.761 and Minn. Rules 7076.0100 to 7076.0290. In - Kind Contribution - The value of a non -cash contribution to meet the cost sharing obligation of the Grantee. Subject to approval of the State, an in -kind contribution may consist of reasonable charges for real property and equipment or the reasonable value of goods and services directly benefiting the project. Local Governmental Unit or Local Unit - A statutory or home rule charter city, town, county, soil and water conservation district, watershed district, an organization formed for the joint exercise of powers under Minn. Stat. § 471.59 and any other special purpose district or authority exercising authority in water and related land resources management at the local level. Nonpoint Source - A land management activity or land use activity that contributes or may contribute to ground and surface water pollution as a result of runoff, seepage, or percolation and that is not defined as a point source in Minn. Stat. § 115.01, subd. 11. Nonpoint sources include, but are not limited to, rural and urban land management activities and land use activities and specialty land use activities such as transportation. Official Controls - Ordinances and regulations that control the physical development of the whole or a part of a local government unit or that implement the general objectives of the local government unit. Operation and Maintenance - Activities required to provide for the dependable and economical functioning of a BMP during its useful life. Operation means effective and efficient control of the processes and equipment, structures, facilities, accessories or appurtenances which make up the BMP, including, but not limited to, financial and personnel management, record keeping, laboratory processes, and planning. Maintenance means the preservation of functional integrity and efficiency and includes preventative maintenance, corrective maintenance, and equipment replacement. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 14 of 15 CR5573 40 STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as required by Minn. Stat. Sections 16A.15 and 16C.05. MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY By By Date Title (with delegated authority) Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 Date Purchase Order No. 3000003300 CITY OF EAGAN Grantee certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed the Agreement on behalf of the Grantee, as required by applicable articles, by -laws, resolutions or ordinances By Title Date CWP -12: Neighborhood Lakes Management Plans Grant Agreement No. 0000000000000000000043249 Project Implementation Grant - A grant from the State to the Grantee for the implementation of an approved Diagnostic Study and Implementation Plan or their equivalent, that identify BMPs to be implemented. Project Objective - One of the major Project Work Plan activity groupings of a Resource Investigation Grant or a Project Implementation Grant (e.g., Monitoring Plan, Identification of BMPs, Stream Bank Stabilization Program). Resource Investigation Grant - A grant from the State to the Grantee for the preparation of a Diagnostic Study and Implementation Plan. Work Plan - A document prepared by the Sponsor, and reviewed and approved by the State, which describes in detail the work activities to be undertaken by the Sponsor in order to fulfill the requirements of Minn. Stat. §§ 103F.701 to 103F.761 and Minn. R. 7076.0100 to 7076.0290. An approved Project Work Plan shall include or incorporate by reference at least the following: an approved Project Monitoring Plan, an approved Quality Assurance Project Plan, an approved Milestone Schedule, an approved project budget according to Objectives. In witness whereof, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. Revised March 20, 2012 CWP12 Project Grant MPCA /Watershed Page 15 of 15 CR5573 41 Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA: I. Minnesota Water Agency Response Network (MnWARN) Mutual Aid Agreement and Resolution. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve and adopt the Minnesota Water Agency Response Network (MnWARN) Mutual Aid Agreement and Resolution and Authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • MnWARN is a statewide water /wastewater agency response network of "utilities helping utilities" assist members with: ✓ emergency assessment, emergency response, and recovery ✓ mutual aid agreement for sharing emergency resources with members ✓ resources to help recover from a disaster ✓ emergency contact network ✓ voluntary participation • MnWARN resources include personnel, equipment, materials and other associated services necessary to protect the health and welfare of the utilities' customers • There are 6 regions in the State of Minnesota; Eagan would be in Region 6. Other MnWARN members in Region 6 (a partial list) include Apple Valley, Bloomington, Burnsville, Fridley, Golden Valley, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, Prior Lake, Rosemount, Savage, Saint Paul, Shakopee, and St Louis Park. • The League of Minnesota Cities developed the standard agreement used by all communities. • Eagan will benefit by having a pre- established agreement among a network of utilities to complement and enhance our capabilities to prepare and respond to a broad range of threats and disasters, both natural and man -made. There is no cost to the City for membership. • The Agreement and Resolution has been reviewed by the City Attorney's office and Public Works Department and found to be in order for favorable Council consideration. ATTACHMENTS: l 1 • Mutual Aid Agreement Resolution, page `'l5 . • A copy of the 12 page Mutual Aid Document is available for review in the City Administrator's Office by request. EXHIBIT I RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN AUTHORIZING GOVERNMENTAL UNIT TO BE A PARTY TO MINNESOTA WATER AGENCY RESPONSE NETWORK (MnWARN) WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 authorizes governmental units by agreement of their governing bodies to jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to them; WHEREAS, MnWARN has been established by the adoption of a Mutual Aid Agreement (the Agreement) among Governmental Units to allow their water, wastewater and storm water utilities to assist each other in case of an emergency; WHEREAS, the Agreement allows other governmental units to become a party to the Agreement by the adoption of this Resolution and sending notice to the Secretary of the Statewide Committee for MnWARN; and WHEREAS, the governing body of the City of Eagan considers it to be in the best interest of the City to be a party to the Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Eagan: 1. Authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to sign this resolution evidencing the intent of City of Eagan to be a party to MnWARN; and 2. Clerk is directed to send a certified copy of this resolution and a completed membership information form to the Secretary of the Statewide Committee of MnWARN; and 3. City of Eagan agrees to comply with all terms of the Agreement. Motion by: CITY OF EAGAN Seconded by: CITY COUNCIL Those in favor: By: It's Mayor Those against: Date: April 17, 2012 Attest: CERTIFICATION I, Christina M. Scipioni, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 17 day of April, 2012. 4 3 It's Clerk City Clerk Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting J. CONTRACT 09 -18, DUCKWOOD DRIVE OVERPASS BRIDGE & STREET IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Change Order No. 5 to Contract 09 -18 (Duckwood Drive Overpass — Bridge & Street Improvements) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • Contract 09 -18 provides for the extension of Duckwood Drive, connecting Federal Drive with Pilot Knob Road, over I -35E as a new grade separated crossing (overpass). Contract 09 -18 also includes reconfiguration of the existing intersection of Pilot Knob Road and Duckwood Drive, including the traffic signal, modification to the right -turn lane for the northbound I -35E ramp from Pilot Knob Road, and bituminous trails on both sides of Duckwood Drive. • On April 5, 2011, the City Council awarded the bid for Contract 09 -18 for the bridge, street and associated improvements to Lunda Construction, Inc. • Change Order No. 5 provides for the following items: o Provide bonus payment for better - quality bituminous street pavement. The specifications for the project provided an incentive /disincentive for the density of the bituminous street surface. A test of the density, or compaction, of the bituminous layers indicated it was higher than what was specified. The additional density will enhance the long term street condition and the specifications provide for additional payment to the contractor to recognize this benefit (ADD $1,116.10). o Additional painting. A modular block retaining wall was included adjacent to the daycare facility on the east side of the intersection of Federal Drive and Duckwood Drive. It is desirable to paint this unpainted wall to match the color of the bridge (ADD $825.00). • The change order provides for a total ADD of $1,941.10 (0.04% of original contract). The cost of the additional work will be the responsibility of the City's Major Street Fund. • The change order has been reviewed by the Engineering Division and found to be in order for favorable Council action. Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting K. ONE -STOP PERMIT SYSTEM DAKOTA COUNTY ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve an Agreement for the City of Eagan's utilization of a One -Stop Permit System with Dakota County and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • Dakota County has created a One -Stop Permit System that brings together the permitting processes of the County and participating cities into one, easy to use permitting application process where the public can easily apply for permits that apply to one or more entities within the County. This would be most applicable to right -of -way permits for projects with installations that are located in the public right -of -way of multiple agencies. • Dakota County and the City of Eagan are members of the High Performance Partnership (HiPP) which began in 2003 to identify collaborative opportunities for Dakota County and its largest cities. The initiative identifies ways to work together that enhance service delivery, reduce the costs of delivering services, or both. The One -Stop Permit System offers an opportunity to provide efficient, effective and responsive government to our citizens and the general public as part of this mission. • The Dark Fiber Subcommittee of HiPP, with Eagan representation, has investigated the feasibility of an amalgamated fiber system that would provide more internal functionality for governmental- operations but also potentially be a backbone system for a county -wide broadband provider. The One -Stop Permit System was a recommendation from this subcommittee. • The County has created the One -Stop Permit System and will grant the City a license to use the Permit System. The County will provide all IT hosting and operations support for the Permit System and provide support and system maintenance as well. The County will provide the computer servers that will run the Permit System, providing secured access to the City and the general public. • The County will provide technical support for the Permit System and help desk support during normal working hours on County business days. The County will provide training on the use of the Permit System for City staff. • The cost of the Permit System includes an Initial Buy -In Fee of $2,000 as the Cities share of the development costs and a monthly fee to cover the hosting and support costs. The monthly fee is based upon the history of permits processed by each city. The cost for Eagan is proposed at $81.88 per month ($982.50 a year). The City currently pays $400 a month for a similar permitting service. • Public Works staff and the City Attorney's office have reviewed this agreement and found it to be in order for favorable Council action. 115 Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA: L: AWARD BID FOR CITY OF EAGAN CONTRACT 12 -08 CONDUIT/FIBER INSTALLATION AND DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY CONTRACT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Award bid for City of Eagan Contract 12 -08 conduit /fiber installation to MP Nexlevel, LLC, direct the City Attorney's Office to prepare the necessary contract and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the contract at the direction of the City Administrator. FACTS: • On January 4, 2011, the Eagan City Council accepted the 2010 report and recommendations of the City's broadband consultant which emphasized a twin strategy: 1) Extend City fiber and duct to business locations in the city for open access use by any provider offering telecommunications services to Eagan businesses. 2) Connect this into a privately owned state -of -the -art colocation facility /data center to position Eagan as a telecommunications hub for multiple providers and end users. • On March 18, 2012, the Council approved the use of best -value solicitation of bids, as allowed by State statutes, for Phase II, providing for the consideration of bidders expected performance in relation to their submitted bid. • On March 30, 2012, the City of Eagan published legal notice and issued the Best Value RFP with technical proposals due on April 9, 2012 and final base proposals due on April 12, 2012. Seven technical proposals were received by the technical proposal due date and eight final base proposals were received. The City had to eliminate one final base proposal because the contractor failed to submit a technical proposal. • The technical responses were evaluated by the City's broadband consultant, Design Nine, the City's broadband field consultant from Elert & Associates, two City Engineering representatives and the IT Manager. Scores were calculated based off the following criteria: o Experience or Performance in constructing projects similar in size and function within the last five years, to the satisfaction of the City. (40 %) o Experience or Performance of the assigned job superintendent and foreman in supervising construction of projects similar in size and functions within the last five years, to the satisfaction of the City. (40 %) o Availability of major equipment to complete this project in a satisfactory manner. (20 %) Li-(p • Contractor scores from the Technical Proposals ranged from a low of 6.1 to a high of 9.2 (mean 7.35,) with the Adjusted Score being the bidders Base Bid divided by their Technical Score (the lowest Adjusted Score represents the Best Value for the City). • The base bid responses ranged from a low of $403,329.63 to a high of $611,253.67 (mean $507,323.24,). Based upon the Best Valuation method the lowest adjusted bidder was MP Nexlevel, LLC for a base bid price of $510,199.76 (MP Nexlevel, LLC received the highest Technical Proposal score of 9.20). • MP Nexlevel scored well because of its demonstrated experience with preparation of all necessary documentation required for the acquisition of the appropriate permits, splicing and testing of the fiber optic cables, directional boring operation and installation. Further, MP Nexlevel demonstrated an exceptional 2 hour response time in an emergency situation, when fiber cable had to be fixed quickly in order to enable data communications with a County building. Not all bidders had experience with these critical functions. • The total awarded construction contract base bid plus alternates would be $670,596.14. The five year annual maintenance contract for all segments to MP Nexlevel, LLC. The total cost of this maintenance agreement is $13,201.25. The low bid for installation is nearly 20% below the engineer estimate. • The City Attorney's Office will finalize the contract for signature by the Mayor and City Clerk upon approval of the City Administrator. • Installation of underground conduit, trace wire, and hand holes are to be completed by August 31, 2012. • It is anticipated the full Phase I and II routes will go active for use by Fall, 2012. ATTACHMENTS: Enclosed on page 413 is an overview of the mapped fiber route. Enclosed on pages t.4 through is a document from the City's Broadband Consultant, Design Nine, which shows results of the bidders associated base bid, technical score, and Adjusted Score sorted by the lowest Adjusted Score. 4� • .. .pmt.., • uo ;6utxwi qq valid, Experience/ Performance in constructing pro- jects similar in size and functions within the last five years, to the satisfaction of the City 4 points Experience of the assigned job superintendent and foreman in supervising construction of projects similar in size and functions within the last five years, to the satisfaction of the City 4 points Availability of major equipment to complete this project in a satisfactory manner 2 points • DESIGN NINE we build networks that perform Re: Bid Award for City of Eagan Open Conduit and Fiber Project - Phase 2 From: Sid Boswell The City of Eagan received seven bids as a result of the RFP for the Open Conduit and Fiber Project, Phase 2. The conduit and fiber built as a result of this RFP will be part of the AccessEagan Open Access Fiber Network. The RFP, using the Best Value Procurement Method, was published on March 23th, with Technical Proposals due on April 9th and final bids due on April 12th. There was a mandatory pre -bid meeting held at the City offices on March 30th with one ad- denda published via the City Web site and sent electronically to bidders who registered during the pre -bid meeting. The Technical Proposals were evaluated by five individuals including two external evaluators, Sid Boswell from Design Nine and Felix Fayngersh from Elert and Associates. The City evaluators included two representatives from Engineering, one from Information Technology. The Technical Proposals evaluations were based upon the following criteria: April 12, 2012 Scores from the Technical Proposals ranged from a low of 6.1 to a high of 9.2 (mean 7.35, standard deviation 1.04) with the Ad- justed Score being the bidders Base Bid divided by their Technical Score (the lowest Adjusted Score represents the Best Value for the City). The bid responses were to include conduit and fiber optic cable placement with optional bids for alternate construction. The op- tional fiber cable awards would be made based upon budget considerations including price of base bid and the price of the op- tional fiber work. Additionally, vendors were invited to provide optional rates for annual maintenance. The base bid responses ranged from a low of $403,329.63 to a high of $611,253.67 (mean $507,323.24, standard deviation $63,615.70). Based upon the Best Valuation method the lowest adjusted bidder was MP Nexlevel, LLC for a base bid price of $510,199.76 (MP Nexlevel, LLC received the highest Technical Proposal score of 9.20). MP Nexlevel, LLC has worked with the City of Eagan in the past, including being selected for the initial phase of the Acces- sEagan construction in the fall of 2011 and currently performs maintenance on some of the enterprise fiber the City uses for in- design nine, inc. • 2000 kraft drive, suite 2180 • blacksburg, va 24060 • 540.951.4400 • info(adesignnine.com • www.designnine.com Base Bid - ti ,ti $ 510,199.76 Alternate Construction 1. MP Nexlevel $ 160,396.38 Total Award $ 670,596.14 2. Universal Services ;.4.1,:' .,_3s - ti ,ti �,�s tea, �>�_ > r •.� 1. MP Nexlevel $ 510,199.76 9.20 55,456 2. Universal Services $ 403,329.63 7.16 56,331 3. TelCom Const $ 476,922.91 7.70 61,938 4. Underground Piercing $ 538,241.00 7.93 67,874 5. Arvig $ 486,015.71 6.10 79,675 6. Egan Company $ 525,300.00 6.38 82,335 7. CCI Systems $ 611,253.67 7.00 87,322 • we build networks that perform ternal business. MP Nexlevel also completed the large fiber build previously completed in the City and two other localities for Independent School District 196. DESIGN NINE The high level estimate Design Nine developed prior to bidding this phase of work was approximately $625,000. The base bid of the lowest adjusted bidder is 20% below that estimate. Based upon the Best Value Procurement Method we recommend awarding the contract to MP Nexlevel, LLC, the lowest adjust- ed bidder. Additionally, MP Nexlevel bid on all components of the RFP including the alternate construction, and annual maintenance. We recommend awarding the alternate construction along with the base bid to MP Nexlevel as well as a five year annual mainte- nance contract to commence upon completion of the construction and acceptance by the City. Annual Maintenance (all segments) $ 13,201.25 The following table lists all bidders with their associated base bid, technical score, and Adjusted Score sorted by the lowest Ad- justed Score. design nine, inc. • 2000 kraft drive, suite 2180 • blacksburg, va 24060 • 540.951.4400 • infondesignnine.com • www.designnine.com ray • DESIGN NINE we build networks that perform design nine, inc. • 2000 kraft drive, suite 2180 • blacksburg, va 24060 • 540.951.4400 • info@designnine.com • www.designnine.com 5! Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012, Eagan City Council Meeting M. FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND FINAL PLAT (STONEHAVEN 3RD ADDITION) - LENNAR CORP. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a Final Planned Development (Stonehaven 3` Addition) for 12 single - family homes, located west of Wescott Woodlands along Duckwood Drive; and To approve a Final Plat (Stonehaven 3rd Addition) for 12 single - family lots, located west of Wescott Woodlands along Duckwood Drive. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Councilmembers present FACTS: D The Preliminary Planned Development and Preliminary Subdivision for the Stonehaven development were approved by the City on March 16, 2010. The approval was for a total of 263 units of single - family, twin- homes, and townhomes, and future 100 -unit multiple - family senior building upon approximately 115 acres. D Stonehaven 3 Addition consists of 12 85' single - family lots in the southwest corner of the development. The 3 Addition is consistent with the preliminary Stonehaven approval from March 2010. D The Open Space Management Plan established with the earlier phases is also made part of the Stonehaven 3` Addition Development Agreement and the Final Planned Development Agreement. Public open space and public trail in this area were incorporated with the first phase of construction, following the Open Space and Trail Phasing Plan previously submitted by the developer. D The Open Space will be owned and maintained by the Homeowners' Association. The City will maintain the trail and land within 6' on either side of the trail. A Conservation Easement has been prepared by the City Attorney for the open space and wetland buffers within Stonehaven 3rd Addition. D All documents are anticipated to be in order for execution at the City Council meeting on April 17, 2012. ISSUES: None ATTACHMENTS (3 Location Map, page 5?) Approved Preliminary Stonehaven Site Plan on page 5 Final Plat (Stonehaven 3` Addition), page 4 City otEapall Community Development Department Location Map THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. Eagan Boundary Right -of -way Parcel Area Park Aroa Building Footprint 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development /Developer: Stonehaven (Lennar) E 153 �m Y� S u _ 'a • I i J 3 1:14111010 o I` _ z m x a m ■ 514 p n 4 tri y o 4 F x 1 `3 � r � o4z ril z 4 N. rororo 1V rnn Eri rTir70rbn om rrrrrrzrt —c ZZZ ZZZ az ZC�x d a�aa�anaan z z� zmzzom� .�rc�c�c�r�roo� oz �' zn e�zz , a >_ <aro~dc�� zmDydrb z ' -3aa �a� >D - �z� z m 0 a z Consent Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012, Eagan City Council Meeting N. APPROVE ADDITIONAL HOUSE PLAN OPTIONS FOR STONEHAVEN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT — LENNAR CORP. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve additional house plan options for the Stonehaven Development located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Councilmembers present. FACTS: ➢ The Stonehaven Planned Development was approved in 2010. The development consists of a variety of single - family homes, twinhomes, and row townhomes. ➢ Development of the site began in 2010. In 2011, Lennar added several additional single - family house plans to the Stonehaven development. ➢ Lennar continues to develop new house models, modifying floor plans and features to update its product to meet the "current lifestyle needs and buyer preferences that are not addressed by the current offerings in Stonehaven." ➢ Lennar recently has submitted 9 new house plans for inclusion in the Stonehaven development for 2012. As with the existing homes in this development, each floor plan is offered in several different exterior finish styles. o Three of the models (Washburn, Kellogg, and Snelling) are designed to fit both the 65' and 85' wide single - family lots. Each is a two -story design with 4 bedrooms and a 3 -stall garage. o Six models (Middlebury, Colgate, Danbury, Wakefield, Walden and Kenton) are designed for the 85' wide single - family lots. All are two stories with 4 bedrooms and a 3 -stall garage. Some have an optional 5 bedroom or 4th garage stall. ➢ These new house plans will be subject to the same bulk standards for setbacks, lot coverage, structure height, etc. as other homes in the development. ➢ Staff has reviewed the house plans and finds them to be comparable and compatible in appearance to the units already approved in this development. ISSUES: None ATTACHMENTS (3): Location Map, page 51 Applicant's narrative, pages •8, and af House plan drawings, pages through 71'l' Location Map Eagan Boundary t Right -of -way I Parcel Area Park Area Building Footprint City of kali Community Development Departm•nt 1000 Development /Developer: Stonehaven (Lennar) 0 1000 THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. 2000 Feet N W+ April 2. 2012 City of Fagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Stonehaven Dear l lonorable Mayor and members of the Council; LENNAI® To endure the demands of today's challenging housing market, Lennar continues to evolve house plans to offer homes that are receptive to customers changing wants and needs. With that in mind, Lennar is proud to submit a series of new home plans to supplement the existing collection of homes already offered in the Stonehaven Community. The new plans are designed based upon focus groups conducted with Lennar buyers, feedback from JD Powers surveys, and market research. The presented plans include design features that meet current lifestyle needs and buyer preferences that are not addressed by the current offerings in Stonehaven. The objective is to maintain variety without compromising the quality of craftsmanship and material selections of the home. The plans below are designed with large families in mind each with four bedrooms and four baths. Washburn: l'hc Washburn is a 2 story single family plan in the Landmark series. The finished area is 3,328 sf including; 4 bedrooms, 4 baths, and a second floor laundry room. This plan includes a 3 car garage. Kellogg: The Kellogg is a 2 story single family plan in the 1..andmark series. The 3,112 sf horne includes 4 bedrooms, and 4 baths. The main floor features a kitchen /dinette /great configuration along with a formal dining room. A highlight of the second floor is the spacious closets throughout. This plan includes a 3 car garage. Snelling: 'fhe Snelling is a 2 story single family plan in the Landmark series. The 3,270 sf plan includes 4 bedrooms, 4 baths with a main floor that features a kitchen /dinette /great room configuration along with an oversized mudroom closet, dining room and a study. The second includes a spacious loft. This plan includes a 3 car garage. Middlebury: The Middlebury is a 2 story single family plan from the Lundgren Collection. The 3,444 sf plan includes 4 bedrooms, 3.5 baths and plenty of open living space, perfect for entertaining. The second story includes a loft and walk in closets in all of the bedrooms. Colgate: The Colgate is a 2 story single family plan from the Lundgren Collection. The 3,748 sf plan includes 4 bedrooms, 3.5 baths and plenty of open living space including a large craft room on the main level. The second story includes n impressive owners suite and walk in closets in all of the bedrooms. Danbury: The Danbury is a 2 story single family plan from the Lundgren Collection. The 3,712 sf plan includes 4 bedrooms, 3.5 baths and plenty of open living space, including a large sunroom on the main level. The second story includes a large loft larger bedrooms then the other plans. RECEIVED APR 1 2 2012 16305 36th Ave N • Suite 600 • Plymouth, MN 55446 -4270 LENNAR.COM 5 LENNAR Wakefield: The Wakefield is a 2 story single family plan from the Lundgren Collection. The 3,614 sf plan includes 4 bedrooms, 3.5 baths and plenty a large u shaped kitchen, perfect for entertaining. The second story includes a cat walk open to the main entrance and separate his and hers closets in the master bedroom. Walden: The Walden is a 2 story single family plan from the Lundgren Collection. The 3,785 sf plan includes 4 bedrooms, 3.5 baths and a large main floor great room, perfect for entertaining. The second story includes a loft, walk in closets in all of the bedrooms, and a laundry room. Kenton: The Kenton is a 2 story single family plan from the Lundgren Collection. The 3,410 sf plan includes 4 bedrooms, 3.5 baths and plenty of open living space, including a main floor family room, living room and formal dining area. The second story includes a loft area that could easily be converted to a 5 bedroom. We feel strongly that the approval of these new plans will improve interest in Stonehaven. We appreciate your support and look foreword to continuing our partnership with the City of Eagan in creating a successful Community. In the meantime, if you have any questions or comments feel free to contact tne. Respectfully, Joe Jablonski Land Development Area Manager. Lennar Corporation 16305 36th Ave N • Suite 600 • Plymouth, MN 55446 -4270 LENNIR.COM RECEIVED APR 1 2 2Q1t The Wash Burn 2 Stories 1 4 Bedrooms 1 4 Baths 1 3-Bay Garage LENNAR 16301 36th Aver o �3. Su to 6 Plymouth, MN 5 6 952 249 -3000 $5' av\A l05` 5� to - The Kellocc 2 Stories 4 Bedrooms 4 Baths LENNAR 16305 56th Avenue N., Suite 600, Plynouth, MN 55/146 952- 249 -3500 (01 SS' aV...A LA Sivnle The Snellinc 2 Stories 14 Bedrooms 14 Baths 13 -Bay Garage LENNAR 16305 36th Avenue N., Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 952- 249 -3000 �z- �5' (AAA (2S ' `f to' 0 n O O fl 6 n <. O ? ^ ry i, ° 0 r, r, R R y Q . P In C L� C- 71 O n n O M co e. r r • O O . en.) 'Q �• O :a R — n. O . • v, O • "� .. C. = c . r r, r• �- w 7' H 0 0 . ;a 0 0 •1 .. t cr H 0 [ O' R b G O tri . 0 n a „� '� .. 4 cn et 4 n ry a 0 c ' v a . ^ • 8 0 H 0• 6.4 . G .. `G 0 ,..� e3 n w 0 v „ n C� ra ' 6' ° et ^ O . 'LY C 0 c 0 0 a 0 � . r c ^;, o 0 6 °»0 n 0 . 0 a 11 g 0 A C R .1 re 0_ -< x 0 0 r °. • : "3 CrQ .j • tlq 0' 0 c o - G 6 N re 0' O -t v O r, rt v 3 . O. o S ° c • -1 rD H U a !S. Q. c c c 0 6 n O 0 O r c 0 G. ti O v 0 a r 0 0 0 0 0 C K (03 S-" (6 S 0 7-)Lkt`L.,1 et e = 6 § § E w ) w ti ƒ } Go \ 2 c m o \ / - / 0 ƒ \ _ _ \ / k R j 0 ( / 0 a m & » # 0 me o - - \ et -, ` § E @ / t \ ƒ .... § co P-1 k 2 § ƒ ƒ \ q *0 § \ $ ƒ 0 ƒ vo / § rl Q ± ° § Cr E J k k / 0. 0. § F / § 0 k . ƒ 2 0. 0 & « 0e ± Q W \ \ n k ? \ / E § o / ƒ - E n f o q 2 _ n k - d - \ / -. et ) Co, eo c n o k p_, 0 0 k 2 0. o } ° § ....e. , \ % 0. o t — ƒ § 0 0 t7 K / en a r \ \ rD 0. 0 ta - » sa � F 0 \ S-y I ois C, LCD r1T W V r Wi'N no h w rz. IQ (0 cl) td itt 1 71 It : ] < e M G C a' O S? O 71 S P., `0 r . c 5 R G et, u .. G e. a> n p ] .- " O G e 7r e = n t' O O O C O. - tTl 4 "2 . n ' t •+ O n v .4' n R °' � ' O •, a i i � Q • f a n: O. O O w 5' G. O O 4 LT" = < ' ft ea : r 8 0 o. rn - a eD C AP w A 1 -a o- a n A R H r O. O r. ►r a t� n ; �' ' rs n O • O 9 , w O g, o C P O H M P r`S P4 a. E Lr r"T N' O n r O E O. O p- w cR p a G ro ...1 ^ Ci. r. 8 ft ea E o ° v o. r ^ fa PP P o 0 O . c n O O. (n t3 124 4 ? O G n qv ro �' Yj ma 'AT u n ;t .. R n cf. ft O � .. Q. :�: O G: � D" � p O C (-r G rs n, H R E p = n G fa, p� O ,. to ; O" O. O. A 5 ` n P v7 V N tol `� SR1t-t5 66 �► W o o h E. Gay to • IQ VI CA ird H • w p, ^n G ., w c e c ? ,c Cr LI o a' . 1 O et o Q' O ry' a . ¢, d ,., • O . Cr7 . v, O w et II O✓ y H .- 4:1 G . a : w cr w O w v O � 9 H Cr e H n L) n H O O. �. w ' x n •e a VS' nt �o v A &E Ft l"LD •r ' � V w 41 c n 1. O h rris to ul a ' OPP !it it tr tra g. cra tY N FIT O '� 0 . et, gl la e C o . y7. E. s t`. g 8 C .o rD c ari 5- A - & n '6- x c a • . a cr 61 n ✓ ° O 0 II, O a 0 q 0 r. o a a. • N S : n cr. 1, 0 r o' H ?' M. 13 a ry t9 09 01. ' = C.) �f ^' O ^ + y 0 n . O U g N O 0 N- C V � B 0 ' W •-- O x ci 0, 0 . 7 n n 0 S' cc F O a o . f ' ar vz rD 0 o n " 0- C i • n 0 r� Cr a u0 0 0 in 0 X 7 l Q'5 5-r l o ■, W 4, r Pit 0 v3 ri • w� ID • CA tit I T 1 ' n a C r a c 0 y 0 0- 0 g . 'o o . y o — o t t s • O • a O 0 0 = a • °• .3 tea n '�_ v N' o $ ac ' 6 ' .o '-t _ '9 5 a. G' A ^w O L .. O ? v O m O O ^ OM X O ¢' C .^'t' cr. 0 0 . fi r N o p O ' 6 Q' A O ., . 9 ° 1, ° + �. • 3 d Cr a �, ., ` . o c PV o ` � ° I. o • 1 • fp O • O y • y ^ < s O • O St _ .`S O' O • < G. (' ^ R ... O n n C '7J- SS ^ O 3 • n r, O o � • � O ? �� . -. O ' co ¢, .--. w x O °3 e. �t , S • v (I' ti n n 0 > L ? p H O ff, • K�*� • x Pitt < •� N o o $ crl �. x • a . ., ° t n R. (t a+ K 9 R R M ^ R �. ft C; b V cm O O N N U -+ 73 S -F It.-t 1g Agenda Memo April 17, 2012 City Council Meeting O. APPROVE a Resolution to accept donations from Genisys Credit Union and Minnesota Pork. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a resolution to accept a cash donation of $500 from Genisys Credit Union and a cash donation of $500 from Minnesota Port to support several 2012 Parks and Recreation programs and events and to authorize the necessary budget adjustment. FACTS: • The Genisys Credit Union and Minnesota Pork have approached the City of Eagan to donate money to support several 2012 Parks and Recreation programs and events. • Donation/sponsorship dollars were budgeted for 2012 to allow these community programs /events to be hosted by interested local partners. • Genisys Credit Union has asked to contribute $500 to support the Battle of the Bands and skateboard event that will occur at the skate/bike park in Lexington Diffley Park. • Minnesota Pork, a farm and pork advocacy organization in Minnesota, has asked to contribute $500 to support the July 18 Classic Car & Oldies Music Night at Market Fest. o In addition Minnesota Pork will donate one pound of pork products to Minnesota's Second Harvest Food Bank for each question that a person asks at their tent. • By approving these donations the 2012 Recreation budget would receive a corresponding budget adjustment reflecting the cash donations of: • $500 to budget line item 3061 -4663. (MN Pork) • $500 to budget line item 3058 -4663. (Genisys) ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution on Page CITY OF EAGAN Motion made by: Seconded by: Those in favor: Those against: Dated RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT CASH DONATIONS FROM GENISYS CREDIT UNION AND MINNESOTA PORK WHEREAS, Eagan Parks and Recreation offers several community wide programs and events during the year that offer volunteer and partnership opportunities; and WHEREAS, Genisys Credit Union and Minnesota Pork, a farm and advocacy organization in Minnesota have expressed an interest in partnering with Eagan Parks and Recreation to support several 2012 programs and events; and WHEREAS, Genisys Credit Union has offered to donate $500 in cash to support the Teen Battle of the Bands and Skateboard Event scheduled in Lexington Diffley Park during the summer of 2012; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Pork has offered to donate $500 in cash to support a specific Market Fest event; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Eagan City Council does hereby accept the $500 cash donation from Genisys to support the Teen Battle of the Bands and Skateboard Event and the $500 cash donation from Minnesota Pork to support the July 18`" Classic Car & Oldies Music Night at Market Fest. CERTIFICATION CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: Attest: Mayor City Clerk I, Christina M.Scipioni, City Clerk for the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 17 day of April, 2012. City Clerk Agenda Memo April 17, 2012 City Council Meeting P. APPROVE a Resolution to accept a grant from the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council in the amount of $5,000 for a Community Arts Grant and authorize the necessary budget adjustment. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a Resolution to accept a Community Arts Grant from the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council (MRAC) in the amount of $5,000 and authorize the necessary budget adjustment. FACTS: • At their November 15, 2011 meeting the City Council approved the submission of an application for a Community Arts Grant to fund various arts programming throughout the community. • The City of Eagan was notified that they were awarded a grant of $5,000, which will be matched dollar to dollar with 25% in cash. • The grant request included a focus on artist gatherings. The community will be gathered in a variety of ways, including, but not limited to: • Harvest of Art event. Activities to include public Raku firing, Harvest of Art exhibit, hands on art activities, and entertainment. • Sampler Saturdays. Adult workshops to allow students to try an art form for an accessible price. • Adult Open Studios. Lectures and demonstrations at open studios to enrich the creative experience and to connect artists in the community. • Teen Open Studios. Provide a place for teens to connect in a safe environment through artwork and creative expression. Teen open studio will be staffed by Eagan Art House teaching artists. • Continued branding and marketing efforts of the "Art... Be a Part" campaign. • By accepting this grant the 2012 Recreation budget would receive a corresponding budget adjustment of: • $5,000 to budget line item 3163 -4140 ATTACHMENT: • Resolution on Page 7Q v . 1.7 CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT A GRANT FROM THE METROPOLITAN REGIONAL ARTS COUNCIL WHEREAS, Eagan Parks and Recreation offers several community wide art programs and events during the year; and WHEREAS, the City of Eagan applied for and received a $5,000 grant from the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council for summer arts programs; and WHEREAS, those 2012 programs include the Harvest of Art event that includes public Raku firing, Harvest of Art exhibit, hand on art activities and entertainment; adult workshops on select Saturdays to allow students to try an art form; lectures and demonstrations at open studios for adults and teens, and continued branding and marketing efforts of the "Art...Be a Part" campaign; and WHEREAS, the grant requires a 25% cash match by the City of Eagan totaling $1,250; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Eagan City Council does hereby accept a grant of $5,000 from the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council for summer arts programs including Harvest of Art event, Sampler Saturdays, adult open studios, teen open studios and the continuation of marketing efforts of the "Art..Be a Part" campaign. Motion made by: Seconded by: Those in favor: Those against: Dated: CERTIFICATION - 1 a CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: Attest: Mayor City Clerk I, Christina M. Scipioni, City Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 17 day of April, 2012. City Clerk Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting Q. APPROVE a Resolution to proclaim May 20, 2012 as Arbor Day and the month of May 2012 as Arbor Month in the City of Eagan ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To acknowledge Eagan as the recipient of the 2011 Tree City USA Award from the National Arbor Day Foundation, and approve the Arbor Day Resolution setting Sunday, May 20 as Arbor Day and May, 2012 as Arbor Month in the City of Eagan. FACTS • Eagan has received the Tree City USA community designation from the National Arbor Day Foundation for the 25 consecutive year. Each year the Parks and Recreation Department conducts an Arbor Day program which includes participation in a tree planting project. This year the 26 annual event will be held at Historic Holz Farm. • Recognition as a Tree City is based on efforts by the City to promote tree planting in the community and the resolution demonstrates that effort. • To become a Tree City, a community must meet four standards: a tree board or department, a tree care ordinance, a comprehensive community forestry program, and an Arbor Day observance. • Eagan has demonstrated progress in the following forestry activities: Publications, parks and open space, and improved ordinance. • The resolution was recommended for adoption by the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission on March 12, 2012. • Receiving these awards acknowledges the City's efforts to minimize environmental impact during developments, and adhere to policies such as "Forever Green," aimed to maintain and enhance Eagan's trees and foliage. • This year's Arbor Day Celebration will be held at the historic Holz Farm site and will be combined with activities scheduled to take place at this year's Holz Farm Spring Festival. Specific scheduled Arbor Day activities include: 11:00 a.m. — 4:00 p.m. Forestry information boot open; visit with Eagan Forestry Staff 11:30 a.m. —12:45 p.m. Arbor Day Tree and Landscape Community Planting Project • Between the park playground and the farm grainery 12:15 — 12:45 p.m. Arbor Day Program • Recognition of 2011 Poster Contest Winner • Announcement of the 2012 Poster Contest Winner 1:00 — 2:00 p.m. Eagan Men's Chorus & Eagan Women of Note performance ATTACHMENTS: • Eagan Arbor Day and Eagan Arbor Month resolution on page E0 • Invitation to event on pages S1 to S2. 79 CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION A PROCLAMATION OF EAGAN ARBOR DAY AND EAGAN ARBOR MONTH WHEREAS, trees are a most valuable resource in the State of Minnesota and City of Eagan — purifying our air and water, helping conserve our soil, serving as a recreational settings, providing habitat for wildlife for all kinds, and enriching our lives in so many important ways; and WHEREAS, pollutants, tree diseases and urban expansion have damaged and continue to threaten our trees, creating the need for reforestation programs and concerted public action toward ensuring the future of out City's urban forests; and WHEREAS, each year the people of Minnesota pay special attention to the wonderful gift that our trees represent and dedicate themselves to the continued health of our state's trees; and WHEREAS, The City of Eagan has been recognized as a Tree City USA community by the National Arbor Day Foundation since 1988 and desires to continue its tree - planting programs; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Eagan City Council does hereby proclaim Sunday May 20, 2012 to be ARBOR DAY and the month of May 2012 to be ARBOR MONTH in the City of Eagan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Council further urge citizens to become more aware of the importance of trees to the well -being of our community; and to participate in City tree planting programs which will ensure a greener place for our citizens to live in the decades to come. Motion made by: Seconded by: Those in favor: Those against: Dated: CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: 80 Attest: CERTIFICATION City Clerk Mayor City Clerk I, Christina M. Scipioni, City Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 17 day of April, 2012. 4 City of Eaall Scheduled activities: 11:00 a.m. — 4:00 p.m. 11:30 a.m. — 12:45 p.m. 12:15 — 12:45 p.m. 1:00 — 2 p.m. Paul Olson Superintendent of Parks Celebrate Arbor Day! Gregg Hove Supervisor of Forester TREE cr r USA. 26 ANNUAL ARBOR DAY CELEBRATION TO BE HELD AT HISTORIC HOLZ FARM 4665 Manor Drive, Eagan, MN 55123 In conjunction with The Holz Farm Spring Festival SUNDAY — May 20, 2012 You are invited to join with the City of Eagan as we celebrate Arbor Day on Sunday, May 20, 2012, at the Historic Holz Farm site. Arbor Day has been celebrated in Eagan since 1987, and was established nationally to emphasize the importance of trees and community reforestation. This year's Arbor Day Celebration will be held at this unique 1940's farm site and will be combined with activities scheduled to take place during the Holz Farm Spring Festival. This will be a fun - filled family event with activities scheduled to entertain all ages. Forestry Informational Booth open; visit with Eagan Forestry Staff Arbor Day Tree and Landscape Community Planting Project - between the park playground and the farm grainery Arbor Day Program - Recognition of 2011 Poster Contest Winner - Announcement of the 2012 Poster Contest Winner Eagan Men's Chorus & Eagan Women of Note performance For further information or to volunteer for planting, please contact the Division of Forestry at 651- 675 -5300. Thank you. See backside for Spring Festival Information! Si cAarbor day /arbor day invite2012 411 City of Etall Holz Farm Spring Festival Sunday, May 20, 2012, 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. 4665 Manor Drive, Eagan, MN 55123 Visit Holz Farm for an afternoon of farm fun and learning for the whole family. • Hayrides • Pony Rides • Children's Activities • Farm Fun • Concessions • And more! Admission is free! Some activities and concessions require tickets and are sold onsite for $.50 each. For more information visit www.cityofeagan.com /holzfarm. Historic Holz Farm 4665 Manor Drive Holz Farm Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting R. APPROVE RESOLUTION TO TEMPORARILY EXTEND THE LICENSED PREMISES OF CUZ, INC. DBA LAFONDA DE LOS LOBOS LOCATED AT 3365 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a resolution to temporarily extend the licensed premises of Cuz, Inc. doing business as LaFonda de los Lobos, located at 3365 Sibley Memorial Highway on May 5, 2012. FACTS: ➢ LaFonda de los Lobos is planning a 20 year anniversary event on May 5, 2012. As part of the event, the restaurant plans to setup a tent in its parking lot. ➢ Per City Code, the on -sale liquor license held by LaFonda de los Lobos only allows the sale of alcohol within the restaurant and on its patio. City Code Chapter 5.07 allows the City Council to temporarily extend an establishment's licensed premise as long as the establishment meets all Code requirements. ➢ LaFonda de los Lobos has submitted an application to temporarily extend its licensed premise. The application has been reviewed and deemed in order by City staff and the Police Department. No reason was found to deny the temporary extension of the on -sale liquor license. ➢ LaFonda de los Lobos has also applied for a building permit to construct the tent and a temporary sign permit for event advertising. Staff is reviewing both applications to ensure they meet State Building Code and City Code requirements. ATTACHMENTS (1): �� VS The proposed resolution, including a site plan, is attached on pages to V S3 RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN NO. APPROVAL OF APPLICATION TO EXTEND THE LICENSED PREMISES FOR CUZ, INC., DBA LAFOND DE LOS LOBOS LOCATED AT 3365 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY WHEREAS, the City of Eagan (the "City ") has issued a license for the sale of alcoholic beverages to Cuz, Inc. (the "Licensee "); and WHEREAS, the Licensee has submitted an application to temporarily extend the licensed premises to include the service of alcohol in an additional outdoor area of the licensed premises (depicted in attachment A) for the purposes of conducting a 20 anniversary celebration on May 5, 2012; and WHEREAS, Chapter 5, Section 5.07 of the Eagan City Code allows the City Council to temporarily extend the licensed premises to include any outdoor area located on the property of the licensed premises subject to the applicable provisions of Chapter 10 and Chapter 11 of the City Code provided that specific terms and conditions as set forth in Section 5.07 are met; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby approves Cuz, Inc.'s application for a temporary extension of the on- sale liquor license for May 5, 2012 at the licensed premises of 3365 Sibley Memorial Highway. Motion by: Seconded by: Those in favor: Those against: Dated: April 17, 2012 Attest: CERTIFICATION CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: Its Mayor Its City Clerk I, Christina M. Scipioni, City Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 17 day of April, 2012. Christina M. Scipioni, City Clerk st- Attachment A Cam ,JA \/)e - R 151 (ri butta u\L Spo'csr 1-cauchc 'poA,t nc. S p e F�-; Agenda Information Memo April 3, 2012, Eagan City Council Meeting S. APPROVE EXEMPT PERMIT FOR PINEWOOD COMMUNITY SCHOOL PARENT TEACHER ORGANIZATION TO HOLD A RAFFLE ON MAY 18, 2012 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Adopt Resolution approving Exempt Permit for the Pinewood Community School Parent Teacher Organization to conduct a raffle on May 18, 2012 at 4300 Dodd Road. FACTS: ➢ The Pinewood Community School Parent Teacher Organization has applied for an Exempt Permit with the Gambling Control Board to hold a raffle as listed above. ➢ All requirements of the application have been met and staff deems it in order for approval. ATTACHMENTS (1): A copy of the proposed resolution is attached on page t:51. (The application is available from the Office of the City Clerk.) APPLICATION FOR EXEMPT PERMIT PINEWOOD COMMUNITY SCHOOL PARENT TEACHER ORGANIZATION WHERAS, the Pinewood Community School Parent Teacher Organization has applied for an Exempt Permit to conduct a raffle on May 18, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Eagan Police Department has reviewed the application and has not identified any reason to deny; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby approved the Exempt Permit for the Pinewood Community School Parent Teacher Organization to conduct a raffle on May 18, 2012 at 4300 Dodd Road. Motion by: Seconded by: Those in favor: Those against: Date: April 17, 2012 RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN CERTIFICATION CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: It's Mayor Attest: It's Clerk I, Christina M. Scipioni, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 17 day of April, 2012. EI City Clerk Agenda Memo April 17, 2012 V. APPOINTMENT OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MEMBERS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To appoint members to the City Council's advisory commissions and Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization (WMO), with terms beginning in May 2012. FACTS: • Per the Council's direction, advisory commission appointments are made in April of each year. • Advertising for the Commission vacancies takes place year- round, with an emphasis in recruitment from January— March. • This year, the commission vacancies were advertised on the City's website, Experience Eagan newsletter, and local print and electronic newspapers. • The deadline for applications to be considered for appointment was March 28, 2012. • There were 15 applicants this year. Of those 15 applicants, 14 attended their scheduled interview with the City Council on April 10. • There are no statutory requirements pertaining to the number of commission members that can serve on an advisory commission, including planning commissions. • As a reminder, the City Council took formal action in May 2011 to remove the requirement that the Council must appoint an alternate to each commission, and instead, stated that the Council may appoint an alternate to each commission. • The City Council will be asked to vote via ballot, which will be distributed at the meeting. In keeping with past practice, the voting is proposed to be done by commission in the following order: 1.) Advisory Planning Commission; 2.) Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission; 3.) Airport Relations Commission; and 4.) Energy and Environment Advisory Commission. • The City Council is also asked to vote on the appointments to the Gun Club Lake WMO. In response to a question raised during the interviews, a City staff person may not be appointed to a 3 -year term on the WMO. • Per the Council's Guidelines for Commission Appointment Policy, in the event of a stalemate after three rounds of voting on a specific Commission appointment, the Mayor shall have the authority to make the appointment of the specific term that resulted in the stalemate. • The new Commissioners appointed tonight will receive a letter from the City, in which they will be invited to participate in a new commission member orientation with their commission staff liaison. Orientation packets will also be provided to new Commissioners. • Rather than duplicating all of the commission applications, the Council is asked to bring their interview binders to the April 17 City Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: • Enclosed on pages( and is a summary of the number of openings that exist on each advisory commission, which can be filled in by the Council as appointments are made. • Enclosed on page q u is a REVISED summary of applicants' commission preferences based on the preferences voiced during the interviews. E3B 2012 City Council Advisory Commission Appointments Advisory Planning Commission (APC) 2 -year Terms 1. 2. 3. (1 -year Alternate (if appointed): ) Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission (APrC) 2 -year Terms 1. 2. (1 -year Alternate (if appointed): ) Airport Relations Commission (ARC) 2 -year Terms 1. 2. 3. (1 -year Alternate (if appointed): ) Energy and Environment Advisory Commission (EEAC) 2 -year Terms 1. 2. 3. 4. (1 -year Alternate (if appointed): ) Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization (WMO) 3 -year Term 1. (3 -year Alternate (if appointed): ) 2012 ADVISORY COMMISSION APPLICANTS' PREFERENCES (Revised per feedback at interviews) *Incumbent on a City Advisory Commission ** Alternate Board Member only * * *A change in preference or openness to serving on other commissions (voiced during the interview process). Pierre Lippert and Clifford Spencer both stated a first choice, but also stated they would serve on any of the commissions. APC ARC APrC EEAC WMO Peter Dugan* 1 Thomas Heaney* 1 Daniel Piper* 1 Tim Harder 1 2 4 3 Michael Wisniewski * * * 1 3 2 Chad Stambaugh* 2 1 4 3 Carol Whisnant* 2 1 3 Scott Johnson 1 Michael Palmer* 1 Ray Hobot 1 Pierre Lippert*** 2 2 1 2 Clifford Spencer*** 2 2 1 2 Amir Nadav* 1 Jon Drucker 2 1 Wayne Sames* 1** 2012 ADVISORY COMMISSION APPLICANTS' PREFERENCES (Revised per feedback at interviews) *Incumbent on a City Advisory Commission ** Alternate Board Member only * * *A change in preference or openness to serving on other commissions (voiced during the interview process). Pierre Lippert and Clifford Spencer both stated a first choice, but also stated they would serve on any of the commissions. Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: 1) Direct preparation of findings for DENIAL of the petition to vacate public drainage and utility easements within Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Heights 3rd Addition, OR 2) Continue the public hearing for consideration to vacate 3rd drainage and utility easements within Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Heights 3 Addition to the May 15, 2012 City Council meeting. FACTS: • On February 24, 2012, City staff received a petition from Greg Stewart, representing the property owners of 901 -913 Oakwood Heights Circle (all townhomes within Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Heights 3 Addition) requesting the vacation of a portion of public drainage & utility easement within that property. • On March 20, the City Council received the petition for this vacation, and set a public hearing for April 17 to consider vacating said drainage and utility easements. • The easement is a blanket drainage and utility easement covering the open space property outside the townhome buildings, originally dedicated with Oakwood Heights 3 Addition plat. • There are no existing City utility lines or drainage facilities near the portion of easement for which the vacation has been requested. However, there are non -city utility lines within the portion of the requested easement vacation area (i.e. Dakota Electric Assn & Comcast). • The applicant is requesting the vacation to install backyard decks with footings along the entire west side of the townhome building, and to remove an encroachment of an existing deck within the easement near the northwest corner of the townhome building. • All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all potentially affected utilities informing them of this public hearing. ISSUES: A. LOT 1, BLOCK 1 OAKWOOD HEIGHTS 3 ADDITION DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT VACATION • Two objections from private utility companies with facilities in the easement (Dakota Electric Association and Comcast) have been received, because the petitioned easement vacation would leave their facilities uncovered by public easement. • This vacation petition as presented has been reviewed by the City Attorney and the Engineering and Planning Divisions and found to be unsuitable for favorable Council qhz v J foal Via DUCKWOOD DR. WILDERNESS S ia _CL_CZ) WESC 1RUN f 7gtit ROAD 0 DIFFLEY ROAD 7`) diovgr Nu. • OD 1;J I'V 4 P HLIt CLIFF ROAD Z E- a u 21 H Proposed Vacation Location i YANKEE DOODLE RD. \_ 3/6/2012 City of Eau Engineering Division Proposed Drainage & Utility Easement Vacation Oakwood Heights 3rd Add. Location Map 9L.)- Fig. 1 MOST WESTERLY CORNER, LOT 1, BLOCK 1,OAKWOOD/ IGHTS 3rd S outh as '4. POINT OF BEGINNING -- --- D .day y � h H o yh eg sg h at a FAS M FH T U ri )} e ‹k / ?sr' 8 €C South 89' 04' 06" East 79.67' South 89° 55' 54" East 17.04 - North 00" 04' 06" East 10.00' of 1, glock Heights 3rd Oakwo North 00° 04' 06" East 7.62' Description for vacation of drainage and utility easements over, under and across Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Heights 3rd Addition, Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the most westerly corner of said Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Heights 3rd Addition, thence South 68° 54' 40" East a distance 0(80.43 feet, thence North 00° 04' 06" East a distance of 10.00 feet to the point of beginning, thence continuing North 00° 04' 06" a distance of 174.00 feet, thence South 89° 55' 54" East a distance of 79.67 feet, thence North 00° 04'06" East a distance of 7.62 feet, thence North 68° 55' 54" West a distance of 62.51 feet, thence South 46° 05' 17" West a distance of 53.75, thence South 00° 04' 06" West a distance of 166.81 feet, thence South 89° 55' 54" East a distance of 17.00 feet to the point of beginning and there terminating. 411 1 6 City of Engineering Department Oakwood Heights 3rd Addition Proposed Drainage & Utility Easement Vacation Location Map q5 Fig. 2 Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012, Eagan City Council Meeting B. VARIANCE — 901 OAKWOOD HEIGHTS CIRCLE (GREGORY STEWART) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR direct preparation of Findings of Fact for Denial) a Variance of 25 feet to the required 30 -foot perimeter yard setback for construction of a deck on property located at 901 Oakwood Heights Circle subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Quorum FACTS: ➢ The property is zoned PD, Planned Development and is developed with a seven unit condominium building. ➢ The PD zoning allowed for the condominium building to be located 10 feet from the perimeter of the site at the closest point, which is where Unit 901 is located. ➢ A 30' setback applies to attached decks over 30" above grade on R -3 property. The applicant is proposing to rebuild an existing deck which is in disrepair. Setbacks are measured to the footings which support the structure. ➢ The unit has two existing decks which are in disrepair. The applicant is proposing to rebuild the deck(s). ➢ The applicant designed the replacement deck based on the existing layout. Upon submitting for building permit, the applicant discovered that the decks were subject to a 30' setback and that the decks along with a retaining wall were over the property line and located upon City Park property. ➢ The original Building Permits were erroneously approved, and consequently, the proposed decks did not satisfy the required setbacks. ➢ The applicant has had the property surveyed and the proposed deck would maintain a five foot setback at the closest point to the property line, alleviating that encroachment. ➢ The application does not include the removal of the retaining wall; however, the removal of the encroachment is a condition of approval. ➢ The applicant is not the original homeowner and his stated practical difficulty is the existing deck is in need of replacement. ISSUES: None 60 -DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE: April 24, 2012 ATTACHMENTS: (2) Location Map, page Planning Report, pages through 110 Location Map Oak Hills Park •Park ® ®®eo rat itsjp, ®11 1� ®O� .uIl uuI. ■ \111111111111I!/� mum ::n E r ° gNIE !� I TRIOKR 1111111e® � ` r ii ® • La®1 ®m1 ®e ® ®oQ f�0 lai 11I1�® dl' 1�`.. tve GIs ?r LEXINGTON POINTE PARKWAY � lim 111 ®s • ® ® ®� ® ® ®® •• ®� ®, o 4 ® a ® � ©� ®�e�A zirrli 11. 11 IH D :III iJI ® � ®B�Ei om Sa 4 .. . ©�� ab'1p �a7 =n � ® co eirenr - f IN� P i71I1 Pleinanisomgdhscatt d VI4WO � : L ,, _. •.aai av� llem0e Park b�® A k O the MI . u1 ■ Il i City of Eagan 0 500 1 Parcels Parks Buildings 1,000 Project Name: Gregory Stewart / 901 Oakwood Heights Circle Legend Request: Variance amuse City Bounda ry Case Nos.: 26- VA- 01 -02 -12 ��■ Y 1 Feet 2,000 SUMMARY OF REQUEST AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: April 12, 2012 APPLICANT: Gregory Stewart PROPERTY OWNER: Same REQUEST: Variance LOCATION: 901 Oakwood Heights Circle COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: MD, Medium Density ZONING: PD, Planned Development CASE: 26- VA- 01 -02 -12 HEARING DATE: April 17, 2012 APPLICATION DATE: Feb. 24, 2012 PREPARED BY: Sarah Thomas The applicant is requesting approval of a Variance of 25 feet to the required 30 -foot perimeter yard setback for construction of a deck for property located at 901 Oakwood Heights Circle, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Heights Third Addition. City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivision 3, B., 3, states that the Council may approve, approve with conditions or deny a request for a variance. In considering all requests for a variance and whether the applicant established that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions(s) of this Chapter, the City Council shall consider the following factors: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owner of property has no control. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Code would deprive the applicant property use commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the provisions of this Code. c. The exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Planning Report — 901 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 2 d. The granting of the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. e. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulties. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Code or to properties in the same zone. g. The property for which the variance is requested is otherwise in compliance with the City Code. The recently adopted Variance legislation is reflected in the City Code language above and also contains the following: Subd. 3, A. "Practical difficulties" as used in conjunction with the granting of a variance, means that the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning provisions of this Code; the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Subd. 3, B., 3. A variance will be denied when it is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning provisions of this Code or when the variance is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. Any condition imposed upon the approved variance must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. CODE REQUIREMENTS While this property is zoned PD, the lot is developed with a townhome style condo building; the Planned Development did not make special allowances for setbacks or other bulk standards other than the building pad which was approved to be 10 feet from the perimeter of the property at the closest point. Thus, the applicable standards are those for R -3, Residential Townhouse zoning, which requires a 30 foot setback from the perimeter of the site. City Code Section 11.40, Subd. 4.D.2 states the following shall not be considered as encroachments on required yard setbacks: "Decks, patios, balconies, stoops, or other similar features provided they do not extend more than 30 inches above grade and a distance greater than ... five feet into a required rear yard and provided they do not encroach upon a public easement." For R -1 (Single Family Residential) zoned properties, these code provisions result in a required 15 -foot rear yard setback for decks attached to the principal building and situated more than 30 inches above grade. Planning Report — 901 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 3 BACKGROUND/HISTORY This site is part of the Lexington South Planned Development, which was approved in 1976 for a 15- year term. A subdivision was approved in 2000 which resulted in the division of the common property for Oakwood Heights condominiums and established a separate ownership of the property, and a separate association. A building permit was issued to unit 901 for a 132 sq. ft. deck and three season porch in 2000 and a 64 sq. ft. deck for a hot tub pad was issued in 2003. EXISTING CONDITIONS The seven -unit condominium building, constructed in 2000, is located off of Oakwood Heights Circle, a private street that extends north from Wilderness Run Road. The applicant owns the northern most end unit (901) which includes a deck to the rear of the unit that is connected to a side deck and paver patio. These improvements, along with block retaining walls, are located within the existing drainage and utility easement which consists of the entire area outside of the building pad. One of the decks and a portion of the retaining wall also encroach into the adjacent City -owned Park, Walnut Hill. The condition of the existing deck(s) has deteriorated and the applicant is decks with a similar design. SURROUNDING USES seeking to replace the The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: Planning Report — 901 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 4 EVALUATION OF REQUEST Proposal — The applicant proposes to construct a new deck that will maintain a five foot setback to the rear lot line. The proposed deck will extend 14 feet from the north side of the building where as the existing deck extends 13.43 feet. The proposed deck will run 31 feet in length and wrap around to the rear of the unit as can be seen in the attached exhibit (Patio Plan). Setbacks — A 15 -foot rear yard structure setback applies to attached decks more than 30" above grade in R -1 zoning districts. That setback requirement is greater in R -3 zoning districts as a 30- foot setback is required to the perimeter of the property. Setbacks are measured to the footings. Since the existing building unit is set back 10'8 ", the proposed deck will extend into the required rear yard setback of 30 feet. At its closest point, the deck will be approximately 5'1" from the west property line. The applicant has also applied to vacate the portion of the drainage and utility easement where the decks(s) will be located. APPLICANT'S PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES The applicant's narrative indicates that the approximate ten year old cedar deck is in need of repair. The original deck was erroneously approved to be constructed within the existing drainage and utility easement and within the required perimeter setback, but "is not being expanded in any way." Thus, the applicant believed the deck to be compliant with the zoning ordinance until application for the building permit was made and they were advised otherwise. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The Zoning Ordinance states that relief may be granted from a required ordinance provision where practical difficulties result from carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of such Code provision, provided "the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning provisions of this Code; the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." iol Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Walnut Hill Park P, Park P, Parks, Open Space and Recreation East Residential PD, Planned Development LD, Low Density (0 -4 units /acre) South Residential PD, Planned Development LD, Low Density (0 -4 units /acre) West Walnut Hill Park P, Park P, Parks, Open Space and Recreation Planning Report — 901 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 4 EVALUATION OF REQUEST Proposal — The applicant proposes to construct a new deck that will maintain a five foot setback to the rear lot line. The proposed deck will extend 14 feet from the north side of the building where as the existing deck extends 13.43 feet. The proposed deck will run 31 feet in length and wrap around to the rear of the unit as can be seen in the attached exhibit (Patio Plan). Setbacks — A 15 -foot rear yard structure setback applies to attached decks more than 30" above grade in R -1 zoning districts. That setback requirement is greater in R -3 zoning districts as a 30- foot setback is required to the perimeter of the property. Setbacks are measured to the footings. Since the existing building unit is set back 10'8 ", the proposed deck will extend into the required rear yard setback of 30 feet. At its closest point, the deck will be approximately 5'1" from the west property line. The applicant has also applied to vacate the portion of the drainage and utility easement where the decks(s) will be located. APPLICANT'S PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES The applicant's narrative indicates that the approximate ten year old cedar deck is in need of repair. The original deck was erroneously approved to be constructed within the existing drainage and utility easement and within the required perimeter setback, but "is not being expanded in any way." Thus, the applicant believed the deck to be compliant with the zoning ordinance until application for the building permit was made and they were advised otherwise. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The Zoning Ordinance states that relief may be granted from a required ordinance provision where practical difficulties result from carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of such Code provision, provided "the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning provisions of this Code; the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." iol Planning Report — 901 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 5 The Zoning Ordinance states that relief may be granted provided the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable matter not permitted by the zoning provisions of the Code. The applicant is proposing to reconstruct a deck. There is a seven -unit condominium building with attached garages that have attached decks that are present on the site. Replacement of the deck appears to be a reasonable use of the property and the condominium building is only setback 10 feet from the perimeter of the property at this location. The Zoning Ordinance states relief may be granted provided the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant. The applicant is not the original owner. In addition to having relied upon the erroneous 2000 and 2003 building permit approvals, the applicant is hindered by the design of the unit with the access to the existing deck and three season porch. The requested Variance does appear to be the minimum required to alleviate the practical difficulties. The applicant is requesting relief from a required minimum setback to allow for the construction of a deck. This lot presently has an approximate 10' setback to the unit in the rear yard. The current deck encroaches 3' onto Park property and the retaining wall encroaches 8' into Park property. The applicant proposes to remove the deck encroachment and maintain a minimum five foot setback, thereby bringing the property further into compliance from what exists today. The existing retaining wall that encroaches into Park property is not proposed to be removed at this time; however, removal of the encroachment is included as a condition of approval. The relief sought by the applicant does not appear to be contrary to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, but may be inconsistent with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. That is, the purpose of the building setback provision is to prevent the overcrowding of properties and to provide green space. Since the request is to reduce the yard requirement, it appears to be contrary to the intent of the ordinance. It does not appear that granting of the Variance would result in detrimental effects to the neighboring properties or the public. A wooded area of Walnut Hill Park occupies the adjacent lot near the proposed deck. The public will benefit with the revised plan and via conditions of approval, the removed encroachments. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION In summary, the applicant is requesting a setback Variance of 25 feet to allow re- construction of a deck. The property is zoned PD and contains a condominium building which requires a 30- foot setback to the perimeter of the property. The existing unit at its closest point is set back 10 feet, eight inches from the rear lot line which was approved via the PD. Planning Report — 901 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 6 The requested Variance would result in the deck being five feet from the property line and the suggested conditions of approval would result in the removal of all encroachments (deck and retaining wall) on City park property. The proposed deck is a reasonable use of the residential property and replaces an existing non - conformity. The proposal does not appear to present a detrimental effect to the public. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve a Variance of 25 feet to the required 30 -foot perimeter yard setback for construction of a deck for property located at 901 Oakwood Heights Circle, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Heights Third Addition. If approved, the following conditions shall apply: 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. A building permit shall be required prior to construction of the deck. 3. A survey stake shall be installed to verify the property line and maintain the five foot setback. 4. The deck shall not exceed the size shown on the proposed Site Plan received March 26, 2012. 5. Encroachments (deck and retaining wall) located upon City park property shall be removed by October 1, 2012. 6. The proposed Site Plan shall be revised to accurately show the drainage and utility easement location. Location Map 1O�IIiI . 1i.,Igg4(�.,. ��IIIII� �Enka� �ATRIGKR 0,,,,.� � •`, � OA Ram LEXINGTON POINTE PARKWA nimiallma* II Y mil o oil 1 � � �a o® 'moo ® ®�� ® ®�► ° °�` ® �� Art • /_. II /.71.fH : Elart®arifir®® ®® Ingra a5 ®0 ©dog 41 E RNE'7: • ® ERN SAW. t ©®® ®1 ®� ♦ / - -� ♦ ®® ES �� `` ,` e rn S � 1 Ibt91�� la t i e v itt a ilati av in�Park‘Park O � � Park '''' � , ` °� '�mi1�1�i11a t,!%m00f,�IIIIIIII ° Oak Pond Hills Park - Park' ® _��,•�'�f , bb n Hills Regional •• •� Map Area Extent Project Name: Gregory Stewart / 901 Oakwood Heights Circle Request: Variance Case Nos.: 26- VA- 01 -02 -12 4401. City of Earn 104 0 500 1,000 Legend plume 111, City Boundary Parcels Parks Buildings 2,000 City otBatau Zoning PD Planned Development Land Use Plan MD Medium Density a N 0 300 600 1,200 Feet Current Zoning and Land Use Map Application: 901 Oakwood Heights Circle Type: Variance Case No.: 26- VA- 01 -02 -12 iiriiiiiiiiWallik7Witerk V. r lag P crtimri-,,,v11111111moillit. lisamolifili• "lila "I mingiti*, - S iiiu..auu1111■vki or Subject Site �'� `�A,. III �� - ��► kirAriatIANtilgt I 1 111.1111 IFZ V F1 WM MINN M.11111111111: %Atoll 41 mostiplUIN 2. , aft ■: i uIuIlllluuI• Subject Site ILDER X05 (0 0 N 0 D P 0 D 1 4 Ur �� A Y Of O W €�S£ /fH S ? 1 S 's s. , ? 0 w Cb BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY •0 •0 0 m O O O o u a Q 3 F z ° on ao X) � N n O 0 • o m m 9 N 00 °04'06' E 174.00 CONDOMINIUM BUILDING BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY 174.00 S 00 °04'06' DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT LINE W PROPOSED BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY CONCRETE CURB BITUMINOUS ROADWAY AND GUTTER OAKWOOD HEIGHTS CIRCLE 94.48 N 00 °21'19` E 'C 0 ° O p X07 8.0 c. A 00 xN O 14.0 U1 co V to �Lo o, BIT. DRIVEWAY •6 9 0; e S A 6'o 7 p ' 5 0 O 8 rr t 0 0 Z BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER UT�R f� e qNO SF MENT S 1 °p 13 X7 W O x mD O m 9 ❑ N 00 ° 04'06' E 174.00 Z an CONDOMINIUM BUILDING BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY 174.00 S 00 °04'06 DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT LINE W D -0 a z 0 fl xx BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY BITUMINOUS ROADWAY OAKWOOD HEIGHTS CIRCLE 94.48 N 00 °21'19" E EXISTING SC BIT. DRIVEWAY ?)0; ? 8 a s 0 0 is 20 31' -0" 201 2N0 AVENUE, SW lOq PATIO PLAN NEW PRAGUE, MN 56011 V EE13 2 4 2012 MACI -1 LUME3EIR NAME. -IONE OWNER DATE CONTACT MAC.1 LUMBER INC 952-150-3D5 PRONE 95.- 594340 F.LX PROPER, OF MACU LUMBER INC. FOR E_SMDAMON AND QUOTATION ON, CASIO' OE -CEO SCR ANY ERRORS, SSOSS *MARKETING NAME OF PROJECT: *TELEPHONE #: NARRATIVE PROJECT DESCRIPTION USE: /65//7 1n/7 f-- f d . c/ fie f-[ -C I /�F�3U9s:Ef�t /✓T 4-i� h6e, C / /1 yRs 066 . , frMe-- /*G4c.r7 Sinb , k h// C /z ikJ 4 %cqm,, e 2.�ZG3 . 77f N " /) c'k- `�S ,'' L' � J� ice✓ yw4j . 7j io' � A4 - e- 16k_ 4‘c7-- /4/ .-Pea/ - de-2- i' *too ✓£4 rf41 J77 W ✓10E 41- 77th. ' .c rfrs!T Vi g--6, mce 77& 4 jA?V C f A 5 r- grg , }-c z 66 c LOCATION:` 6K l G/e P ir GO/pr 45' cora . a cv j,- go-g. / 7 tr.-tre :77E- r c' fE ,i5 &t #1 7Z ‚"t&- /,a c47 7v e'e/ v,'1/ , 0 ; -- / yE SUBDIVISION NAME: (existing/ proposed) /2 1'/ft£nl 41/7f S'Lset. /f-7/ f PROPERTY SIZE: (acres, square feet NUMBER OF LOTS: *For use in City's Current and Pending Development pamphlet and Internet site G/Planning /Forms /Development Forms /Applications/Development Application -2005 Ilb Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012, Eagan City Council Meeting C. VARIANCE — 903 OAKWOOD HEIGHTS CIRCLE (NEIL HETHERINGTON) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR direct preparation of Findings of Fact for Denial) a Variance of 6.7 feet to the required 30 -foot perimeter yard setback for construction of a deck on property located at 903 Oakwood Heights Circle subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Quorum FACTS: ➢ The property is zoned PD, Planned Development and is developed with a seven unit condominium building. ➢ The PD zoning allowed for the condominium building to be located 10 feet from the perimeter of the site at the closest point. ➢ A 30' setback applies to attached decks over 30" above grade on R -3 property. The applicant is proposing to rebuild an existing deck which is in disrepair. ➢ The applicant designed the replacement deck based on the existing layout. Upon submitting for building permit, the applicant discovered that the decks were subject to a 30' setback. Setbacks are measured to the footings which support the structure. ➢ An approved Building Permit for the above ground deck on this unit and the other five decks could not be located. ➢ The applicant has had the property surveyed and the proposed deck would generally utilize the same footing location but cantilever two feet toward the perimeter of the property. The deck would be setback 23.3 feet. ➢ The applicant's stated practical difficulty is the 12 year old deck is rapidly deteriorating. ISSUES: None 60 -DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE: April 24, 2012 ATTACHMENTS: (2) Location Map, page 1 .- 2.- Planning Report, pages 113 through 124 Request: Variance Case Nos.: 26- VA- 02 -02 -12 4 11. City of Eagan Location Map LEXINGTON POINTE PARK ��,,, 1111.• ® ® ® ®�•�® • ®�� rump Ali o. ®EP� j • o t • ®0#0 • ®ono ®o OI �� ; �tre�•+,a .� bite anroe nate. �11111P.p�li►� o r 1111111 mule 40► ∎,�' • Oak'Pond Hills Park •Park 4 \IIIIIIIIIIIIP I �� IIIIII 1!!PI! L $P �►�111111 p1111I m �III�P�je�: ebanon Hills Regional Park Map Area Extent Arabbi: �1111111 iii •:i - -: Ravi a Park Park - __ '� o Park �II1i111111Ei IM! i.uii\ '_4 /111111 All OP � o e■ :. 1� ice_ �� Project Name: Neil Hetherington / 903 Oakwood Heights CircleLegend II> 0 500 1,000 omit %min; City Boundary I I Parcels Parks Buildings I Feet 2,000 PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: April 12, 2012 CASE: 26- VA- 02 -02 -12 APPLICANT: Neil Hetherington HEARING DATE: April 17, 2012 PROPERTY OWNER: Same APPLICATION DATE: Feb. 24, 2012 REQUEST: Variance PREPARED BY: Sarah Thomas LOCATION: 903 Oakwood Heights Circle COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: MD, Medium Density ZONING: PD, Planned Development SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a Variance of 6.7 feet to the required 30 -foot perimeter yard setback for construction of a deck for property located at 903 Oakwood Heights Circle, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Heights Third Addition. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivision 3, B., 3, states that the Council may approve, approve with conditions or deny a request for a variance. In considering all requests for a variance and whether the applicant established that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provisions(s) of this Chapter, the City Council shall consider the following factors: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owner of property has no control. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Code would deprive the applicant property use commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the provisions of this Code. c. The exceptional or extraordinary circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Planning Report — 903 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 2 d. The granting of the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. e. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulties. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Code or to properties in the same zone. g. The property for which the variance is requested is otherwise in compliance with the City Code. The recently adopted Variance legislation is reflected in the City Code language above and also contains the following: Subd. 3, A. "Practical difficulties" as used in conjunction with the granting of a variance, means that the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning provisions of this Code; the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Subd. 3, B., 3. A variance will be denied when it is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning provisions of this Code or when the variance is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. Any condition imposed upon the approved variance must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. CODE REQUIREMENTS While this property is zoned PD, the lot is developed with a townhome style condo building; the Planned Development did not make special allowances for setbacks or other bulk standards other than the building pad which was approved to be 10 feet from the perimeter of the property at the closest point. Thus, the applicable standards are those for R -3, Residential Townhouse zoning, which requires a 30 foot setback from the perimeter of the site. City Code Section 11.40, Subd. 4.D.2 states the following shall not be considered as encroachments on required yard setbacks: "Decks, patios, balconies, stoops, or other similar features provided they do not extend more than 30 inches above grade and a distance greater than ... five feet into a required rear yard and provided they do not encroach upon a public easement." For R -1 (Single Family Residential) zoned properties, these code provisions result in a required 15 -foot rear yard setback for decks attached to the principal building and situated more than 30 inches above grade. Planning Report — 903 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 3 BACKGROUND/HISTORY This site is part of the Lexington South Planned Development, which was approved in 1976 for a 15 -year term. A subdivision was approved in 2000 which resulted in the division of the common property for Oakwood Heights condominiums and established a separate ownership of the property, and a separate association. EXISTING CONDITIONS The seven -unit condominium building, constructed in 2000, is located off of Oakwood Heights Circle, a private street that extends north from Wilderness Run Road. The applicant owns unit 903, which is the second unit in from the northern end. Six of the seven units have raised decks that are attached to the condominium building. There are no building permits on record for these decks. The condition of the existing deck(s) has deteriorated and the applicant is seeking to replace the deck with a similar design. The deck attached to Unit 903 is the only one of the six that does not meet the 30 -foot perimeter setback. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the ub p ro p ert y : 11 5 Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Walnut Hill Park P, Park P, Parks, Open Space and Recreation East Residential PD, Planned Development LD, Low Density (0 -4 units /acre) South Residential PD, Planned Development LD, Low Density (0 -4 units /acre) West Walnut Hill Park P, Park P, Parks, Open Space and Recreation Planning Report — 903 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 3 BACKGROUND/HISTORY This site is part of the Lexington South Planned Development, which was approved in 1976 for a 15 -year term. A subdivision was approved in 2000 which resulted in the division of the common property for Oakwood Heights condominiums and established a separate ownership of the property, and a separate association. EXISTING CONDITIONS The seven -unit condominium building, constructed in 2000, is located off of Oakwood Heights Circle, a private street that extends north from Wilderness Run Road. The applicant owns unit 903, which is the second unit in from the northern end. Six of the seven units have raised decks that are attached to the condominium building. There are no building permits on record for these decks. The condition of the existing deck(s) has deteriorated and the applicant is seeking to replace the deck with a similar design. The deck attached to Unit 903 is the only one of the six that does not meet the 30 -foot perimeter setback. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the ub p ro p ert y : 11 5 Planning Report — 903 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 4 EVALUATION OF REQUEST Proposal — The applicant proposes to construct a new deck that is setback 23.3 feet, as measured to the footing. The deck design includes a two foot cantilever. The proposed deck will extend 10 feet from the west side of the building where as the existing deck extends 8 feet as can be seen in the attached exhibit (Patio Plan). Setbacks — A 15 -foot rear yard structure setback applies to attached decks more than 30" above grade in R -1 zoning districts. That setback requirement is greater in R -3 zoning districts as a 30- foot setback is required to the perimeter of the property. Setbacks are measured to the footings. While the proposed deck does meet the 15 -foot setback for R -1 properties, it does not meet the 30 -foot R -3 requirement. From the footing, the deck will be approximately 23'3" from the west property line. The applicant has also applied to vacate a portion of the drainage and utility easement where the deck will be located. APPLICANT'S PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES The applicant's narrative indicates that the "request is to replace an existing 12 year old deck which is rapidly deteriorating." EVALUATION OF REQUEST The Zoning Ordinance states that relief may be granted from a required ordinance provision where practical difficulties result from carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of such Code provision, provided "the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning provisions of this Code; the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." The Zoning Ordinance states that relief may be granted provided the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable matter not permitted by the zoning provisions of the Code. The applicant is proposing to reconstruct a deck. Replacement of the deck appears to be a reasonable use of the property and the condominium building was approved to be located within the 30 -foot perimeter setback. The Zoning Ordinance states relief may be granted provided the plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant. The applicant is hindered by the location of the condominium building, which was permitted via the approved PD and is requesting to replace an existing structure. Planning Report — 903 Oakwood Heights Circle April 17, 2012 Page 5 The requested Variance does appear to be the minimum required to alleviate the practical difficulties. The applicant is requesting relief from a required minimum setback to allow for the reconstruction of a deck. The deck footing is proposed to be in approximately the same location as the existing deck footing. The relief sought by the applicant does not appear to be contrary to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, but may be inconsistent with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. That is, the purpose of the building setback provision is to prevent the overcrowding of properties and to provide green space. Since the request is to reduce the yard requirement, it appears to be contrary to the intent of the ordinance. It does not appear that granting of the Variance would result in detrimental effects to the neighboring properties or the public. A wooded area of Walnut Hill Park occupies the adjacent lot near the proposed deck. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION In summary, the applicant is requesting a setback Variance of 6.7 feet to allow re- construction of a deck. The property is zoned PD and contains a condominium building which requires a 30- foot setback to the perimeter of the property. The condominium building was allowed to be set back 10 feet, eight inches from the rear lot line which was approved via the PD. The requested Variance would result in the deck being 23.3 feet from the property line. The proposed deck is a reasonable use of the residential property and the proposal does not appear to present a detrimental effect to the public. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve a Variance of 6.7 feet to the required 30 -foot perimeter yard setback for construction of a deck for property located at 903 Oakwood Heights Circle, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Oakwood Heights Third Addition. If approved, the following conditions shall apply: 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. A building permit shall be required prior to construction of the deck. 3. The deck shall not exceed the size shown on the proposed Site Plan received March 26, 2012. 4. The proposed Site Plan shall be revised to accurately show the drainage and utility easement location. Case Nos.: 26- VA- 02 -02 -12 4 City of EaQau Lebanon Hills Regional Park Location Map Trapp Farm Pa Jam■rma I I I I I I ge/We w ee r te s i PAT RIOK wpm � Impa� `s Its,,, •� -O 0 ®'® i *i " � :ii m _ � ti w ®® IMO Iillm © ,� LEXINGTON POINTE PARNWAV � actir m i 3 O11,,fr aNifira a q ' quon: aa Munaiiimmililualk + �� Map Area Extent Project Name: Neil Hetherington / 903 Oakwood Heights CircleLegend Request: Variance smug c�c Boundary Y rY 118 0 500 1,000 1 Parcels Parks Buildings 1 Feet 2,000 Cily of Eat Zoning PD Planned Development Land Use Plan MD Medium Density N 0 300 600 1,200 Feet Current Zoning and Land Use Map Application: 903 Oakwood Heights Circle Type: Variance Case No.: 26- VA- 02 -02 -12 1 1 11 1 / 1 1 11 gra ll. y IC ■ /G \C Alt#1141 1 1 1 1 � omm �m► ki Viii milli1u■uti ■ //m NI - - 11 4:111*.‘ M aripr (A OA ifialiNW ■ ittl inii i lip Fi•1�•.._\CI :Z jjjjj iIIIIIIIMMILViseang16 Istit:t L I - 1 :4WI.UL7.1: /I1i�.i imalh1iu■t Subject Site, VO i'�• ILDFRN R•q• ►� ,l �• , i ^s 111 `�kmal 44 ormaativieS ii ial i■mirnledi 11111111 P oir 119 cn 1 0 r 0 0 a.) 0 0 6 0 w 0 a) x 0 0 a = cQ 0 c.) 0 w 01 S EXISTING E – O co JO () 0 co O 0 U 0 w p m 0 0) 3 ,61,1Z•00 N 917 310810 S1HOI3H QOOMNVO AVMOVON snoNIWnlle AYM3AIN0 SnONIWn1le cn z D u ❑ 10 0 0) ww M XW 0U wW 00'4L 3 ,90,40.00 N El a a x U I� 3NI1 1N3W3SV3 Allllln ONV 3OVNIV210 .90,40.00 S 00'4L AVM3ARJ0 SnONIWn118 a) 0 0) O i y b So N bb n a3lln0 ONV 138113 313NONO0 AVM3A180 SnoNIWn118 a-- 0 , w w O0 —Q___ –. w co P oo QD a J U O 6 L . w g8 0 0 h 0 m Y y E 0 PROPOSED N 0 N a U gg 0 V m cn iW Q� d• U JO p p 2 Q W CO p o J << 0 o ,69 N 1 AVM3AI210 118 0 w 3 0 I 0 (.3 X w W m N 0 U 0 O 1 0 _ 0 1 0 3 ,6L,LZ000 N 84 AYM3Al210 SfONIWfll19 3102110 SIHOI3H aOOMNVO 24311f10 ONV AVMOV021 SnONlvYfllIB B21f10 313210N00 M 00'4L l I -> 3 .90,40,00 N 0 09 IL < X 0 m M • Oa. S001 S r — 3NI1 1N3113SV3 Alflilfl ONV 30VNIV210 .90,40,00 S 00'4L l N 0 0) SZ AVM3AI210 SfONIMUI118 U / 0 / lONb3 H6b AVM3A1a0 SfIONIW(1118 CZ ❑ ❑ 91. 0 J 3 Ems/ ILLS soma 6 5 31' -0 PATIO PLAN I t ` /tom ['FR 1 ,1] M4CW LUMBER NAME. WOME OWNER: DATE - . MAC- : INC 1 %3 952 -155 -3235 PONE 95,5,4340 FAN PROPERTY OF MACH LUMBER INC. FOR EST nATION AND QUOTATION ON, CERECTS N 11.1 CONS, 6, INERECNS OR CORR 201 2N17 AVENUE, 5W NEW PRAGUE, MN 560-11 VARIANCE WRITTEN NARRATIVE The purpose of this request is to replace an existing 12 year old deck which is rapidly deteriorating. The existing deck presently sits off the back of my condominium at 903 Oakwood Heights Circle, part of the Wilderness Way Condo Association. The plan for the new deck is to expand it out from the back of the condo approximately two more feet which will be within the required 30 foot set back to the property line which we share with city park. (Submitted project plan should detail exact dimensions and distance from the property line). Provided this variance is approved, the timing for the deck replacement is planned for this spring and should take approximately 4 weeks to complete. Questions regarding this request should be directed to Neil Hetherington at 952 -239- 9334. d Neil He heringtoAh 903 Oakwood H Circle Eagan, MN 55123 NARRATIVE RECEIVED FEB 2 4 2012 Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012, Eagan City Council Meeting OLD BUSINESS A. REZONING, PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND FINAL PLAT — EAGAN CAR CLUB ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: ➢ To approve a Rezoning from Neighborhood Business to Planned Development for six acres located west of Highway 3 and north of Diffley Road. ➢ To approve a Preliminary Planned Development to allow eight buildings with a total of 76 — 24' x 48' storage units (garages) and a club house, subject to the conditions listed in the APC minutes. ➢ To approve a Final Plat creating one six acre lot located west of Highway 3 and north of Diffley Road. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: At least three votes New information is in BOLD FACTS: ➢ This item was continued without discussion at the April 3, 2012 City Council meeting. ➢ Following action by the APC, the applicant met with some neighbors in the lobby after the item was heard and has made revisions to the plans in response to that discussion. ➢ The revisions include a reduction in the overall building count, from eight to seven, and an increased setback from the west property line, from approximately 30' to 65'. The number of individual units for sale remains the same at 78. ➢ Additionally, the applicant has worked with the property owner to the south (Valley Blacktop) to allow grading on that property that will eliminate the need for retaining walls along the south property line. ➢ The approximately 6 acre site is undeveloped and unplatted; public access is provided from Highway 3. The site contains significant topography that ranges from a highpoint elevation of approximately 904 to a low point of approximately 828. 1 25 ➢ The plans call for 76 — 24' x 48' storage units (garages) and two bays dedicated for a club house and possibly accessory products and/or service for the storage users. Each unit will be individually owned as a condominium. No unit owner residences or businesses will be allowed by covenant. ➢ Owners will have the option to customize their units via individual Building Permits. An Owner's Association will be formed to handle general maintenance, snow removal, security and trash removal. ➢ The applicant is proposing a Planned Development because the plan calls for multiple buildings on a single parcel and development will occur in two phases. All outward facing building facades meet the material and percentage breakdown requirements. ➢ The only deviation to City Code standards relates to the exterior materials /percentages proposed for interior - facing building facades. The developer is proposing a durable pre- finished metal exterior that would be considered a Class III material. The appropriateness of this deviation is a policy matter to be considered by City officials. ➢ The Park & Rec Commission has recommended approval of conservation easement in lieu of park dedication, a temporary construction easement on a portion of Captain Dodd Park and placement of mitigation trees in that same area once it is restored. ➢ The PD zoning allows for flexibility from strict code requirements. ➢ The Advisory Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on March 27, 2012 and they are recommending approval. ISSUES: ➢ Several neighboring residents shared concerns about drainage, noise and lights. ➢ The revised plans require modifications to the Preliminary Planned Development conditions of approval. In addition, the City Attorney has suggested adding two conditions. All conditions are listed on a "revised condition" page. 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE: May 13, 2012 ATTACHMENTS: (5) Location Map, page 04 -12 -12 staff memo summarizing applicant revisions on pages 12 through 12- . Revised conditions of Preliminary Planned Development a royal on pages 120 through Draft March 27, 2012 APC minutes page 1 3 j through __sue Planning Report, pages 13 through 1 ' , 1 ?le Location Map Bridle RidnPark Difley Rd Map Area Extent Cliff Rd Project Name: Eagan Car Club Request: Rezoning & Preliminary Planned Development Case Nos.: 24- RZ- 01 -02 -12 & 24- PD- 01 -02 -12 4 City of Eagan Az� 0 500 1,000 Legend 1 ..1 City Boundary Parcels Parks Buildings 2,00 eet Building A: North, south and east Building B: North, south and east Building C: North Building D: North and west Building E: West and east Building F: West, east and south Building G: North, south and east 4 11° City of Eagan demo To: Tom Hedges, City Administrator From: Michael J. Ridley, AICP City Planner Date: April 12, 2012 Subject: Eagan Car Club Background At their regular meeting of March 27, 2012, the Advisory Planning Commission recommended approval of the Rezoning and Preliminary Planned Development for the Eagan Car Club. Several neighbors spoke at the Public Hearing and shared their concerns about drainage, lights and noise. The applicant met with some neighbors in the lobby after the item was heard and has made revisions to the plans in response to that discussion. Revisions The revisions include a reduction in the overall building count, from eight to seven, and an increased setback from the west property line, from approximately 30' to 65'. The number of individual units for sale remains the same at 78. The exterior material matrix should be revised as follows: In addition, the applicant has worked with the property owner to the south (Valley Blacktop) to allow grading on that property that will eliminate the need for retaining walls along the south property line. Regarding the proposed revised grading plan, the applicant should obtain a temporary easement approval for this grading from the adjacent property owner, prior to building permit. If the applicant is not able to obtain this easement, grading should be contained entirely within the Eagan Car Club property. 1 -2-B Summary The changes to the Site Plan are minimal and do not change the site operation to any large degree. The revised grading plan is acceptable provided the applicant obtains a temporary easement from the property owner at 4135 South Robert Trail. In addition to changes to the grading plan, the City Attorney also suggested two additional conditions of approval that are added to the conditions found in the draft APC minutes. A separate exhibit containing the action and all conditions of approval for the Preliminary Planned Development has been created and will be made part of the Council packet attachments. Please contact me if you have questions or need additional information. IZ9 Building A: North, south and east Building B: North, south and east Building C: North Building D: North and west Building E: West and east Building F: West, east and south Building G: North, south and east 04 -17 -12 Preliminary Planned Development Action and Conditions of Approval To approve a Preliminary Planned Development to allow eight buildings with a total of 76 — 24' x 48' storage units (garages) and a club house subject to the following conditions: 1. A Preliminary Planned Development Agreement shall be executed and recorded with the Dakota County Recorder's office prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of recording shall be provided to the City. The following plans are required for the Agreement: • Site Plan • Building Elevations • Landscape Plan • Tree Mitigation Plan • Lighting Plan 2. Any prospective add -on uses for the club house i.e. accessory product sales and/or service for the storage users shall be identified , reviewed and approved by the City. 3. No unit owner residences or businesses shall be allowed; this shall also be a covenant restriction. 4. No repair work shall occur between 10 PM and 7 AM. 5. A property manager shall be identified and contact information for same shall be provided to the City. 6. Refuse /recycling collection areas shall be identified on the Site Plan. 7. Association documents shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and these documents shall be recorded against the property prior to any Building Permit issuance. 8. The interior - facing facade elevations are allowed with a prefinished metal primary surface. 9. The following building facades shall meet the City Code standard for materials and percentage breakdown: 10. If the proposed parapets do not adequately screen the mechanical equipment, the developer shall provide an alternative screening mechanism. Page 1 of 3 ) 5D 11. The applicant shall execute the temporary access /construction easement prepared by the City Attorney for a mutually agreed upon portion of Captain Dodd Park. The Developer and the City shall also agree on the parameters for the use of the easement and restoration of same. 12. The applicant shall obtain a temporary easement from the property owner at 4135 South Robert Trail prior to issuance of the Building Permit. If the applicant is not able to obtain this easement, grading shall be contained entirely within the Eagan Car Club property. 13. The designer of the erosion/sediment control plan required under the MPCA permit shall be certified through a state erosion/sediment control design training course, such as offered by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, or a City- approved equal erosion/sediment control design training course. 14. The underground stormwater infiltration systems shall be designed in accordance with City code, state water quality and engineering standards, and based on the available infiltration rates of the on -site soils. 15. The applicant shall be responsible for annual inspection and maintenance of the stormwater features and for providing the City documentation of these activities. 16. The developer shall be responsible to maintain the underground stormwater infiltration systems in accordance with City engineering /water quality standards, under a maintenance agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 17. The developer shall extend sanitary sewer and water main to the south edge of the development, at an adequate depth to serve the property to the south (4135 South Robert Trail) in accordance with City engineering standards. 18. This developer shall meet all conditions of plat approval and permit approval as required by MnDOT, including constructing a right -turn lane for south bound Highway 3. 19. The applicant shall submit a revised Tree Mitigation Plan that indicates the installation of sixty -four (64) Category A trees (or an equivalent number of Category A, B, or C trees) as fulfillment of Tree Preservation requirements. 20. The Developer shall install tree mitigation trees within the temporary easement and in proximity to the conservation easement area as approved by the City. All tree plantings in these areas shall be field verified by City Forestry staff before installation. 21. The developer shall be responsible for replacement of dead or dying material for the first year. 22. The applicant shall protect the preserved woodlands and individual tree's critical root zones through the placement of required Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt Page 2 of 3 fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting), to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees /woodlands to be preserved on -site. 23. The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre - construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the Grading Permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 24. Park Dedication shall be met through the creation of a Conservation Easement over the undeveloped portion in the northwest quadrant of the site. The developer and City shall agree on the easement area, the developer shall prepare the legal description of the area and the City Attorney shall prepare the easement document. 25. Trail dedication shall be met via a cash dedication. 26. The City shall grant a temporary access /grading easement to the developer over a mutually agreed upon portion of Captain Dodd Park. The developer and the City shall agree upon parameters for the use of the easement and restoration. Page 3 of 3 1 3Z Advisory Planning Commission March 27, 2012 Page 3 of 11 B. Eagan Car Club Applicant Name: Manley Development Location: Section 24, Township 27, Range 23 West, off of State Trunk Highway No.3 Application: Rezoning A Rezoning for approximately 6 acres from NB, Neighborhood Business to PD, Planned Development. File Number: 24- RZ- 01 -02 -12 Application: Preliminary Planned Development A Preliminary Planned Development of approximately 6 acres to allow 76 vehicle storage units and a club house. File Number: 24- PD- 01 -02 -12 City Planner Ridley introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City Staff report dated March 23, 2012. He noted the background and history. Todd Mohagen, Architect discussed a similar operation in Chanhassen and its success. Chair Heaney opened the public hearing. Don Gaylord, 4140 Country View Drive, stated he represents the neighbors on the west side of the property. He stated concern with the storm sewer on his property, the 30 foot drainage easement, noise and light from units and hours of operation. He stated further concern with the soil condition due to garbage burial by previous owners of the property. Barry Swanson, 4144 Country View Drive, stated concern for drainage, lighting, view of the property from the park, the size of the Chanhassen facility, and parking during events. Lisa Finke, 4112 Country View Drive, stated concern for property values, the storage facility so close to her back yard, and the drainage. There being no further public comment, Chair Heaney closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. Member Dugan stated he has a business relationship with the applicant; however, he has not been approached regarding matter and will vote on the item. Nate Herman, Engineer for the Applicant, addressed the drainage and stormwater concerns by explaining that the water will be collected into a storm sewer and routed around the buildings and into the underground infiltration system on the northern part of the property which provides rate control, increased infiltration, and water quality treatment. He stated the sheet flow from the site would be reduced from existing conditions because the storm water is being collected and piped into the storm sewer system rather than sheet draining onto neighboring ' properties. Any water that lands on impervious surface will be collected by catch basins and be piped to the underground system where the water will be treated before being released into the off -site storm water system. City Planner Ridley explained that the developer is responsible for soil boring to ensure adequate sub - structure for the buildings. He stated as with any noise complaint in the city, the Police Department or Zoning Enforcement will enforce the noise ordinance, restricting owners from making noise between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. He stated there will not be any flood I 3� Advisory Planning Commission March 27, 2012 Page 4 of 11 lighting as the facility will be illuminated internally and will be fenced. No Tight should escape the site in any direction. He stated any development on the site will be visible to the park. He stated the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission has suggested that mitigation trees be placed along the south side of the park for screening and to soften the views of the property from the park. He stated the building meets setback requirements and therefore, placement is appropriate. He stated the Advisory Planning Commission does not speak to property values. The landscape plan was displayed and discussed. Kurt Manley, Manley Development, stated the design of the buildings will not be of the same scale as the Chanhassen Motoplex facility and that these buildings are much shorter. He stated there will be no construction traffic through the neighborhood, a construction supervisor will be on staff, and all access will be via Highway 3 with a turn lane to prevent obstruction of traffic flow on Hwy. 3. He stated the facility is for classic car collectors to store vehicles and it is not anticipated intended for owners to work on their cars. He stated the soil borings returned negative and if contamination is found, it will be addressed. He displayed the lighting plan and stated the facility is completely lit internally with building mounted wall -packs He addressed parking concerns by explaining that all units and driveways are two stalls wide and permit parking. Also, the drive aisles are 24' wide and when there are Larger event, parking will be inside and in front of the units and along the drive aisles. He stated the turn lane on Hwy. 3 will be constructed and paid for by the developer. City Planner Ridley discussed the phased approach to development and possible interior facing facade visibility during construction. City Engineer Russ Matthys stated public safety and access for emergency vehicles is adequate and suggested single - sided parking on the drive aisles during events for better access in case of emergency. Member Filipi moved, Member Piper seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Rezoning from Neighborhood Business to Planned :,Development for six acres located west of Highway 3 and north of Diffley Road. All voted In favor. Motion Piper,moved, Member Vanderpoel seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Planned Development to allow eight buildings with a total of 76 — 24' x 48' storage units (garages) and a club house, subject to the following conditions: 1. A Preliminary Planned Development Agreement shall be executed and recorded with the Dakota County Recorder's office prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of recording shall be provided to the City. The following plans are required for the Agreement: • Site Plan • Building Elevations • Landscape Plan • Tree Mitigation Plan • Lighting Plan 2. Any prospective add -on uses for the club house i.e. accessory product sales and /or service for the storage users shall be identified, reviewed and approved by the City. Building A: North, south and east Building B: North, south:and east Building C: North Building D: North and west Building E: West Building F: North,.s uth and west Building G: South and east Building H: North, south and east Advisory Planning Commission March 27, 2012 Page 5 of 11 3. No unit owner residences or businesses shall be allowed; this shall also be a covenant restriction. 4. Refuse /recycling collection areas shall be identified on the Site Plan. 5. Association documents shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and these documents shall be recorded against the property prior to any Building Permit issuance. 6. The interior - facing facade elevations are allowed with a prefinished metal primary surface. 7. The following building facades shall meet the City Code standard for materials and perce 8. If the proposed parapets do not adequately screen the Mechanical equipment, the developer shall provide an alternative screening mechanism. 9. The applicant shall execute the temporary access /construction easement prepared by the City Attorney for a mutually agreed upon portion of Captain Dodd Park. The Developer and the City shall also agree on the parameters for the use of the easement and restoration of same. 10. The designer of the erosion /sediment control plan required under the MPCA permit shall be certified through a state erosion/sediment control design training course, such as offered by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, or a City-approved equal erosion /sediment control design training course. 11. The underground stormwater infiltration systems shall be designed in accordance with City code, state water quality and engineering standards, and based on the available infiltration rates of the on -site soils. 12. The applicant shall be responsible for annual inspection and maintenance of the stormwater features and for providing the City documentation of these activities. 13. The developer shall be responsible to maintain the underground stormwater infiltration systems in accordance with City engine ering /water quality standards, under a maintenance agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 14. The developer shall extend sanitary sewer and water main to the south edge of the development, at an adequate depth to serve the property to the south (4135 South Robert Trail) in accordance with City engineering standards. 15. This developer shall meet all conditions of plat approval and permit approval as required by MnDOT, including constructing a right -turn lane for south bound Highway 3. 16. The applicant shall submit a revised Tree Mitigation Plan that indicates the installation of sixty -four (64) Category A trees (or an equivalent number of Category A, B, or C trees) as fulfillment of Tree Preservation requirements. 17. The Developer shall install tree mitigation trees within the temporary easement and in proximity to the conservation easement area as approved by the City. All tree plantings in these areas shall be field verified by City Forestry staff before installation. 18. The developer shall be responsible for replacement of dead or dying material for the first year. 19. The applicant shall protect the preserved woodlands and individual tree's critical root zones through the placement of required Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting), to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees /woodlands to be preserved on -site. I a5 Advisory Planning Commission March 27, 2012 Page 6 of 11 20. The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre- construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the Grading Permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 21. Park Dedication shall be met through the creation of a Conservation Easement over the undeveloped portion in the northwest quadrant of the site. The developer and City shall agree on the easement area, the developer shall prepare the legal description of the area and the City Attorney shall prepare the easement document. 22. Trail dedication shall be met via a cash dedication. 23. The City shall grant a temporary access /grading easement to the developer over a mutually agreed upon portion of Captain Dodd Park. The developer and the City shall agree upon parameters for the use of the easement and restoration. All voted in favor. Motion carried 5 -0. REPORT DATE: March 23, 2012 APPLICANT: Kurt Manley PROPERTY OWNER: Thomas Finn Co. REQUEST: Rezoning LOCATION: South Robert Trail (Hwy 3) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: O /S, Office /Service ZONING: NB, Neighborhood Business SUMMARY OF REQUEST PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN CASE: 24- RZ- 01 -02 -12 HEARING DATE: March 27, 2012 APPLICATION DATE: February 29, 2012 PREPARED BY: Michael J. Ridley, AICP The applicant is proposing a Rezoning, Preliminary Planned Development and a Final Plat to create the Eagan Car Club as a place for individual owners to store high -end or restored vintage vehicles and other high- quality storage in customizable garage spaces. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Rezoning: City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subd. 5 states in part, 1. The provisions of this chapter may be amended by the majority vote of the council, except that amendments changing the regulations of any district may only be made by an affirmative vote of two - thirds of all members of the council. 2. The City Council shall not rezone any land or area in any zoning district or make any other proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance without first having referred it to the planning commission for its consideration and recommendation. Planned Development: City Code Chapter 11.60, Subd. 18, A., states the intent of the Planned Development zoning district as follows: 1 3T Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 2 1. Providing greater flexibility in environmental design and relaxation of strict application of the zoning ordinance in exchange for greater creativity and environmental sensitivity. 2. Recognizing the economic and cultural advantages that will accrue to the residents of a planned community. 3. Encouraging a more creative and efficient approach to the use of the land. 4. Encouraging the preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, natural features, and open space. 5. Encouraging a development pattern that is consistent with land use density, transportation facilities and community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND /HISTORY The site is undeveloped and unplatted. EXISTING CONDITIONS The approximately 6 acre site is undeveloped land with public access to Highway 3. The site contains significant topography that ranges from a highpoint elevation of approximately 904 to a low point of approximately 828. There is a mature stand of trees along the western boundary of the site; the remainder of the site is generally open grass land with a couple of small stands of trees near the center of the site and along the east, southeast edge along Highway 3. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The proposed use appears compatible to surrounding uses. There is a mini - storage facility to the north in IGH, Valley Blacktop to the south and future industrial office park development to the east, also in IGH. 1 38 Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Captain Dodd Park Park Park South Valley Blacktop Transitional Office /Service East Undeveloped /IGH Industrial Office Park General Industrial West Single Family R -1 LD Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 2 1. Providing greater flexibility in environmental design and relaxation of strict application of the zoning ordinance in exchange for greater creativity and environmental sensitivity. 2. Recognizing the economic and cultural advantages that will accrue to the residents of a planned community. 3. Encouraging a more creative and efficient approach to the use of the land. 4. Encouraging the preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, natural features, and open space. 5. Encouraging a development pattern that is consistent with land use density, transportation facilities and community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND /HISTORY The site is undeveloped and unplatted. EXISTING CONDITIONS The approximately 6 acre site is undeveloped land with public access to Highway 3. The site contains significant topography that ranges from a highpoint elevation of approximately 904 to a low point of approximately 828. There is a mature stand of trees along the western boundary of the site; the remainder of the site is generally open grass land with a couple of small stands of trees near the center of the site and along the east, southeast edge along Highway 3. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The proposed use appears compatible to surrounding uses. There is a mini - storage facility to the north in IGH, Valley Blacktop to the south and future industrial office park development to the east, also in IGH. 1 38 Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 3 Proposal — The plans call for 76 — 24' x 48' storage units (garages) and two bays dedicated for a club house and possibly accessory products and /or service for the storage users. These potential add -ons should be identified, reviewed and approved by the City. Each unit will be individually owned as a condominium. No unit owner residences or businesses will be allowed by covenant. Owners will have the option to customize their units via individual Building Permits; this may include individual utilities to accommodate mezzanines, restrooms, sinks, kitchens as well as heating and cooling systems. An Owner's Association will be formed to handle general maintenance, snow removal, security and trash removal. Community trash/recycling collection areas should be identified on the Site Plan and the design of same should be illustrated. Individual unit security will be the owner's responsibility. Association documents should be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney. The Association documents should be recorded against the property prior to any Building Permit issuance. Site Plan — The Site Plan calls for a total of 76 storage garages and two bays dedicated for a club house to be located in eight, free - standing buildings. The perimeter of the site will be secured by the buildings themselves and a prefinished 8' tall metal fence. Planned Development — The applicant is proposing a Planned Development because the plan calls for multiple buildings on a single parcel and development will occur with a two -phase approach; only the Planned Development Zoning District allows multiple buildings on a single parcel. Exterior Materials — The developer is proposing a mix of brick, glass, stucco, prefinished metal and textured CMU (concrete masonry unit). The City Code requires certain percentages of materials to be used for building exteriors. In this case, newly constructed buildings shall use at least two Class I materials and the building must be finished with at least 65% Class I materials and not more than 35% of Class II or Class III materials and not more than 10% of Class IV materials. The materials by class and percentage breakdown are listed in the table below: X39 Class I Class II Class III Class IV 65% Clay -based masonry units; brick (integrally colored), natural stone, glass /spandrel glass, architectural metal panels which cover a Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 3 Proposal — The plans call for 76 — 24' x 48' storage units (garages) and two bays dedicated for a club house and possibly accessory products and /or service for the storage users. These potential add -ons should be identified, reviewed and approved by the City. Each unit will be individually owned as a condominium. No unit owner residences or businesses will be allowed by covenant. Owners will have the option to customize their units via individual Building Permits; this may include individual utilities to accommodate mezzanines, restrooms, sinks, kitchens as well as heating and cooling systems. An Owner's Association will be formed to handle general maintenance, snow removal, security and trash removal. Community trash/recycling collection areas should be identified on the Site Plan and the design of same should be illustrated. Individual unit security will be the owner's responsibility. Association documents should be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney. The Association documents should be recorded against the property prior to any Building Permit issuance. Site Plan — The Site Plan calls for a total of 76 storage garages and two bays dedicated for a club house to be located in eight, free - standing buildings. The perimeter of the site will be secured by the buildings themselves and a prefinished 8' tall metal fence. Planned Development — The applicant is proposing a Planned Development because the plan calls for multiple buildings on a single parcel and development will occur with a two -phase approach; only the Planned Development Zoning District allows multiple buildings on a single parcel. Exterior Materials — The developer is proposing a mix of brick, glass, stucco, prefinished metal and textured CMU (concrete masonry unit). The City Code requires certain percentages of materials to be used for building exteriors. In this case, newly constructed buildings shall use at least two Class I materials and the building must be finished with at least 65% Class I materials and not more than 35% of Class II or Class III materials and not more than 10% of Class IV materials. The materials by class and percentage breakdown are listed in the table below: X39 Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 4 Due to the proposed design of the site and elevation changes on and off site, the developer is proposing to meet the exterior materials requirements for all of the building facades that will be visible from off site and from the adjacent public r -o -w. The typical elevations for the `exposed' facades call for approximately 66% brick, 32% decorative CMU and the remainder a prefinished metal accent. The interior - facing facade elevations are proposed to be finished primarily with prefinished metal surfaces which is not consistent with the required mix of materials. The suitability of this approach is a policy question to be considered by City officials. All overhead garage doors providing access to the individual units will be on the interior - facing elevations. Should this approach be acceptable, staff suggests that the following building facades* should have the standard treatment: Building A: North, south and east Building B: North, south and east 1 4b wall (e.g. copper panels) 35% Specialty concrete block such as textured, burnished or rock -faced block, masonry stucco, manufactured stone 10% Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS), architecturally precast textured concrete panels, glass block, ornamental metal building accents 10% Smooth concrete block, smooth scored concrete block, smooth concrete tip up panels, ceramic, wood Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 4 Due to the proposed design of the site and elevation changes on and off site, the developer is proposing to meet the exterior materials requirements for all of the building facades that will be visible from off site and from the adjacent public r -o -w. The typical elevations for the `exposed' facades call for approximately 66% brick, 32% decorative CMU and the remainder a prefinished metal accent. The interior - facing facade elevations are proposed to be finished primarily with prefinished metal surfaces which is not consistent with the required mix of materials. The suitability of this approach is a policy question to be considered by City officials. All overhead garage doors providing access to the individual units will be on the interior - facing elevations. Should this approach be acceptable, staff suggests that the following building facades* should have the standard treatment: Building A: North, south and east Building B: North, south and east 1 4b Building C: North Building D: North and west Building E: West Building F: North, south and west Building G: South and east Building H: North, south and east Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 5 * Per the Architectural Site Plan received March 1, 2012. Lighting Plan — Site lighting is primarily provided by wall -pack fixtures. The light levels appear to adequately cover the site to provide visual security and the light levels at the property boundaries are appropriate. Landscaping — The Landscape Plan appears acceptable. The applicant is proposing a variety of over -story and coniferous plant material in addition to assorted shrubs and perennials that will provide year -round color and soften and enhance the appearance of the buildings from the perimeter of the site. Some of the landscaping and tree mitigation is proposed to be located on City -owned property north of the subject site within Captain Dodd Park. The applicant is seeking a temporary construction easement in this location. The easement would allow the developer to blend the slopes of the park and development site together and forego the potential need for a significant retaining wall along the property line. Upon completion of the grading, the developer has proposed to restore the site using an appropriate seed mix and erosion control fabric. The City has also requested that mitigation trees required due to the amount of removal (tree mitigation is discussed later in this report) be planted in the easement area to create a visual buffer /screen between the park and the development. Because of the elevation of the park, planting the trees in the easement area will increase their benefit to the public as opposed to planting at a lower elevation immediately adjacent to the development. The Park & Recreation Commission is recommending approval of this temporary easement. Mechanical Equipment — The applicant's narrative states the project will utilize raised parapets around the perimeter of the buildings to screen possible mechanical units from the perimeter of the site. If the proposed parapets do not adequately screen the mechanical equipment, the developer should provide an alternative screening mechanism. Grading/Topography /Erosion Control — The preliminary grading plan is acceptable. The existing site is generally open and slopes to the north and west, with large variations in topography, with elevations ranging from 900 along the south edge of the site to 830 in the northwest. Portions of the site are 30 to 40 feet in elevation above existing single- family properties to the west, and 10 to 20 feet above Highway 3 to the east. Private retaining walls are proposed throughout the site to account for the large variations in elevations. 141 Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 6 The preliminary grading plan shows some grading along the southern edge of the City's Captain Dodd Park property (approximately 550' x 30'). Grading of the site will require a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency storm water permit for construction activity for developments of more than one acre in size. The developer must meet all requirements of this pen The designer of the erosion/sediment control plan is required under the MPCA permit to be certified through a state erosion/sediment control design training course, such as that offered by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, or a City- approved equivalent. Storm Drainage — The preliminary storm drainage plan is acceptable. Storm water runoff from the development is proposed to be managed for water quality and quantity purposes through underground infiltration systems, as provided by City Code, in lieu of traditional ponding and to reduce grading disturbance in the northwest corner of the site. These underground infiltration systems should be designed in accordance with City and state water quality and engineering standards, and based on the available infiltration rates of the on- site soils. The developer should be responsible to maintain these storm water systems in accordance with City engineering/water quality standards, under a maintenance agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. Utilities — The preliminary utility plan is acceptable. Sanitary sewer and water main pipes of sufficient size, depth and capacity are available for connection within Highway 3 right -of -way northeast of the site. These connection points are within Inver Grove Heights, but are available for extension through the existing Joint Powers Agreement Eagan has with Inver Grove Heights. The developer should extend sanitary and water main to the south edge of the development site, at an adequate depth to serve the property to the south (4135 South Robert Trail) in accordance with City engineering standards. Access — Full build -out of this development is anticipated to generate approximately 25 vehicle trips /day. Public access is available only to State Highway 3 (also known as South Robert Trail) to the east. The MN Department of Transportation (MnDOT), who has jurisdiction over Highway 3 and they have stated a requirement for the developer to construct a right turn lane on Highway 3 for southbound traffic. A permit to construct the proposed access will also be required from MnDOT. The developer should meet all conditions of plat approval and permit approval as required by MnDOT. Water Quality/Wetlands —There are no wetlands on site, and City Code §11.67, wetland protection and management regulations, does not apply. ML Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount Water Trunk C/I $2,950/ac 5.94 acres $17,523 Total $17,523 Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 7 Easements /Rights of Way /Permits — The developer should be responsible for acquiring pennit approval from the MN Department of Transportation for all work within Highway 3 right -of- way, prior to Building Pen approval. Financial Obligation — At this time, there are no pending assessments on the parcel proposed for platting. Based upon a study by City staff of the financial obligations collected in the past and proposed use for the property, the following estimated charges will be collected at time of building permit or connection to the City's utility system. The final charges will be computed using the rates in effect at time of connection or subdivision. The estimated financial obligation is subject to change based upon the areas, dimensions and land uses contained in the building permit or plat. Tree Preservation — A tree inventory submitted with this application indicates that there are one - hundred forty -one (141) significant trees existing at this site. This individual tree resource is comprised of oak, cottonwood, maple, elm, black cherry, boxelder, and cedar trees. Tree diameters range from 6 inches to 38 inches. According to the Tree Preservation Plan submitted, significant tree impacts will result in the removal of ninety (90) significant trees (63.8% of the total). Per the City of Eagan Tree Preservation Ordinance allowable tree removal for this type of development proposal (single -lot single -phase commercial) is set at 30% of the total significant trees. Because the proposed significant tree removal is more than allowed without mitigation, there is required tree mitigation that calculates to sixty -four (64) Category A trees (or an equivalent number of Category A, B, or C trees). The applicant has submitted a Tree Mitigation Plan that indicates the installation of thirty -nine (39) Category A trees. Therefore the application is short 25 Category A trees from being complete. A revised Tree Mitigation Plan should be submitted that fulfills the required tree mitigation amount. The Park & Recreation Commission is recommending that mitigation trees should be planted on the west side of the site (near the proposed conservation easement) and on the north side of the site on the park property over which the temporary access easement is requested. The trees will 1 43 Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 8 provide for reforestation of the proposed graded area within the park and for improved visual screening of the proposed buildings from the park. The placement of the mitigation and landscape trees near the conservation area and north of the site in Captain Dodd Park should be field verified with City Forestry staff prior to installation. Parks and Recreation — At the time of development of a new site, the APrC has the option of making a recommendation regarding the park dedication that will be required from the development. Park dedication options generally include the fee title dedication of land or cash payment based upon the type of development. Recent State legislation has put the onus on local units of government to justify dedications, especially those associated with fee title ownership. This development site is located immediately adjacent to Captain Dodd Park. Given the steep slopes, the configuration of the proposed development and difficulty in accessing the site from the existing park, a fee title dedication may not be appropriate. However, the northwest portion of the development site does contain 44 significant trees including Black Cherry and Oak that may merit additional protection beyond that afforded in the City tree preservation requirements. To that end, the provision of a Conservation Easement in favor of the City may have multiple benefits. A Conservation Easement is a set of restrictions that a landowner would place upon a property to preserve its conservation values. The conservation values of the property and the restrictions that would preserve those values (no tree removal etc), along with the rights reserved by the landowner are detailed in a legal document. This document is filed with the County and becomes part of the property record and would remain with the property regardless of ownership. Each Conservation Easement is unique as determined by the site and the needs of the owner. In this instance, given the location and character of the site, it may be appropriate to consider the development of a Conservation Easement, in favor of the City, as fulfilling the park dedication requirements. It would be the responsibility of the land owner to provide a legal description of the easement area. On March 20, 2012, the Park & Recreation Commission recommended approval of a Conservation Easement as the approach to fulfilling the park dedication requirement and the requirement of a cash trail dedication. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The applicant is proposing to create the Eagan Car Club on approximately six undeveloped acres located on the west side of South Robert Trail (Highway 3), just north of 4135 South Robert Trail. 144 Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 9 76 — 24' x 48' customizable storage units (garages) and two bays dedicated as a club house. Each unit will be individually owned as a condominium. Owners will have the option to customize their units via individual Building Permits; this may include individual utilities to accommodate mezzanines, restrooms, sinks, kitchens as well as heating and cooling systems. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Rezoning from Neighborhood Business to Planned Development for six acres located west of Highway 3 and north of Diffley Road. To recommend approval of a Planned Development to allow eight buildings with a total of 76 — 24' x 48' storage units (garages) and a club house. If approved the following conditions shall apply: 1. A Preliminary Planned Development Agreement shall be executed and recorded with the Dakota County Recorder's office prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of recording shall be provided to the City. The following plans are required for the Agreement: • Site Plan • Building Elevations • Landscape Plan • Tree Mitigation Plan • Lighting Plan 2. Any prospective add -on uses for the club house i.e. accessory product sales and /or service for the storage users shall be identified, reviewed and approved by the City. 3. No unit owner residences or businesses shall be allowed; this shall also be a covenant restriction. 4. Refuse /recycling collection areas shall be identified on the Site Plan. 5. Association documents shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and these documents shall be recorded against the property prior to any Building Permit issuance. 6. The interior - facing facade elevations are allowed with a prefinished metal primary surface. i�5 Building A: North, south and east Building B: North, south and east Building C: North Building D: North and west Building E: West Building F: North, south and west Building G: South and east Building H: North, south and east Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 10 7. The following building facades shall meet the City Code standard for materials and percentage breakdown: 8. If the proposed parapets do not adequately screen the mechanical equipment, the developer shall provide an alternative screening mechanism. 9. The applicant shall execute the temporary access /construction easement prepared by the City Attorney for a mutually agreed upon portion of Captain Dodd Park. The Developer and the City shall also agree on the parameters for the use of the easement and restoration of same. 10. The designer of the erosion/sediment control plan required under the MPCA permit shall be certified through a state erosion/sediment control design training course, such as offered by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, or a City- approved equal erosion/sediment control design training course. 11. The underground stormwater infiltration systems shall be designed in accordance with City code, state water quality and engineering standards, and based on the available infiltration rates of the on -site soils. 12. The applicant shall be responsible for annual inspection and maintenance of the stormwater features and for providing the City documentation of these activities. 13. The developer shall be responsible to maintain the underground stormwater infiltration systems in accordance with City engineering/water quality standards, under a maintenance agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 14. The developer shall extend sanitary sewer and water main to the south edge of the development, at an adequate depth to serve the property to the south (4135 South Robert Trail) in accordance with City engineering standards. 15. This developer shall meet all conditions of plat approval and permit approval as required by MnDOT, including constructing a right -turn lane for south bound Highway 3. Planning Report — Eagan Car Club March 27, 2012 Page 11 16. The applicant shall submit a revised Tree Mitigation Plan that indicates the installation of sixty -four (64) Category A trees (or an equivalent number of Category A, B, or C trees) as fulfillment of Tree Preservation requirements. 17. The Developer shall install tree mitigation trees within the temporary easement and in proximity to the conservation easement area as approved by the City. All tree plantings in these areas shall be field verified by City Forestry staff before installation. 18. The developer shall be responsible for replacement of dead or dying material for the first year. 19. The applicant shall protect the preserved woodlands and individual tree's critical root zones through the placement of required Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting), to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees /woodlands to be preserved on -site. 20. The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre - construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the Grading Permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 21. Park Dedication shall be met through the creation of a Conservation Easement over the undeveloped portion in the northwest quadrant of the site. The developer and City shall agree on the easement area, the developer shall prepare the legal description of the area and the City Attorney shall prepare the easement document. 22. Trail dedication shall be met via a cash dedication. 23. The City shall grant a temporary access /grading easement to the developer over a mutually agreed upon portion of Captain Dodd Park. The developer and the City shall agree upon parameters for the use of the easement and restoration. Map Area Extent Project Name: Eagan Car Club Request: Rezoning & Preliminary Planned Development Case Nos.: 24- RZ- 01 -02 -12 & 24- PD- 01 -02 -12 City of all Location Map d 4� 500 Legend 1. i City Boundary Parcels Parks Buildings eet 4 City of Eagan Zoning NB Neighborhood Business Land Use Plan O/S Office /Service 0 300 600 Current Zoning and Land Use Map Application: Eagan Car Club Type: Rezoning Case No.: 24- RZ- 01 -02 -12 1,200 Feet Ilk 1 ' 1111 '11'1 IIiIIII Il]OIIIMI 0111 11 0111tillNl �� ❑11001 11110 Intro 1101111 1 0110 011101'01 11) m 01 MEL 1 IIJn111 m1�0I 1 101110 11111500 L 111 214E11 nillinlmmmm 1101111thml111I1mmrnl ammo u1 III 1011111111 III III 1111111 1 111101111 I 11110 111111 01 m - - 11 1101 111 01 111101111 001111 '1 1 01111 1111111 1101111 0 I n 0111 III 011111 15111011 11011(0 0111 01a19111111 0101 SITE PLAN EAGAN CAR CLUB EAGAN, MINNESOTA MANLEY DEVELOPMENT w NIIOINII I 1'I CIAmIIm III AI IMO 1 m 01 11 100111111 0111 11 10111100 01111 1 11 110 11 0111 111111 1unu11I11110 11 1 1 111 111 1 11 nm m m 11 1 0 1111111 0 1 111 1 1 III n '1;4'r, 1 r 1 ® 101/1111111 11 I i 11 m 2 115 IT M 011 11 111 1 1151111 11 10011 1111111 II , ." 7 " .- 110htnriva 1 01101 1 1 I n na !mum] m ll k0 0 I L ) B 6a1 x1 -: tows) (0vo) (0'00119) ,N SATHRE - BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA. MN. 55391 (952) 076-6000 00 rn rn u1 N t I I i I rn 1 J 1 OD I (D I 0 I NO11 00V ON00]S M(11OH J .u1Nf100 1 1 1 I_ 14 J 500 '25'16'W 1396.52 15.02 • 'Y CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PREPARED FOR MANLEY DEVELOPMENT 3 • j&/ 1 7.09 °«.y.. ma - C - o acx 1.n, sw SATHRE - BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 55391 (952) 0 85000 ir f I 3 aI3 lA da3eMott 1 Aga ' 40 1!)000!FAM 1 5 112121111 1 II I 1142110 1110111111 91 1111 III 0 1 - 1110 11 III 11 I 0 I 1124,114119101111121D111 121 21 11' 2L ILO III 0 NI l■ 2114113111112111 II I 1 SI 1191" '' - '..— wr.„1 IIII)T 7111 ' 1130V711V211 171 11'1 m 1 ii , u t u I 112 114111 arlcoilri u115111111 21 11 1 1 $1 MPH 01 I 113 11 1 ' ni '''. r 1. it 0 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN EAGAN CAR CLUB EAGAN, MINNESOTA MANLEY DEVELOPMENT 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA. MN. 55391 (952) 476-6000 11 "IN 01 ES Y 511 AiI111IL'I0i110 -0'111 I!II'IIIIAm111! I��Ott PI0I10 11 PI I9 OPO 10i1P11i11I 110 11,15111101510 Ilt"dIV 111'0511 IiA Aq Liaill'.fd11;I1iNO�1111 I IIIIIII11I1510IiI YRy- 4,4111ill1A4 O- mrl°,.to ni k. mmX irrT nl.-m� 1101 III 111110 0.1190 511111111 1 1 0 I 110 1150 I 11111 1/11 V dim 0P ■IIIJ1U1i MU 1115111 001 1111100 NL III II1I01110iw«nNv Eli:. RI > ON 1111M10 lm 1Uf�0711 IW ON'07C MWI fm0 11 111I 1IP6i A_#( RAINAY eW 0011 PYII'0 011100- 'PIO'0 11 10150 A7 W111'1111 1121011 IILIO IIII IN1 , 1 21[EGiIF nr 1 ■Mtl IP1��lO11N 111101 105 1N -8111110. 9,111 IICF .IIY. ,,, t IdAPOM 1-810 }�AR.�?1p0� 'Al40LT'�1' OI C I L I` PP 1 1 11 1 00110 III OIWIII . WLIN 4 1 48'x24''_" TREE SUPVEY EAGAN CAR CLUB EAGAN, MINNESOTA MANLEY DEVELOPMENT 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN. 553g1 (952)176-8000 Drawing nenet X:\ 2012\ 120019\ plan Sheets \ 1200191and.dwg reb 2S, 2012 - 44Bpn x �z a 6 6 [ 1 IEEE 3 5 EAGAN CAR CLUB HIGHWAY 3 & OIFEEY ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA TREE MITIGATION PLAN act t eetate 00;6 3d89g8g ea 4RIA 41 gar ti § § �§ § 9 | �` / | �� | §/ § | }N§jrP i)$ §� 'i §q) ki V i I �; 1 . i ` | FFiPi 4 y5 515 ' '' ' ` 2E 2 i |l;Y.Y! |§|i!■ EzE! 11111111�g �� ; •11;I Ui \ ) 1; ! � ) EAGAN CAR CL a EAGAN, MINNESOTA LANDSCAPE PLAN 1.5 z m rn rn CD 1 m c A3OO SCHEMATIC DESIGN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS i 1 1 N � k " KM I c. w1aot 10071 y ` °F nil ` • AE El z Z 2 A f1 z g a' -1 z Z Cw 3 \fl d IUJ Ulo-4m Efl( t M+TOXStq 0 n 0 z u\ 5 Z •n 0 C i 0 0 Id) A301 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS M OOR T...�..� m,. Molrpt MrMwl hdid�l �� 3 O z �, u n b O z Stn P.s \ Ye. \11]v.oYtaAlol [PPM fFVAICYS.no. c 0 z z O 1 5 0 z J C 4 N c 0 n O 0 z 1r c 6 z n 0 z • sam NMI LEI IEN MEI NMI NMI NMI 99 a 3 3 I Et A3O2 SCHEMATIC DESIGN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS C14+05 007noral III VG a M*. xWe 18071 3'- Z O m -, Z C g z r c \v ne\wa1 \11312.04o-.u04 trnwu ruwroxs.e.t z 0 0 z a 5 c H ,5 6 z F O 4 c f a FE 3 4 18p4 y Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District / Waters Edge Building ' 1500 County Road B2 West Roseville, MN 55113 March 21, 2012 Mike Ridley City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Rd. Eagan, MN 55122 SUBJECT: Eagan Car Club #S12 -009 TH 3 - The property site on the west (Eagan) side of the Eagan/Inver Grove Heights border, north of Diffley Rd. Eagan / Dakota County Control Section 1921 Dear Mr. Ridley: RECEIVED ! \R 2 1 201? } The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has reviewed the above referenced plat in compliance with Minnesota Statute 505.03, Subdivision 2, Plats. MnDOT staff has the following comments: Traffic: A right turn lane is warranted at this location and is required for the proposed access. The driveway should be designed to accommodate the design vehicle, which is most likely a passenger car with a boat trailer. The lane should be 12 ft. wide with a 11/2 ft. shoulder and have a length of 300 ft. with a 1:5 taper. The existing shoulder will need to be removed by a sawcut at the edge of the through lane. Please submit the turn lane design and the appropriate turning templates for review. For questions concerning these comments, contact David Sheen, MnDOT Metro District Traffic, at 651- 234 -7824. Design: The MnDOT Road Design Manual (http: / /roaddesign. dot .state.mn.us /roaddesign.aspx) and MnDOT Standard Plate 9000 Approaches and Entrances offer design guidance for driveway entrances. While the following is not an all- inclusive list, the following areas should be addressed in subsequent plans: • Approach grade of 0.5% for 25 ft. or 15 ft. minimum. Your plans show 2 %. • Driveway side slopes of 1:6 or flatter. It appears that there is a 1:3 side slope. • The shoulder does not stop at the driveway but continues beyond the driveway. Using your design vehicle, verify that the turning vehicles track on the pavement and not on the shoulder. If the culverts are in the clear zone of TH 3, they may need safety aprons. For questions concerning these comments, contact Nancy Jacobson, MnDOT Metro Design, at 651- 234 -7647. Materials The applicant will need to perform a geotechnical investigation for right turn lane construction. MnDOT Materials requests that one core of the shoulder pavement and one boring to a depth of 5 ft. is sufficient. Both of these could be in the same spot, through the shoulder pavement of the proposed turn lane. After this is performed, MnDOT Materials will make a recommendation for pavement (or the applicant can make a recommendation for approval). For questions concerning these comments, contact Chris Kufner, MnDOT Metro Materials, at 651- 234 -7352. Permits: A MnDOT Access Permit will be required. The Permit application must include plans showing the required right turn lane and bypass lane, including signing and striping. MnDOT Permits will also need to determine the number and value of any trees to be removed from MnDOT right of way. Any use of or work within or affecting Mn/DOT right of way requires a permit. Permit forms are available from MnDOT's utility website at www.dot.state.mn.us /tecsup /utility . Please include one 11 x 17 plan set and one full size plan set with each permit application. Please direct any questions regarding permit requirements to Buck Craig, MnDOT's Metro Permits, at 651 -234- 7911. Review Submittal Options: MnDOT's goal is to complete the review of plans within 30 days. Submittals sent in electronically can usually be turned around faster. There are four submittal options. Please submit either: 1. One (1) electronic pdf version of the plans. MnDOT can accept the plans via e -mail at metrodevreviews.dot@state.mn.us provided that each separate e-mail is less than 20 megabytes. 2. Three (3) sets of full size plans. Submitting seven sets of full size plans will expedite the review process. Plans can be sent to: MnDOT — Metro District Planning Section Development Reviews Coordinator 1500 West County Road B -2 Roseville, MN 55113 3. One (1) compact disk. 4. Plans to MnDOT's external FTP Site. Send pdf files to: ftp: / /ftp2.dot.state.mn.us/ pub / incoming /MetroWatersEdge /Planning. Internet Explorer does not work using ftp so use an FTP Client or your Windows Explorer (My Computer). Also, send a note to metrodevreviews.dot@state.mn.us indicating that the plans have been submitted on the FTP site. l�l If you have any questions, contact me at 651- 234 -7789. Sincerely, Molly McCartney Sr. Transportation Planner Robert S. Molstad, P.E. Sathre - Bergquest, Inc. 150 South Broadway Wayzata, Mn. 55391 oliAj CC: Tom Link, Inver Grove Heights Scott Carlstrom, Water Resources Richard Cady, Water Resources Clare Lackey, Traffic David Sheen, Traffic Buck Craig, Permits Lee Williams, Right -of -Way Nancy Jacobson, Design Chris Kufner, Materials Sheila Kauppi, Area Engineer Dave Torfin, Surveys Ann Braden, Metropolitan Council William Goff, Planning Y�� Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting OLD BUSINESS: B. SEWER SERVICE REPAIR CLAIM, 4321 STIRRUP ST. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Public Works Committee's recommendation and provide a response to the appeal for reconsideration of the denial of a claim for a failed sewer service at 4321 Stirrup St. FACTS: • On December 12, 2011 the City received a formal claim from owners Donald and Lisa Bliss for costs incurred on December 2, 2011 to repair a private sanitary sewer service originally installed in November of 1983 at the referenced address. The claim identified costs incurred at approximately $8,400 to remove and replace the private sewer service between its connection to the City's system at the property line and the house foundation (approx. 46'). Additional future restoration costs to repair the driveway, landscaping and front lawn were projected to exceed another $7,000. • The claim was forwarded to the City's insurance carrier, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT), and subsequently denied on January 20, 2012. The claimants then approached the Council at their informal Listening Session on February 21 to appeal the insurance company's denial. The Council directed the matter to the Public Works Committee for further review and consideration. • The Public Works Committee was provided with all pertinent background information necessary to review the merits of the appeal and met with the claimants on March 9. The Public Works Committee's deliberation concluded in a recommendation to the City Council that they approve a contribution towards the cost of repair that would typically be covered under the City's Inflow and Infiltration (I &I) program for similar type work. • The claimants were asked to obtain and submit estimates of all remaining restoration work along with any other related costs. Staff was directed to research previous I &I corrective repair work that might be similar to the claimants' repair and identify which costs would typically be covered if the work were to be considered under the I &I Program. ISSUES: • If this private sewer service failure and its repair are deemed to be considered part of the City's current I &I Program, the costs incurred by the property owner for the required corrective work would qualify for the City's 50% reimbursement policy. However, the Policy specifically defines and limits the scope of the work eligible for cost participation to only those costs incurred by a pre- approved licensed plumber or pipe - laying contractor and does not cover any restoration work performed by others. • If this private sewer service failure is deemed to not be considered part of the City's I &I Program and still the responsibility of the City, the LMCIT and City Attorney's office have opined that the City has no legal liability or financial obligations per State Statute. If the sewer failure is deemed to be the responsibility of the property owner, the Council may similarly be precluded from providing public funds towards the repair and maintenance of private property. (Continued next page) Ili Agenda Information Memo April 17, 2012 Eagan City Council Meeting OLD BUSINESS: B. SEWER SERVICE REPAIR CLAIM, 4321 STIRRUP ST. (continued) ATTACHMENTS: • I &I Reimbursement Policy page 1 15 . • I &I Mitigation Cost evaluations page I - 1 (p . • Property owners' Summary of claim estimates, page M . • Public Works Committee meeting summary notes, page 17p . • Public Works Committee Packet, enclosed without page number. I &I Reimbursement Policy (Sewer Service Repair — 4321 Stirrup St.) The City's I &I Sump Pump and Service Lateral Inspection Program and related Mitigation Policy has been in effect since Council adoption on January 19, 2010. The purpose of the program is to eliminate any type of clear water connections via services that allow ground or surface water to enter the system. The City's Inspection Program has been primarily focused on Inflow only (i.e. sump pumps, foundation drains, downspouts, etc. which create peak flow issues) rather than Infiltration (i.e. ground water seepage). The Mitigation Policy provides for the City's contribution of 50% towards the cost of repairs. "Citv Cost Participation. The City will assume responsibility for 50% of costs incurred by the homeowner for required corrective work. If the corrective work is not performed under a City issued contract, the property owner may perform the work personally." Per this City policy, if the property owner opts to physically perform the work themselves, the City's contribution is limited to the cost of materials only. If the property contracts with an outside vendor, the City requires that at least two estimates be obtained and submitted for approval prior to the work commencing. The City will then reimburse 50% of the lowest cost estimate for only work required to address the Corrective Work Order issued under the I &I Program. only work performed by a licensed plumber and/or pipe -layer contractor pre- approved by the City will be eligible for City participation." This Policy does not provide reimbursement for any related restoration or other costs incurred by the property owner beyond the service line repair. Because the sewer failure at 4321 Stirrup was discovered with resulting repair work performed by the property owners prior to the City's I &I inspection of the property, neither the contractor nor the related scope of repair work were able to be pre- approved by the City. Subsequently, competitive estimates were not provided helping to insure the lowest cost and minimum scope of work as necessary to correct any identified I &I issue(s). The only potential source of Infiltration into the system (i.e. ground water) would have been via the deteriorated "elbow" section where the blockage occurred near the connection to the City's service stub, and this corrective repair would not have required replacement of the entire line (i.e. spot excavation only). Although the service line was noted by the property owners' plumber as having several "bellies" along it, it would not have been considered a source of I &I and a Corrective Work Order would not have been issued under the inspection program. The sewer service line appeared to have been fully functional until the deteriorated elbow section failed resulting in the blockage. Unfortunately, the submitted invoice does not break out the cost of repairing only the faulty elbow section (i.e. spot repair) vs. relaying the entire service line from the house to the right of way (approx. 46'). ns I &I Reimbursement Cost Evaluation (Sewer Service Repair — 4321 Stirrup St.) The property owners have submitted receipts, invoices and/or cost estimates for all other work related to the sewer failure, its repair and proposed restoration. Based on the City's current policy, only the sewer repair work would be eligible for reimbursement under the City's I &I reimbursement policy. To date, the City has only encountered four (4) I &I corrective sewer repairs that involved an exterior excavation. All of these were spot excavations with nominal yard/landscaping disturbance and none resulted in any driveway disturbance. Per the I &I Policy, all related lawn and landscape restorations at these 4 locations were the responsibility of and performed by the property owner at their expense. The following is a breakdown of the claim submitted by 4321 Stirrup St with a comparison to the other repairs and the City's I &I Reimbursement Policy. Sewer Repair • 4321 Stirrup • City comparables(4) Landscape/Lawn • 4321 Stirrup • City Comparables Driveway (12 SY patch req'd; • 4321 Stirrup • City Comparable (1) (Not I &I related) Misc Expenses (4321 Stirrup) • Hand Sewer Snake • Wet/Dry Vac • Plumber call out #1 • Plumber call out #2 Actual Costs $7,250 $ 758 $4,521 $2,103 Estimates $4,246 $7,550 $5,747 None $1,990 Low High Avg Low High Avg Total D/W area = 72 Estimates $2,380 $4,536 $3,414 $3,420 $2,952 Submitted Costs $125 $ 25 $325 $463 SY) City's 50% Reimbursement TBD $ 379 $2,260 $1,203 City's 50% Reimbursement $0 (DNQ = Does Not Qualify) $0 (DNQ) $0 (DNQ) None Low (84 SY) = $28.33/sy High (103 SY) = $44.04/sy High (84 SY) = $40.64/sy High (67 SY) = $51.04/sy Avg (72 SY) = $41.01 /sy Actual (78 SY) = $25.44/sy Previous City Reimbursements $0 (DNQ) $0 (DNQ) $0 (DNQ) $0 (DNQ) Total amount of claimed expenses for 4321 Stirrup St = $17,241.64 Expenses Totaled Landscape Averaged Bid $5746.64 Driveway Averaged Bid 3307.50 Expenses Known Cost 150.00 Rabbit Rooter Known Cost 325.00 Hopke Plumber Known Cost 462.50 Hopke Plumber - Replacement of Sewer Lateral Water Shut -off moved Known Cost 7250.00 TOTAL EXPENSES PART AVERAGED /PART KNOWN $17,241.64 Landscape Bids: $7550.00 5443.92 + 4246.00 TOTAL $17239.92 DIVIDED BY 3 for an average price Driveway Bids $4536.00 2380.00 2900.00 3414.00 TOTAL $13230 DIVIDED BY 4 for an average price DON AND USA BLISS 4321 STIRRUP ST SEWER LATERAL EXPENSES WITH BIDS AVERAGED Average cost: $5746.64 Average cost: $3307.50 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING FRIDAY, MARCH 9 EAGAN CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOMS 2A AND 2B MEETING NOTES The Public Works Committee of the City Council consisting of Councilmembers Paul Bakken (via Skype teleconference) and Cyndee Fields convened the meeting at 2:00 p.m. Also in attendance were City Administrator Tom Hedges, Public Works Director Tom Colbert, Communications Director Tom Garrison, Utilities Superintendent Jon Eaton, City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator Christina Scipioni, property owners Donald and Lisa Bliss (4321 Stirrup Street), Gary and Karen Foster, and Debra O'Connor. Councilmembers Bakken and Fields called the meeting to order and adopted the agenda as presented. II. SEWER SERVICE REPAIR CLAIM APPEAL — 4321 STIRRUP STREET Director Colbert provided background information about the claim previously brought to the Council's attention by the property owner at the Council's Listening Session on March 6. Mr. Foster presented information about the work undertaken to repair the sewer service, which included excavating the entire length of the property owners' line with significant restoration work still remaining. The Public Works Committee discussed potential ways to address the appeal and determined it would be reasonable to offer a partial reimbursement under the Inflow and Infiltration (I & I) Program. Mr. Colbert could recall possibly only one other I &I correction that involved excavation of the sewer service. It was noted that most I & I repairs are completed without full excavations using internal slip lining or spot excavations. More research was needed to determine if any full excavations have been done as part of an I & I repair and what repair costs were paid for as part of the I & I Program. The property owners were requested to submit all available receipts and to obtain formal estimates regarding their claim. This information would then all be forwarded to the full Council with the Committee's recommendation. Public Works Committee Recommendation: After reviewing the claim, the Committee recommended the City reimburse the homeowners for 50 percent of the repair costs, consistent with the Inflow and Infiltration Program. The Committee directed staff to determine what costs the Inflow and Infiltration Program would cover and how much the City has reimbursed other property owners for excavation costs related to Inflow and Infiltration repairs, if any such repairs have occurred. The Committee suggested that this recommendation go to the full Council at the April 17 meeting to accommodate the property owner's availability. The Committee adjourned the meeting at 2:45 p.m. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING FRIDAY, MARCH 9, 2012 2:00 P.M. I. ADOPT AGENDA AGENDA CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOMS 1A &B II. SEWER SERVICE REPAIR CLAIM APPEAL - 4321 Stirrup St. III. OTHER BUSINESS IV. ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE March 9, 2012 II. SEWER SERVICE REPAIR CLAIM APPEAL - 4321 Stirrup St. BACKGROUND On December 12, 2011 the City received a, formal claim (copy enclosed on page J ) from owners Donald and Lisa Bliss for costs incurred on December 2, 2011 to repair a private sanitary sewer service at the referenced address. Enclosed on pages 7 through 9 is additional supporting information to the claim submitted on December 14. Mr. & Mrs. Bliss purchased the property in the summer of 2011. The claim identified costs incurred at approximately $8,400 with additional future restoration costs yet to be determined (projected by property owner at about another $7,000). HISTORY The repair work revealed that the sewer service had incurred a blockage and structural failure at the elbow joint near the connection to the City's sewer stub near the street right of way. At the direction of the property owner, approximately 46 feet of sewer was subsequently removed and replaced by Hopke Sewer & Drain Inc at an invoiced cost of $7,250. The property owner's claim is based on statements by others of inferior installation procedures and materials, and their belief that the work was either never inspected or assumed defects were overlooked at the time of the City's inspection 28 years ago. The sewer service permit was originally pulled by McGuire Mechanical Services Inc. under Sewer Permit #6285, dated 11 -16 -83 and, according to Tim McGuire, subcontracted to Larson Sewer and Water for installation (no longer in business). The permit is signed off by the City's Utility inspector "Larry" (retired in 2004), but no date is referenced for the inspection (see permit on page /0 ). The property owner stated that the two sewer maintenance companies called out on this problem identified an impenetrable obstruction at a distance near the service connection to the City's stub at the property line. A statement by Hopke Sewer & Drain Inc is enclosed on pages /,,, and /3 describing an undulating condition of the sewer line and deterioration of the elbow connection at the city's stub that resulted in the ultimate blockage (photos enclosed without page number). Video tapes of the sewer televising by the sewer maintenance companies were not recorded and /or retained. The sewer appeared to function adequately until the blockage occurred from the collapsed pipe at the elbow. CLAIM DISPOSITION AND APPEAL The claim was forwarded to the City's insurance carrier, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) and subsequently denied on January 20, 2012. The basis of the denial was the State's 10 year Statute of Limitations and reliance on previous court rulings affirming a city's lack of liability for actions related to city inspections on private property. A copy of the denial is enclosed on page /L . Mr. Foster then appealed to the City Council for their consideration of this claim. A copy of that appeal dated February 13 (enclosed on pages 15 through / J ) was forwarded to the City Council and heard at the February 21 Council Listening Session. The Council then directed the matter to the Public Works Committee for review and recommendations. RESEARCH RESULTS OF OTHER STIRRUP ST. PROPERTIES Permits Permits were reviewed for the 20 other properties addressed off Stirrup Street. 15 of those were also inspected by Larry. The others were by other City Utility inspectors. All other permits were signed and dated. McGuire Mechanical also pulled sewer permits for 3 of the other properties, all of which were also inspected by Larry. A combination of 14 other plumbers installed the services on the 20 other properties between 11 -17 -79 and 7- 07 -87. The City does not have any records of any service work requiring a permit for repair or replacement. Inflow & Infiltration (I &I) Sewer Line Camera Inspection A notice was mailed on November 25, 2011 informing all property owners in this sewer district of the City's I &I Mitigation and Sump Pump Inspection Program and an informational community meeting scheduled for December 14. Follow up notices requesting property owners to schedule a sump pump inspection was sent to these same properties on January 4. All other properties along Stirrup St were also informed that their sewer would be televised at the same time. This was a staff initiative to see if the Bliss sewer problem was systemic. Starting on January 12, 15 of the 20 properties have since been televised to date. The remaining 5 are individually scheduled for sometime within the next 6 weeks based on property owner availability. Results received to date show no indications of any structurally damaged or compromised pipe. The reports identify minor sags in 3 of the sewer service lines. Of those, none were installed by McGuire Mechanical. No I &I related issues have been identified that would require the issuance of a Corrective Work Order. INFLOW & INFILTRATION (I &I) REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM Inflow & Infiltration (I &I) Reimbursement Program The structural failure of the sewer pipe elbow at 4321 Stirrup at its connection to the City's service stub is not considered an I &I related issue as it would not have been a conduit for direct clear water inflow into the sewer system similar to a foundation drain, roof rain leader or sump pump connection. If any existing cracks, sags, deflections, etc would have been pre- discovered, it would have been considered a private maintenance issue and would not have warranted an I &I Corrective Work Order. As such, any repairs or follow up work would not have qualified for the City's I &I reimbursement program (50 %). However, advisory notices are typically provided to property owners in these situations informing them on the benefits of ongoing vigilant maintenance and /or subsequent structural improvements to minimize future sewer service problems. Any work deemed eligible for the I &I Reimbursement program requires two estimates pre - approved by the City with reimbursements based on the lesser amount. The City provides a list of both trench excavators and sewer lining contractors for consideration. MATERIAL INSPECTION City staff consisting of the Public Works Director, Chief Building Official and Plumbing Inspector visited the property on March 1 to inspect the salvaged pipe stored on site in the garage. It was identified as a 4" Carlon PVC plastic pipe with the manufacturer's material classification testing numbers stamped on the sewer pipe (ASTM #3033 & #3034) (ASTM = American Society of Testing Materials). Research has determined that this pipe meets both today's standards as well as the standards contained in the State Plumbing Code in 1983. The joints were found to be tight and sound with no indication of movement under hand pressure and appeared to be structurally sound. The pipe was noted to have been saw cut between joints to facilitate removal and /or storage rather than having been pulled apart at the joints. There was evidence that several of the joint couplings broke apart rather than simply being pulled apart. There also was evidence of plastic joint sealing pruner compound on one section of white PVC pipe. There did not appear to be any evidence or indication that would identify the cause of the deterioration and collapse of the elbow connector. This is where the obstruction was noted and the apparent structural failure occurred. INSURANCE & WARRANTY COVERAGE City staff is not aware of or familiar with various types of private insurance coverage that may be available under a homeowner's policy or as a separate endorsement. The claimant's contractor (Hopke) who installed the new sewer service, under continuously observed and very controlled conditions, has provided a 5 year parts and labor limited warranty. When contacted by the City about his willingness to extend that warranty to 30 years on this or similar work, he declined implying that that length of warranty is not practical and didn't know anyone who would warrant any product or service for that period of time. The City has never offered any type of warranty protection or insurance program for private property improvements. If the City were to assume warranty responsibilities as part of its inspection program, it would need to implement an ongoing maintenance management program to identify potential issues and provide mitigative corrective maintenance in a timely manner, similar to the City's Pavement Management Program. In regards to sewer services, it would most likely require televising all sewer services every 2 -4 years at a current cost of $160- $200 /each. This would greatly expand the resources required of City staff and a related increase in utility fees to finance it, along with any subsequent repair work that might be required. If such a City program were to be implemented, it might also be considered a business conflict by government competing with private enterprises who offer this same type of maintenance service. An ongoing inspection program, and any resulting preventative maintenance work, is something that property owners can presently perform on their own schedule and at their own discretion. CORRECTIVE REPAIR OPTIONS An option to total sewer line replacement via full trench excavation involves spot excavation to repair the isolated segment where the blockage is located. "Trenchless" technology is another alternative method of installing a new liner within the existing pipe from within the home sealing off existing cracks, gaps, etc and restoring the structural integrity of the pipe, if deemed necessary. This method minimizes the disturbance of surface amenities and related restoration expenses. If a blockage can't be breached, a spot excavation can be performed. If deemed necessary, a sewer liner can also then be installed from the point of the spot excavation. The cost for this type of repair runs approximately $85 - $100 /ft for a liner plus an estimated extra $500- $1,000 for the spot excavation. LEGAL LIMITATIONS ON CITIES The City Attorney has provided a memo addressing the City's limitations on providing public funds for private property improvements (enclosed on pages of a through ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The photos provided and onsite inspection of the pipe materials was made possible through the cooperation of the property owners, Mr. & Mrs. Bliss, and their designated representative, Mr. Gary Foster. Mr Foster has also specifically requested that his letter of February 25 be forwarded to the City Council. It is included on pages & PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION December 10 2011 Christina Scipioni City Clerk 3830 Pilot Knob Rd. Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Ms. Scipioni, Please consider this correspondence a claim filed by us as homeowners at 4321 Stirrup St. in the City of Eagan. We are seeking reimbursement for costs related to the excavation and replacement of the sewer lateral which occurred on December 2nd, 2011. I am filing this request for reimbursement because of a discovery of inferior installation procedures and materials for our sewer line that was uncovered in the excavation process. We feel the water and sewer work was either never inspected as required at the initial construction phase of the home in 1983 -84, or was improperly overlooked by the inspector. My father -in -law Gary Foster will be representing Lisa and myself in this matter at this stage of the process. He has had conversations with the Public Works Director Mr. Thomas Colbert, and Assistant City Attorney Thomas Donnelly from Mr. Dougherty's office. Both have indicated a willingness to sit down and review this matter with Mr. Foster. We will provide statements, video, and still photos related to this claim. The pipe removed from the trench and will be made available for inspection. Should you decide to meet with him, he can be reached at 715 -271 -0342. Some costs are known at this point and some are not. Roughly $8,400.00 has been expended thus far. Included in this figure is: payment to two plumbers to determine the extent of the problem, a router snake purchased by us in an attempt to clear the pipe, and excavation from foundation to city stub to replace entire lateral. Also, a city inspector required removal of the water shut off from driveway where it should not have been in the first place. We can and will provide receipts for these things. Costs which are yet to be determined are as follows: - Replacement of entire front lawn (grading, black dirt, and seeding) - Repairing blacktop driveway measuring 6' X 13' - Replacing 8 shrubs & two small trees -40ft of edging - Replacement of river rock near foundation As my father -in -law has indicated to Mr. Colbert, Mr. Donnelly, and Mr. Order we are seeking a reasonable resolution to this matter and we are confident this can occur. We would appreciate some form of confirmation that this claim has been received and filed. Beyond the phone number above, Mr. Foster can receive documents or correspondence at the following: barykarenfoster rz,trmail.com Gary L. Foster 2027 Rice Ct. Eau Claire, WI. 54701 Thank You for receiving and forwarding this information to the appropriate staff. Donald Bliss Lisa Bliss ssrig gsq a C7 •uyq `uugug •1S things [Z£b w wauraouidar MOM JOMOS Sutp aai pail suquio s ouut r iin puu Xuu ul ssrig >;sn puu piuuou luasardai laisoJ 7 £i>;f Jo3 uoiuuzuoq ;nu pa.rap!suoo aq molls luamnoop s!ta :u.raouoo ,(um ii wogm o j, i [ oz ` [ 13q1110o0a December 14 2011 The following are some of the points we would like to make as claimants: • When you have people who do this for a living saying things like, "I've never seen this stuff before." And, "look at this." Or," this guy must have held his level upside down when he put this stuff in ", it's the kind of thing that gets your attention. Then a city employee, "Leon" is standing over the excavation hole, saying more than once, "I would never sign off on something like that." (If he denies that now, he's not being truthful.) I'm not a plumber, but I could clearly see that pipe flexed up and down radically. The plumber told me this is why the previous plumber's cameras were going in and out of water. This condition is called "back pitch ", and it's the result of over digging during installation and then not tamping properly. People were also telling me that there is no way a lateral installation from 1984 should go bad this soon. Typically tree roots are a major factor in damage and blockage; they found zero roots around this pipe. One of the workers while excavating, picked up the pipe approx. 15 feet from the foundation and it literally came apart in his hands. The plumbers and excavators commented on the poor joints in the pipe several times. They tell me the flexing of this pipe is the result of poor installation and failure to tamp the ground below and around the pipe. Like they did (see video) when this new pipe was installed. If it was installed properly, and the right product was used, then explain to me why other 1984 vintage lines are not going bad as well. And if they are, I want to know which ones and who installed and inspected them. • Leon, after the fact, stated he thought the white PVC in the center of the trench was a repair. I found it interesting how his demeanor changed on Monday morning when it became apparent to him that I was focusing on who signed off on the original work. There are some problems with this theory however. The guys in the trench stated while they were down there that they believed the white PVC could have been the result of someone cutting corners and using "whatever he had left" to meet the stub at the right length. If a repair occurred, shouldn't there be a permit on file? All the neighbors have been spoken to. None of them indicate an excavation of that magnitude took place while they have been in the neighborhood. You can't have it both ways without some proof. We do know a permit was purchased in 1984. There is a first name signature with no inspection date on a form that is designed to capture an inspection date. That's all we know for sure. There has never been a permit purchased since then for that type of work at that address. You can't say the cityinspected this, because you can't begin to tell me when "Larry" signed this form which asks for a date of inspection. The fact that this pipe failed during its relatively young lifetime, coupled with the fact that experienced people believe it was installed improperly, in addition to a lack of a definitive date of inspection or proof certain that it was even looked at all, adds up to the city being responsible for a huge monetary loss to the occupants who have lived here less than six months. While this recent dig is taking place, the city "inspector" requires that the water shutoff be moved from the driveway to the street. (adding more cost to the new owners). Further proof that someone 1 2 never looked at the original project, or turned their head to what would have made sense even to a lay person in 1984. • The big question is going to be, did your employee follow policy. I believe we will be able to show that they did not. Why pay a city employee a salary for signing his first name to a permit without indicating when he was on site. All we know at this point is when the permit was purchased. Why have a "date of inspection" area on the form if there is no requirement to fill that out. As a former municipal employee and Police Officer, the city required us to file reports. Probably the most important aspect to these forms were the date and time you responded. How could a city defend your service or actions if they couldn't even know for sure when you were there (or I would argue if you were there)? I feel compelled to also ask: • Did Larry fail to fill in the dates on every permit he dealt with? • Did he sign some and not others? If so, why? • Is there any pattern to those he did or did not sign? o These are reasonable questions given what is in front of us. • Was Larry ever corrected or disciplined for not following policy? • Is there anything in his personnel file that would show a possible pattern of cutting corners? o Again, I feel these are reasonable questions given the permits lack of dates. • I think that we can agree that if someone were inclined to cut corners as a contractor, a very good place to do it would be underl2 -15 feet of dirt, where it becomes the home owner's responsibility when the work fails. If it is visible or semi visible work inside the home, it would be pretty hard to hide most things long term. This makes the inspection of the sewer lateral even that much more important in my view. • There is something very distasteful about a newlywed couple who having owned this home for less than six months, are left holding the bag to the tune of thousands of dollars on something a city employee either did or did not do after collecting a fee for the city. The whole reason for inspections is to protect people like Don and Lisa from people who would take advantage of someone and cut corners. This problem was so easily hidden; it took Don and Lisa a thousand dollars just to determine they needed to spend at least seven thousand more. Our view on who is at fault is as follows: The city was supposed to be the entity who received a fee to inspect the work for the protection of future owners of that home. If the city wants to take issue with the original work now, that is between the city and the contractors. I don't feel that these kids should expend time, money and effort at this point pursuing the contractor's liability. If the city had done their job as guardians of compliance on the original work we wouldn't even be discussing this. • I'll leave you with one last thought. There is a good reason the city stub was found to be in good shape after it was cleared of dirt. It is because the city followed good and reasonable plumbing practices when installing those stubs to their citizen's properties. The reason we are here today is because those same standards were not met when the lateral itself was installed. That work was either never seen or ignored. As you know from the very beginning of this situation, I have been determined not to let this young couple be victimized by someone else's laziness, incompetence, or indifference. There are some "oh, well" moments in everyone's life. This is not one of them. They were prepared to suck it up and move on until it was obvious even to them, that the pipe in that hole was at the very least installed improperly. We have indicated a willingness to discuss a resolution to this that is reasonable. The aggravation and inconvenience of this situation is a factor here as well. Whatever the resolution, there will still be a need to let the ground settle before landscaping. When it does happen, it will take months for the plants and lawn to take hold. Continual watering will be necessary. The driveway can't be replaced until that ground settles and weather permits. The yard and driveway will be a soupy mess in the spring. My point is that this is not a quick fix. This is a long tern fix with the front yard never being the same again. Feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. Gary L. Foster 2027 Rice Ct. Eau Claire, WI. 54701 715- 271 -0342 3 6 ( r AGAN 3830 PflofKnob Ro a(� PE[�M1T P, O Bo 21198 E an MN' 55121 Zoning, = • - c - N df U Owner: Jcsem ConA A ddress: -- -- — a i'e1t Site Address: 4321' St:ixki> Strut Plumber McGuire Ve;Ct : I *pie to comply with .the City of 4 Eagon • Ordinenoes. A Permit Mise rpea. Totola; Date Paid: w ''`�I�if�TER�S ERVI Elf • PERA�tT NO .` ` , ' r "` ;' N o of Units St. PIN Nip is & West Sub SEWER & DRAIN INC. .• North subs 4 Emer enc Service 24/7 5242 Credit River Rd. Prior Lace, -NMI 55372 "4"• s wwe poet gins mmassWen q 1 , • $ 4 ( arr. WAIL MP � 4 1,0i ASSWINt TIMM eniemeeme meMUT TOTAL A p a r fo td k rt. 1;, fr #'// et had t••N4#.' "Ire 4 Wots' >Ji fI f(�✓ ,seezeipt lava r� f'11N1 See.* 6e f/ gA Ito ve'. / tl4,i t /- t // f 4141 piptA K tat ai J. re.4. 4 a 710 tier..00P rat" ftaI*i. -t; q ri�i4- I.T �� U ! , / f ! r ll v T4 �/ /II(E', /1",...,1 /5 D i• 4 x; r .e e /6 tda•., > /eile 4 ifrcu , R... ,,i1 A.)c 4,.) y" Sci. ti6 flit 40 ' . ,1�, ( T.- <-+'.I, _ .. c •l - / /?J 4 4-/- Alt (4....I 0..4 .- ..0 ed. )' s4rrr + ); -1' t'.4 .�, <6: 4.,44.e, ++ o.?4 44 C1� + S i/ PL,I /tyr.�- �u.•.�.�ir %rtJrj C4 / rf'4 2r054w / /r� IVtL,: t Jit s v ( Jf ei wow* wit Ir m a r eellr 0 00K PAID t11f OCob Mbednibm MONA abase Ow iti/ddtri Or sod ua eMr taiwielAtiln 0.4101 1 WM/ Aida* t d awl darramml rtaR: war ar ea imp eM roam at w M Mt, r we tlat mit *IONS OM% b Me M. as 1 N al NNMr op* f 1 M MUMPS w walk ar ia* alt MS and W Mb, PAS ttMiMt !Mohr Imo a DIM d !iwyewe via max WONrtrwLA abbe Maw d anal al al 1 A0�1MtOtlli011wt fNtai'fiiR rM'tfwt>!M$ � .� ��MMIO�t ��tf Afil�l►- IA�1O/A11�plONAll��tttK ft00MtN r1�ItM1MItLA61Mta1/MM/RiO =At =.. 1 0 M 4 Dleoer South Subs aslarlasied m in - OMM WI M s Nit, ' ` ° Orttiii i iron Annum Loon TOTKLA/OR TOT& revs TOTAL � / Berm VI, 11 let 1111 112111 !MIN v ■1tf1. 11111 TO RIM D D D fr 2 Nam $7250.00 ammi war WRITTEN STATEMENT FORM DATE_ 12- / y- I TIME r 1 C.1104K Ikeeke , live at y0 Cr4J;4- .de/ icd , Abt I , my phone number is 906-.7 Jay_ (.o9.2my date of birth is Ap_ p. my . I am writing this statement voluntarily. No threats or promises have been made to me to induce the writing of this statement. The following is the truth based on my observations and discussions with others who were involved in the matter herein described. We, c)ej?, Gel /J o.4 40 pr(y y � 4.a S/ ra 5�ree -1- i. - d SP cd� a e.1 pvc , rid }� �,/ iIV?x.tA </ AA l uw l ms.v /. . � n 4,4 A iw Page ) of WRI F1'EN STATEMENT FORM I , live , my phone number is my . I am writing this statement voluntarily. No threats or promises have been made to me to induce the writing of this statement. The following is the truth based on my observations and discussions with others who were involved in the matter herein described. 1.06n a . S Al r i As4,i(Pd S4tP 4 P h AL) Z.) Goad Pat f ,� � `4 a r 1. 0.4.v. i s .�' s d Pep. S od hM, a no4' been po6le,.. _ at date of birth is 1 hole 1'4 .54s ler o ), A + '-J;1 / h elm teso k, 4),;c ✓� . s� f 'I'ein Q, DATE TIME Page of ez LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Gary Foster 2027 Rice Court Eau Claire, WI 54701 RE: LMCIT FILE NO.: PC0011274 TRUST MEMBER: City of Eagan CLAIMANT: Donald & Lisa Bliss D /OCCURRENCE: 12/2/2011 Dear Mr. Foster: CONNECTING & INNOVATING SINCE 1913 January 20, 2012 The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust provides coverage to our trust member, the city of Eagan. At this time I have reviewed your claim and unfortunately we do not feel the city of Eagan should be held liable for the damages 4321 Stirrup St. in Eagan, MN. Minnesota Court of Appeals has stated building inspections and issuance of building permits are not meant to be guarantees to property owners that a home is in full compliance with the Minnesota State Building Code. The courts have been clear that inadvertence or simply missing an infraction does not result in the city being liable. In addition to this, the courts have also stated the issuance of a certificate of occupancy to a homeowner is not a "good housekeeping seal of approval" and is a protected discretionary function for which the city is not liable. For a city to held liable there needs to be a special duty created and this only exists when a building inspector steps out of the public role and begins acting more like a private contractor. In this matter, there is no evidence that a special duty was created, therefore no negligence on the city's part. Furthermore, this work was completed more than 28 years ago. Minnesota Statute of Limitations states; "no action by any person in contract, tort, or otherwise to recover damages for any injury to property, real or personal, or for bodily injury or wrongful death, arising out the defective and unsafe condition of any improvement to real property, shall be brought against any person performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, materials, or observation of construction or construction of the improvement to real property...more than ten years after the substantial completion of the construction ". We regret we cannot provide you with a more favorable resolution to your claim. If you have questions, my direct dial is 651 -215 -4078. Sincerely, Derek Krause Claims Adjuster c: Tom Colbert, City of Eagan Christina Scipioni, City of Eagan Donald & Lisa Bliss Northern Capital Insurance Group Matt Hanley, LMCIT LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INSURANCE TRUST CLAIMS DEPARTMENT 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST PHONE: (651) 281-1200 FAX: (651) 281 -1297 ST. PAUL. MN 55103 -2044 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 WEB: WWW.LMC.ORG February 13, 2012 Mayor Maguire and City Council Members City of Eagan, MN Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Rd. Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mayor Maguire and City Council Members: My name is Gary Foster from Eau Claire, WI. At the request of my daughter and son -in- law, Don & Lisa Bliss, who live at 4321 Stirrup St., I have been representing them on issues related to their sewer lateral failure which was repaired in early December 2011. I will hopefully be speaking with you at the February 21 listening session. I'm told time will be very limited. I understand that, and wanted to share some things in this format that I may not get to express to you that day. The claim submitted to the city regarding this situation has been denied. In the denial, there is nothing that would indicate a past city employee wasn't the cause of the large monetary loss to Don & Lisa. The denial simply gives the legal footing the city is on related to Minnesota Statute of limitations and a form of immunity. Honestly, I get the legal aspect of the denial. What I don't get is why the city of Eagan would want citizens to pay out of pocket for an employee's action or inaction regardless of when it occurred. Additionally, the fact that the problem was buried under 20 feet of dirt for all those years makes its discovery unlikely until the failure was catastrophic. Well, that day finally came shortly after Don, an IS analyst with a new job, and & Lisa, a HS Spanish teacher began making their first house payments. Do all of you remember how scary it was to buy that first house? You wondered the whole time, can we really do this and still meet our other obligations? Picture either yourself or your adult children purchasing a home in a city specifically where you want to live, and hopefully raise a family. You both work hard every day, and go to school at night. You play by the rules by paying your bills, paying your taxes, being good neighbors and generally coloring within the lines. You have been married less than a year when you purchase this home. The house isn't perfect. But that's okay; you know what needs work and updating, etc. You decide to spend a modest amount of money to make the house the way you want it. You don't have enough money to do everything. It's okay, because you will save and do the rest as you can afford it. Then after less than six months of occupancy the sewer lateral fails. You are told the line has to be excavated from foundation to curb at a minimum cost of $8,400.00. You are also told that if the problem is near the city main, the street will be excavated as well to the tune of an additional $8,000.00. Fortunately, the street stub was okay. However, the excavation of the lateral totally destroyed the entire front lawn, a 6' x 13' section of your driveway, several trees, all the shrubs, all the edging & landscaping rock. Instantly, the bill goes up to about $15,000.00. You go more than a week not being able to use the home. You 1 shower at relatives, use gas station bathrooms, eat in restaurants and still keep your work routine. Lisa became so upset by this news, she became physically ill. She threw up in the backyard, because she couldn't use any inside facilities. We knew immediately that sewer lateral failures are not covered by insurance. They are generally not covered because; typically failures are caused by one of two things: Extreme age, or tree root damage. This lateral was 28 years old with zero roots in the trench. If this was an age issue we would not be discussing this. If you buy a 90 year old house and the lateral fails, you knew going in everything was old and subject to failure. But a house built in 1984 should not experience lateral failure. Roots in this line would have made it a non -city issue also. By the way, I'm told many 90 year laterals are still functioning just fine. I'm sure you're wondering how or why this claim came about. It unfolds like this: I was at the dig to replace the lateral on December 2 " As the excavator's and plumbers uncovered the pipe they were using expletives in describing what they were finding. Comments like "holy S - -- look at this" and "I've never even seen this S - -- before" and "some of these joints aren't even glued" and "the guy must have had his level upside down when he put his stuff in" and "I can't believe this passed an inspection." Certainly all of these comments got my attention. As the dig is underway a current city inspector "Leon" shows up and he starts looking at the situation. After looking at the pipe he says to me at least three times, "I would never sign off on something like this." He also said he had never seen this type of pipe used before, which was consistent with what the on site plumber was telling me. All, plumbers, excavators and Leon, commented on the number of unnecessary and unconventional splices in the lateral. The plumber on site stated, "It looked like whoever had installed the line was using leftover materials from other job sites to construct this lateral." This entire time I'm thinking to myself that someone certainly did sign off on what we were seeing. I'm guessing that none of you council members are plumbers. I am not one either. You did not need to be a plumber to look into that hole and see that the entire line was a disaster; raw sewage was going directly into the ground and had been for quite some time, long before Don and Lisa had ever contemplated purchasing this home. Naturally, a reasonable person who was getting hit with a $15,000.00 loss would ask the next logical questions: Who signed off on this? Why did they sign off? I have had to share things with your staff that they should have been able to share with me. I learned that the home was built between December 1983 and March 1 1984. In November 1983 the permits were purchased. That winter was one of the coldest winters ever recorded. The temperature remained below zero for several consecutive months. Christmas Eve was a whopping 40 degrees below zero. The first owner of the house expressed concern to the builder about excavation during that time. He was told not to worry. I have talked to two people who excavate for a living. They indicate under these conditions there could easily be 6 -7feet of frost. When they do dig in these conditions, it's essential that the top layer of frozen ground, removed during the dig, is piled separately from the soft ground from below the frost line. They explained that throwing 2 frozen ground underneath the pipe is likely what caused the dramatic up and down flex of the pipe in that hole. They further explained that under those conditions, sand should have been hauled in to put under the pipe to keep it from settling after the thaw. What's really troubling about all of this is that 1 don't do this for a living. but I somehow learned what should have happened. Someone who inspects for a living should have known what needed to be done. Again, that person either saw what was going on and ignored it, or didn't see it at all. I'm inclined to believe he couldn't challenge what was put in that hole or how it was put in that hole if he never looked in that hole. Why would the initial plumbing contractor risk using substandard and unconventional methods and materials in that trench if they knew it was going to be inspected? I submit to you, that they knew it was not going to be inspected. It also points directly to no date being placed on the inspection permit for just this particular property. The plot thickens when on Monday I begin by calling Leon, the city inspector who was on site for the dig on the previous Friday. I inquire about permits for the original construction. Suddenly, "Leon" is a reluctant conversationalist and says he has other things he needs to do. He side - stepped acknowledging that he had made the statement, "I would never sign off on anything like this." (I was told recently by the adjuster that he has since acknowledged that he did indeed make that statement to me.) I submitted a data request to the city and received a copy of sewer and water permits issued to all (26) properties for the entire length of Stirrup St. The only permit not dated on Stirrup St. was Don & Lisa's. Look at that permit which is attached. "Larry's" signature is written diagonally across the "date" area. It's the only permit out of (26) where this occurred. If there was intent to put a date on that form "ever ", why would you write across this area? All other signatures are horizontal on the appropriate line with the date on the appropriate line. Is it just a coincidence that the one pipe in the neighborhood which goes bad in an unreasonable amount of time, with shoddy workmanship and materials, happens to be the only one without an inspection date? I think not. The city can't defend "Larry" either way because one of two things had to have happened: 1. He either inspected and let things slide that professionals and members of your own staff indicated they would not sign off on(not likely) or, 2. He never inspected anything, and simply signed his first name. It is conclusive that no date went on that form. What date would he put down if he wasn't there for the dig? He certainly would be better off not putting a date down than making one up. It would be tough to explain why a date on the form did not match the actual dig date if asked about it later. As I indicated to Mr. Hedges in discussing this, there is just something fundamentally wrong with these kids picking up the tab for something caused by the negligence of a city employee, past or present. 3 I would ask each council member the following questions: • When a city charges a fee (in this case over $900.00 in 1983) do most if not all citizens expect that an inspection will occur? • If an inspection does occur, should the city sign off on substandard materials or work? • What good is an inspection process designed by a municipality if it is not followed? • If the inspections process is not followed by staff, should citizens absorb their failure to follow the process? The city can certainly hide behind the statute of limitations, which basically allows you to ignore the moral implications of what this is doing to a young couple, who are citizen taxpayers, who chose the city of Eagan as a place to raise a family. The denial letter made reference to a certificate of occupancy not being a "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval." Maybe not, but I'll bet you my next six paychecks that any citizen you ask will tell you that they pay a fee and expect something for that fee. What they expect is someone employed by the city being the guardian of compliance on all sorts of specifications and codes. If it doesn't matter, why have inspections at all? This isn't a young couple trying to make a big insurance score. This is a deal where citizens are asking the city to stand behind them as taxpayers, who through no fault of their own got stuck with a $15,000.00 bill which was buried under 20 feet of dirt for 28 years. Had that employee done their job when this home was constructed, we wouldn't even be discussing this. I am astounded that the city would want a citizen saddled with an expense caused by one of their own, regardless of the circumstance or time frame. An offer of sharing the cost was never even proffered. Does the city of Eagan really want Don and Lisa to tell friends, relatives, co- workers, neighbors and strangers the details of being forced to pay for the mistake of an Eagan city employee? People who hear what happened will certainly put themselves in their situation and imagine themselves being ground swatted for thousands of dollars through no fault of their own. The question, "What happened to your front yard ?" will be asked for quite some time. There is no money to put it back to the way it was. This will lead to an explanation of what happened and how it was handled. You can tell by now and probably before you received this document that I'm no wall flower. What you don't know is that I'm a realist who knows very well life is not fair. When the denial was received I did not like it but accepted it. I knew at that point the kids would not likely recover a dime, in spite of everything described above. I frankly don't expect you as a council to change direction on this either. I'm not coming to the session to take another kick at the can in hopes you will do what is right. From the beginning, I have sensed a culture of circling the wagons, rather than what is in the best interest of the citizen. If I'm wrong about this, tell me why I'm wrong. Playing defense when citizens have a legitimate issue doesn't give a warm and fuzzy feeling to those who are taxpayers. When I sat down with the adjuster, City Clerk and Public Works Director on Don and 4 Lisa's behalf, prior to the denial, there was no asking of questions which would cause one to believe they were interested in learning what happened and why. It was more of a "tell us what you know" session with a closure of "you should know we are looking at the statute of limitations." I knew right then that these kids were going to pay for "Larry's" $15,000.00 maneuver. We always hear people say they want to teach their children to accept responsibility for things when it is warranted. That always sounds good until human beings are faced with actual situations. This is one of those situations. If you can look me in the eye and tell me that you would not be furious and frustrated in how this has played out if this were you or your children, then I'll be all ears on February 21 I won't have too much more to say at the listening session. But I will be curious to see how Council members, who are themselves citizens of Eagan, who are elected to look out for other citizens, respond to our concerns. If you were able to put yourself or your kids in Don & Lisa's shoes, do you really believe the outcome here was just? Gary Foster 2027 Rice Ct. Eau Claire, WI 54701 715- 832 -7685 garykarenfoster@gmail.com cc: Deborah O'Connor, Saint Paul Pioneer Press Watchdog Reporter 5 February 25, 2012 Thomas Colbert Director of Public Works 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Sewer Service Failure, 4321 Stirrup St. Dear Mr. Colbert, I am in receipt of your February 23 letter. You will receive a separate email which should allow you to view the photos and videos which were previously provided to you on January 5th I am sure you were not happy with my presentation to the City Council. Your department's competency and creditability were called into question. I told the truth and will continue to do so. If your letter was designed to make me appear uncooperative, shame on you, again. For you to write a letter, in a way that suggests that you have been trying to get to the bottom of our concerns, but that I have stood in your way, is laughable. You did request to see photos, videos and pipe in your December 12 email. A meeting was eventually scheduled for January 5 2012. As you recall I brought a DVD and a flash drive which contained both photos and videos of the dig. I told you that the IT fellow at my workplace transferred the photos and videos of the dig to the DVD which I gave to you. My wife, Karen, had the IT person at her work put the same information on a flash drive which was also given to you. She was able to bring up both the photos and videos on our home computer before I brought them to you. Mid - meeting, January 5 you and Ms Scipioni tried without success to bring up the videos, but you were able to bring up some of the photos. I told you at the meeting that I was not computer savvy beyond the basics and could not help you. Regarding the pipe; every last inch of it has been at the Stirrup Street address since the day of the dig. Did you want me to drive from Eau Claire and transport the entire sewage caked pipe to your desk? Perhaps it would make more sense to go look at it on Stirrup Street. You and the adjuster could have done this fifty times by now. It is still there waiting to be looked at. As I indicated in the Council document, it was very apparent to me at that January 5th meeting that the claim was going to be denied. Mr. Krause talked Statute of Limitations and you stated, "We can show it was inspected, there is a signature." Sure enough the denial came. At this point what incentive would one have to assist the City of Eagan in their pursuit of understanding why the lateral failed? I wasn't even told that there was an appeal process to the City Council. I had to learn that on my own too! 1 Regarding McGuire Mechanical; look at the December 14, 2011 document which 1 sent to you. On the second page, third bullet, 10` line clown, I explain why we felt the City of Eagan was supposed to be the buffer between the contractor and the homeowner. The City signed off on McGuire Mechanical's work without dating the permit. What do you suppose McGuire Mechanical's position would be if contacted? How about, "We paid for a permit -- -the city signed off- - -go away!" I am not an investigator for your city. If you want them contacted I suggest you spend some time and effort and do it with paid employees. If you were me, wouldn't you find it a little bit odd, that when I called you on February 16 to basically find out why you had not shared the I & I information with me, that you would solicit my assistance in determining why Don and Lisa's lateral failed. Wouldn't this be more appropriate prior to a denial? Then I asked why, post denial, all of the Stirrup Street laterals were being videoed. You indicated that in 2010 video of the lines was suspended, but because of Don and Lisa's situation you wanted to make sure there were no patterns with bad laterals and contractors etc. in the Stirrup Street area. Again, here is a guy who on one hand dismisses my suggestions pre - denial, and is now following up on them with vigor post- denial. I feel like I have spent a great deal of time having to point out what you or your staff should have done in this matter. I would have preferred that you would have recognized early on, that this was something that could have been handled in a more forthright and citizen friendly manner. Each time I have felt a little progress has been made, I'm rewarded with non - sharing, accusations of noncooperation and being threatening. I left the council listening session optimistic that perhaps some people finally understood our position and frustration. I had a pleasant phone conversation with Mr. Hedges on Friday afternoon, February 24 I found your letter in the mailbox a couple hours later. I am very puzzled about what to think. At any rate, you are welcome to contact Don and view the pipe on Stirrup Street. We will however, retain possession of all pipe materials until this matter is resolved. Don can be reached at: 952- 693 -6247. Gary Foster 2027 Rice Ct. Eau Claire, WI 54701 715- 832 -7685 garykarenfoster @gmail.com Cc: Thomas L. Hedges, City Administrator Christina M. Scipioni, City Clerk Mayor Mike Maguire Eagan City Council Members Deb O'Connor, St. Paul Pioneer Press Watchdog 2 D D Dougherty, Molenda, Solfest, Hills & Bauer P.A. OUGHERTY MOLENDA • ©` -'' B Attorneys Advisors MEMORANDUM To: Eagan City Council From: City Attorney's Office Date: 03/05/2012 Re: Repair Private Sewer Service Line — 4321 Stirrup St SUMMARY: While the circumstance is unfortunate, the City has no legal obligation to reimburse Donald and Lisa Bliss for the costs they incurred to repair their private sewer service line. Furthermore, the City is prohibited from providing public money for a private purpose, and reimbursement under these circumstances may constitute expenditure for a private purpose. BACKGROUND: 7300 West 147th Street Suite 600 Apple Valley, MN 55124 (952) 432-3136 Phone (952) 432 -3780 Fax ww.v.dmshb.com The City of Eagan's Public Works Department requested an opinion memorandum addressing the legal limitations placed on the City to provide public money for private property improvements. The request arose in light of the City's receipt of a formal claim from Donald and Lisa Bliss for costs incurred to repair a private sanitary sewer service line at 4321 Stirrup Street. The formal claim alleged that the private sanitary sewer service line was either (1) inspected by the City and should not have been approved, or (2) never inspected by the City. The formal claim estimated incurred repair costs of approximately $8,400.00 and future repair costs of approximately $7,000.00 (for damages to driveway, lawn and landscaping due to excavation for total replacement). The claim was denied by the City's insurance carrier, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. The City has investigated the situation, which has heeded the following pertinent information: • A sewer service permit, dated November 16, 1983, was pulled for the property by McGuire Mechanical Services Inc. and subcontracted to Larson Sewer and Water for installation; • The sewer service permit was signed off (undated) by "Larry ", a City utility inspector; • A less intrusive method of repair exists that does not entail trench excavation and total replacement; and, • City staff review of the salvaged sewer pipe material indicated that the pipe met the standards contained in the State Plumbing Code at the time of installation. March 6, 2012 Page 2 of 3 LEGAL ANALYSIS: Cities are prohibited from expending public money for a private purpose.' Thus, a city cannot use public money to "perform the legal duty of private parties. ' ' ` Property owners are responsible for maintaining and repairing the private sewer line that serves their property. Since replacement of the private sewer service line is the property owners' responsibility, reimbursement of their costs may be considered expending public money for a private purpose, unless the city has a legal obligation to pay. In this case, the City has no obligation to pay for the repairs because the City is not legally liable for the damage. There is no liability on the City's part for, at minimum, two reasons: (1) the claim is denied by the applicable statute of limitations /repose, and (2) there is no special duty owed to the property owners (known as the public -duty doctrine). Statute of Limitations /Repose As noted by the City's insurance carrier, the property owners' claim is barred by the statute of limitations /repose. The applicable statute of limitations /repose is set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 541.051, which states, in relevant part, as follows: Except where fraud is involved, no action by any person in contract, tort, or otherwise to recover damages for any injury to property, real or personal, .. . arising out of the defective and unsafe condition of an improvement to real property, shall be brought against any person performing or furnishing the design, planning, supervision, materials, or observation of construction or construction of the improvement to real property or against the owner of the real property more than two years after discovery of the injury, nor in any event shall such a cause of action accrue more than ten years after substantial completion of the construction. Date of substantial completion shall be determined by the date when construction is sufficiently completed so that the owner or the owner's representative can occupy or use the improvement for the intended purpose. This provision applies because the formal claim is based on the allegedly defective condition of the private sewer service line. The legislature has declared a strict deadline of 12 years from the date of substantial completion of the construction to bring a cause of action like the one set forth in the formal claim. The certificate of occupancy issuance date may be evidence of the substantial completion date. As the construction of this property, including the installation of the private sewer service line, occurred between 1983 -84, more than 12 years have passed, and any cause of action is barred. Public -Duty Doctrine www.dmshb.com Dougherty, Molenda, Solfest, Hills & Bauer P.A. OUGHERTY MOLENDA © "?L 0 Attorneys 1 Advisors D March 6, 2012 Page 3 of 3 A negligence claim asserted against a government entity or its employee must be based on a duty owed to individual members of the public (special duty) and not a duty owed to the general public (public duty).' The property owners claim the City's inspector either negligently inspected the private sewer service line or negligently failed to inspect it. Building codes, the issuance of building permits and building permits "are designed to protect the public and are not meant to be an insurance policy by which the municipality guarantees that each building is built in compliance with the building codes." Accordingly, "the charge for building permits is to offset expenses incurred by the city in promoting this public interest and is in no way an insurance premium which makes the city liable for each item of defective construction in the premises. " Since the City's inspection of the private sewer service line at 4321 Stirrup Street is based on a public duty, the City is not liable to individual property owners even if the City's employee acted negligently. R. E. Short Co. v. Minneapolis, 269 N.W.2d 331, 337 (Minn. 1978). '` Bybee v. City of Minneapolis, 208 Minn. 55, 292 N.W. 617 (1940). 3 Otto v. St. Paul, 460 N.W.2d 359, 361 (Minn. App. 1990). ' Minn. Stat. § 541.051, subd. 1(a) (2011) (emphasis added). 5 Minn. Stat. § 541.051, subd. 2 (2011). 6 Weston v. McWilliams & Associates, Inc., 716 N.W.2d 634 (Minn. 2006). ' Cracraft v. City of St. Louis Park, 279 N.W.2d 801 (Minn. 1979). 8 Id. (quoting Hoffert v. Owatonna Inn Towne Motel, Inc., 293 Minn. 220, 223, 199 N.W.2d 158, 160 (1972)). 9 Id. www.dmshb.com Dougherty, Molenda, Solfest, Hills & Bauer P.A. OUGHERTY MOLENDA Attorneys 1 Advisors