My WebLink
More
Help
About
Sign Out
No preview available
/
Fit window
Fit width
Fit height
400%
200%
100%
75%
50%
25%
View plain text
This document contains no pages.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
10/06/1988 - City Council Regular
AGENDA REGULAR MEETING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (PINK) II. 6:35 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES (PINK) III. 6:45 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS (PINK) I MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1988 EAGAN, MINNESOTA A. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1. Review of Dakota County Five Year C.I.P. �j 2. Approve Revised/Updated Comprehensive Water Supply, Storage and Distributive Plan and Sanitary Sewer Plan IV. 6:55 - CONSENT AGENDA (BLUE) F.2, A. PERSONNEL Items (7. , $ B. ELECTION JUDGES for the General Election (p. i( C. CERTIFICATE of Correction for Bur Oak Hills 2nd Addition Plat i( D. PROCLAMATION, Declare Week of October 16th as National Business Women's Week T. /C.i E. PROJECT 555, Receive Petition/Authorize Feasibility Report and Detail Plans )D.4 F. Wood 2nd Addition - Streets and Utilities) F. CONTRACT 88-35, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Stratford Oaks and Hidden Valley) P•[( G. CONTRACT 88-36, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Country Hollow 2nd Addition and l'g Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition) p. H. FINAL PLAT, Lexington Pointe 3rd Addition . Zp I. FINAL PLAT, Bur Oak Hills 2nd Addition '� 4 J. FINAL PLAT, Hidden Valley Addition •L (o K. FINAL PLAT, Country Hollow 2nd Addition 11• Z g L. REVIEW Cooperative Snow Removal Agreement with Inver Grove Heights (Bur Oak Hills) 17.21 M. APPROVE Form and Schedule and Authorize Issuance of Request for Proposal For Banking Services -1".40 N. VACATE Portion of Right of Way, Receive Petition/Order Public Hearing (Safari Pass) 0. PROJECT 556, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Potts Addition- SanitaryP Sewer) P,ctj P. FINAL PLAT, Community of Joy Church Addition P.,q 3 Q. CONTRACT 88-38, Receive Bids/Award Contract, Rink Lighting, Pilot Knob Park t�� R. CONTRACT 88-12, Approve Change Order #1 (Eagan High School Utility ' Improvements) P.' // S. CONTRACT 86-20, Final Payment/Acceptance (Windtree 7th Addition - Utility & Street Improvements) 'P. T. CONTRACT 86-X, Final Acceptance (Lexington Place South 3rd Addition - Utility & Street Improvements) I •9<‘ U. Final Acceptance, City Project 86 -TT (Briar Oaks of Apple Valley - Sanitary Sewer Improvements) V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS (SALMON) D,c.(7 A. CONTRACT 88-39, Public Hearing (Bituminous Trail Installation, Rahn Road I south of Diffley to Shale Lane) r,6( B. PETITION, Residents of Woodgate Opposed to Project 524, Johnny Cake Ridge Road - Sidewalk/Trail T•g 5 C. PROJECT 543, Public Hearing (Prettyman and Utilities) F•t!a7 D. PROJECT 552, Public Hearing (Eagandale Storm Sewer and Watermain) -p.I27.. E. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS - 1987 I TI),lib 1. Adopt Policy 86-3, Revise Policy 82-2 .(33 2. 138 3. 1 ,.i'� 4. 148 5. .154 6. .16,1 7. lii.167 8. .112. 9. .178 10. -7.417 11. -,,193 12. F.20013. Heights/Sibley Hills Drive - Streets Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition - VIII. Project Project Project Project Project Project Project Project Project Project Project Project Special Assessment Appeals 467, Wescott Rd, Lots 20, Block 1, Lexington Square Addition 450, Williams and LaRue 1st Addition - Parcel 10-01400-030-53 467, Wescott Road - Parcel 10-01400-03-53 444R, Holland Lake Storm Sewer - Parcel 10-02600-011-52 460A, Nicols Road - Parcel 10-03000-010-29 460A, Nicols Road - Lot 1, Block 2, Cedar Ridge 1st Addition 460A, Nicols Road - Lot 3, Block 1, Cedar Ridge 1st Addition 442 Alternate, Becker Road - Lot 4, Block 1, Loren Place 442 Alternate, Becker Road - Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, KSTP Addition 455, Deerwood Drive Parcel 10-02100-010-07 455, Deerwood Drive - Parcel 10-02100-010-08 455, Deerwood Drive - Parcel 10-02100-011-77 OLD BUSINESS (ORCHID) PARKING BAN, Terminal Drive/Eagan Center Industrial Park NEW BUSINESS (TAN) CERTIFICATION, 1989 Tax Levy ASSESSMENTS, Brittany Ninth Addition APPOINTMENTS, Citizens Committee/Parks and Recreation Committee for Community Center Project WORK PLAN, Economic Development Commission WAIVER OF PLAT, Dennis J. Shaw, Realign Common Property Line Between Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, Blackhawk Glen 2nd Addition, Located on Ashbury Court in SW4 of Sec 16 WAIVER OF PLAT, Federal Land Company, Relocate Common Property Lines Between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Town Centre 100 Sixth Addition, Located Along Denmark Ave in NWS of Sec 15 WAIVER OF PLAT, Kraft Inc., Lot Split to Allow Individual Ownership on Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Industrial Park #8, Located on Eagan Industrial Road in SES of Sec 3 VARIANCE, James R. Jensen Jr., A 2' Variance to Side Yard Setback Located at Lot 6, Block 2, Lake Park Shores, SE4 of Sec 28 SPECIAL PERMIT, James Bartizal, B & Z Farms, A Temporary Permit to Sell Christmas Trees in the Thomas Lake Center Shopping Center, SW4 of Sec 28 COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT, Oak Meadow Addition, Meritor Development Corp., PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT (REZONING) of 21.5 LB (Limited Business) Acres Within the Blackhawk Park Planned Development to R-1 (Single Family) and a PRELIMINARY PLAT Containing 30 Lots Located Between Highway 35E and Pilot Knob Road and South of Englert Road in the SE 1/4 of Sec. 16 ADDITIONAL ITEMS (GOLD) F.26, 7 A. RELOCATION, Old Town Hall IX. X. XI. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA (GREEN) VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda) ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 1988 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION, OCTOBER 6, 1988 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 'ADOPT AGENDA APPROVE MINUTES After approval is given to the October 6, 1988 agenda and special City Council meeting minutes for August 15, August 30 and September 13 and regular meeting minutes for the September 19, 1988 meetings, the following items are in order for consideration. As a reminder, the reason the City Council meeting was changed from Tuesday to Thursday at the organizational meeting in January is to officially recognize the Jewish holiday, Shemini Atzeret and Simchat Torah (Rejoicing the Law). This holiday, like Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur includes Sabbath -like work restrictions. The Jewish Federation contacted the League of Minnesota Cities last fall and requested that a notice be sent out to all municipalities in the state of Minnesota asking that they recognize all Jewish holidays that have Sabbath -like work restrictions. :-DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS= A. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Item 1. Review of Dakota County Five Year Capital Improvement Program --The City has received a copy of the proposed 1989 Dakota County Capital Improvement Progrpli for our review and comment. Enclosed on pages .- through is a listing of the C.I.P. with those projects within the City of Eagan appropriately underlined. The portion identified as the City's share is an estimate based on the standard cost participation agreements used for the improvement of county roads. The City has estimated participation as broken down as follows: 1989 - $1,476,000 1990 - 1,787,000 1991 - -0- 1992 - 1,063,000 1993 - 1,669,000 5 -Year Total - $5,995,000 The City's proportionate share will be financed through a combination of Municipal State Aid funds, special assessments against benefitted adjacent properties and the Major Street fund. If the Council has any comments or concerns regarding the proposed improvements, scheduling or the City's commitment to jointly participate in these projects, it would be appropriate to address those issues so that a formal response can be forwarded to Dakota County. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive and comment on the Dakota County proposed 5 -year Capital Improvement Program. HIGHWAY CIP 1989 - 1993 Q N O O lri r•f Ur) C0 CO O) .-+ N N N 4, a+ .4.1 4, • Q ¢ C P'1 N r'1 O • 1 N Q d ¢ V1 vl CL, N U U U !J1 cm cm ^l cJ O O O 7 O T T N N f`9 V G Lel vi L) U T Q' CO on Q1 cr O O O O O O O O O O 1� N) 0 C O 0 4_+ yJ '0 u 0 O O J J N 7 o O L L C D0 Cm T 03 cO cm 01 O O O Q� N $18,209,000 1989 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION O O O O�K Carryover from 1988: 1989 Requested Funds: 11 q) 2 7 U 11 PI Lo r j<nr04 1L.1 11 7 a -0 -0 0 V C-) N CC o U O U J W ua W H. N W W 7411 '' 22 r cc U 2.H HIGHWAY CIP - 1989 - 1993 W ct O- 0- 0- a U - W C 'D cc Lo 0. C) 0 O 0 0 VD CT -+ r•1 to N OOOoo- 00 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 O o O 0 O o IP 0 O1 N rl CD un n ...CM N 00 to cr n .-• N • O O O O O O O O O O O CO t0 N CO co co co co O O O O er on cm tO u') M n N u) O O O O O o O O 000 O- 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0- O O O O- 0 0 O O O N r Sr)COLC) un r1 0 ▪ 1.LO LC1 CO 01 '0 tO .00 tO N cr M 1 Q LC) n CO CO •--- n O,0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 . O O 0P.CD Ob0 C)0000- 00 LC) LO 10000Th CO.0 0 0 0. 4D to cO COO un O rn I.11 on ►n O n N O N i - --. �. O » • O cfj Q) -- Q) Q.1 •- Ql Ql 01 t 0 O•• O O O C C C C C •• O O > - > > > > > L U U - N m Q) Q) O 6.100 00+J\CC C 1 4-1 Q) 10 N 0.1 01 Q) QJ 0 1n Q) al C 0 0 0 0 CU C .1 0 10 10 10 10 10 CO 0 Cfl J J J J J 3 u r J \ Q) L I V V - cr QCC CO N 01 O .•r N rl V to LC) N en en en en r7 rl en T _ I-. C . ol L 1 J Cu ..-• O _ - C N •--• C 10 c 4 tO • O U Q)LN cc .r VI U +J U til• CD O 0 O o Ml u) N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ul o. O 0 0 N n CO Cn on M r7 CD 0 CD O CD O O O O O n .-.1 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 N N C C 0 0 rtl Io Io Io +J 4.+ C C C C 10• 10 C71 01. Cr. U U r c • O O ,11171 N J J U u 1J VI ^ VI VI 7 4- 4- 4- .4. O O 21 E 1V L s- 5- L Q) L 10 10 iJ Q) 1 01 W I•^• E 17 i [ C 0 L0 C C• Q) 1 0 ▪ - 7 V1 • C U. 0 Q) N1 r U V) 10 0- 1 2 1 10 .....-.1 W- E 4J U u 1 -C L I- 2 IO !h L N - C .1 u 2 +J r-'1 Q) T z 10 SO to Io rl 0 > . 0 0 L •-• 0 Q 0 y C 1- U Ib t-1 U L7 C 4 • t0 .0 n W C Q) tN .1. 0 +-) • 0 = +J .1- N L) XL)- .)4O.nH. 44 H- L.) U W ^7 O a C Y MCn 4 N to U O O O 0• U 0101 ccCm0' CO LCIN •--I -4 01 er tO co C1 VI C C C CC U U U U U U M N O = N v▪ ) U U 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 01 01 01 01 01 01 O 01 C31 Cn 01 01 01 01 CnCT, Q) N C +J 0) U > Q) 4 •O O ♦J L 1 .1 0- 01 Q) Q) L • • L U 1- R1 N COz v.J.� 4 4 4 O CZ 13 N 11 Y N N >I 0 M V t0 •-4▪ 0= L C 4 4 Q) L C N N > 7 UUU OH. 1990 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 0 0 0O O Cm 0. 01 01 01 00'0' 0'03 CIP-Sum/I Dnooc.e Rd D,As"oNO SEGMENT (FROM/T01 O O O O O O 00 u) N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O n CO ? u) Q) O cn v3 u) u1 C) O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O? ?OO )O ? M 0 0 u) u) aAN CO N c,0 M ar► w O O O IO O O O O N O O N ,..0 CO O ? ? u) WI Ial IN v. .A O O O IO O O O O O O 00 O O 00 O ? ? ... ? O0 ? 1'43_ •'0 O On Q)on .1.N I.-. = ..q.IM I'4' Fv ••. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 O O O O O p 0 0 0 0 0 0 ip 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O X) u) CO M N O .--. )D M )p O In r. r. 00 u) - O O u) u) O) O t0 u) O ,0 an - Co O )D N Ire N I? I VI. 000000010 000000 OIO 0 0 0 0 0 0 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IO O O O r. u1 0 0 KV O u1 0 N O O p I r-. O .... ).'1 p O O Or,. C) N O) )D 00 O O IQ u)?..co b?r\n 00? \M)D?nN aA p 4* aA -. N M ? un ? ? ? ? ? • mcmp,_ 4 Q ? ? 1 sin ars O O O O O O O O O u) O u1 ul O CO N N O O O O O O O O O O O O ? 0000 u) CO O ? 7 N N aA $11,731300 $1,069,200 O OI un 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _fv0 O O O O • 0 ? 0 0 N N O O Cr n M N N M? u) '.0n u) u- u1 u1 1n N N V) V 3 C 7 C C 7 1 C O o N o o N O 0 7 ...r 7 7 7 7 a.+ '7 7 N' J 7 7 •^ y of y y y .J a� y H 0) L)+ 0) 1J as .� 7 c 77- • 10 .o c > - 7 MI 10 _�7...+�_�,.� le .e O '^ ^^ V V ^ O •^ U V (0 N V1 V V > V>>> 0 0 > V 7 •> L O O 7> C> C C O O J J •^ 0) C •^ 07 J J C •^ 0 '^ 0 0 J J O CC OOO 0CC0 O7, =8 OCJU N N 4) C) C) N N 7 7 N N v v v) 7 7 C) 6) y 0 y y 7 7 3333300 3333300 c C C C C C 0 0 10 b co 10 co -^ '^ 10 r0 10 10 O '^ .•- 10 10 10 b N N •^ ••- J J J J J L L J J J J V L L J J J J J L L 1 I I 1 1 10 0 1 1 I I N 10 .O I I 1 I I I ,- C y CF N??? D.? ? N?? C D. Do ?? C N N Y? 0) O > L CL.� L G _ N O` 0 O U L y M M y �' 7 4) - 7 0 J 7 N F•- C O ' N U > L U .3 L V N C u) G CC Q C N yLI ^ '':`3 .0utN CLI r-. M V J. VI to on N •.1 NN C L y . J T7 =.G I C) VO =Q= CU N C0 ...1?)D G y V O I¢-• 0 - .o •C J v) r' "0 y U Q = C "-•) •-) U N .-. .!f = = ”--3 C) U O V ._ N U y O '^f N L N Q y 0 0 J F-• O -'--) h- >) 0' 1 => 0 J .� U N Y_ L L J .... = L O J '3 In N 3 +-1 (1) CL 1- N I J N I CL 1- Q C) C> M 1 Y .- 0 1 1 - • 0 I r-.-) .--. r O w 7.7'± .., O < n • q V V. 1 0 u) ellO V T N M M .0 V 1- T - V 0 .0 L C )D u) C N M .4. L..1 = ..r L '7)-^ .--. ? M .--I u) Cr,- N M ? .••. �_ -C CO ,. ^ --) = G1•^ M W C C '^ CT C ' iC) _ 0 C� O GCQ�.-Tp) 7 N •O c) CC yN O) CC I-= 0:!) en .. C. CC cJ 1nv)tn ..... y L �.. N U U Y 7 •-•• • U F- I- )-- U 7 •-. U U U U 7 LL 7 CL CL 7 C 7 C 7 C 7 U.^• ' I.10 CO y.. N w. u, `^ N C L L= rr Ili N M V .0 • u) .--• N V q V 0 t..0 y .- )0 N .- rr ' C0 = ? CL L = CO = = ? O. L = N •• Cr Q VD3. L. Cr C G v) N G G Cr N N Q VI N V) C V) N C C > to Q' 1n N CC C > 1n C . 00 CC CL' C > .-. N M U C.) UU U 0 C CJ U 0O UU UU=O .0 �.••.� N M aA G. U T '0 N Y 00 0) 3 Bikeway projects are described en CL U 00 • N N N N N N Q cn p) T O Q) 0 O) 0) O) Q) p) C) C) C) �.. I .... _ _ ^. M M 0) 0 C) c M M M M C))C)0) T Dn C7, On 0" A 4 c O 0 Q YAt< .i / 0 CIS ni J` —O -d 'd O • 3 '0 U v C o Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting Item 2. Approve Revised/Updated Comprehensive Water Supply, Storage and Distribution Plan --On September 6, copies of the proposed Comprehensive Plans were forwarded to the Council under separate cover for their information and review. On September 19, an Executive Summary prepared by the consulting engineer was distributed with the packet helping to identify significant changes to the previous 1984 Comprehensive Plans. Bob Rosene, representing the consulting engineering firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, who prepared these Comprehensive Plan revisions and updates, will formally present these plans for Council approval. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the 1988 Comprehensive Water & Sanitary Sewer Plans. s Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA There are twenty-one (21) items on the agenda referred to as consent items requiring 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 Additional Items unless the discussion required is brief. PERSONNEL ITEMS A. PERSONNEL ITEMS Item 1. Police Officers -- There are currently three vacant police officer positions at the City of Eagan. Two of these positions are additional positions and were authorized by the City Council at its July 5, 1988 meeting. The other is a vacancy caused by a resignation. When these positions were advertised, approximately seventy applications were received. After screening, thirty candidates were invited to the Eagan Municipal Center for an interview and physical fitness screening. After evaluations, seven candidates were selected for an extensive background investigation. From these seven candidates, three were selected for recommendation for hire. Those three have also successfully completed the City's physical and psychological examination requirements. Therefore, it is the recommendation of Chief of Police Berthe that the following persons be hired as police officers for the City of Eagan: Robert Jurgens, Bradley Ramthun and Michael Schrader. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve the hiring of Robert Jurgens, Bradley Ramthun and Michael Schrader as police officers for the City of Eagan. Item 2. Accounting Intern -- The City has received a letter of resignation from the accounting intern, Kimberly Vitale. Ms. Vitale is leaving the City in order to accept a permanent position with a financial firm. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To accept the resignation of Kimberly Vitale, Accounting Intern. Item 3. Substitute Park Attendant -- With the coming of the fall season and additional schedule conflicts among present seasonal workers, the Park Maintenance Division is finding difficulty in having a park attendant available for Trapp Farm Park at all needed times. Therefore, it is the recommendation of Superintendent of Parks VonDeLinde that Kevin Duffy, who has served as a seasonal ice rink/park attendant for the last two winter seasons, be hired as a substitute park attendant for this fall season. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the hiring of Kevin Duffy as a seasonal substitute park attendant. Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting Item 4. Administrative Intern -- Eleven applications were received for this internship. City Administrator Hedges and Administrative Assistant Hohenstein will be interviewing five of those applicants on Friday afternoon, September 30. It is expected that they will have a recommendation for hire for presentation to the Council with the Administrative packet or at the Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the hiring of an administrative intern (name to be furnished). Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting ELECTION JUDGES/GENERAL ELECTION B. Approve List of Election Judges Enclosed on pages 0\ through (() is November 8, 1988 General Election. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: list of election judges for the November for General Election -- a list of judges for the To approve or deny the 8 General Election. DEMOCRATS Leo Amundson Cathy Brost Janice Merck JoAnne Arbour Fran Bohn Alyce Bolke Cathy Caflisch Evelyn Cota Marte Dehler Edith Drake James Driscoll Jean Fontaine Jan Giefer Lorraine Reiger Al Jarvi Helen Jarvi Anna Lou Arneson Beatrice Cooper Patricia Kaeder Mildred J. Beck Mary Kellner Duane Petrie James Kennedy Dorothy LeMay Stella Lundquist Julia McNurlin Dorothy Peterson Donna Quinn Pat Rask Lori Regan Carolvenia Richardson Emily Rodich Martie Ruzicka Sharon Scholler Ilene Hazel Helen Kennedy Geraldine Knutson Judy Kazda Eleanor Piepho Judy Mundahl Doug Nicolay Robin Copeland Carolyn Thurston Pauline LeGendre Orlean Garness Kay Dodge Sharon Hanson Janet Billings Claire Duren Marguerite Friegang Eleanor Grimmer Barb Schreiner GENERAL ELECTION JUDGES NOVEMBER 8, 1988 CONFIRMED REPUBLICANS Lois Agrimson Lynn Fieman Irene Kreidberg Judy Allen Sharon Astelford Jenny Baker Terri Berksness Rena Blomberg Georgia Cummings Gloria Czycalla Ellen Engquist Sandy TenNapel Karen Factor Laurel Graves Emily Medin Mildred Hartelben Marge Jacobs Patti Benjamin Nancy Hendren Nancy Jarvi Marilyn McNurlin Tracy Jones Aurelia Peterson Marilyn Porter Lisa Laramee Mary Jane LaRock Phyllis Ligman Zella Mirick June Nelson Sandra Nelson Barbara Nuttall Sue Olson Lyle Severson William Skar Nancy Strom Ruth Sydow Sara Tidrick Rose Vimr Arlene Sheldon Laura Nichols Molly Elder Marth Ann Guetzlaff Marie DesLauriers Barb Edgerton Carol Vihovde Marie Lane Neal Black Doris Vogt Jean Kimber Gladys Byrnes Jim Bartholomew Julia Bartholomew INDEPENDENTS Karen Flood Marilyn Holm Suzanne Hoffman Della Gangl Ramona Broman Joann Bloch Brian Malloy Judy Peterson Bernice Witter Rita Dandurand Ann Ouradnik William Reid Harold Peterson Robert Manning DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS INDEPENDENTS Annette Heuer Geraldine Hrimnak Vivian Jackson Charlene Krusell Andrina Kuechle Bob Olson Sharon Orth Julianne Keller Oliver McCulloch Kirstin McCleary Barb Shields Anne Sullivan Ruth Twomey Joan Uselmann Elinor Villelli Tony Villelli Irene Wachtler Walter Lawrence Janet Schuetze Kathleen Daly Christine Johnson Nancy Gibbs Stephanie Thorson Joyce Unten Julianne Keller Betty Woody Elaine Jones Lynn Thompson Joan Bohlig Eleanor Bruce Adeline Buehler Darlene Formanack Joanne George June Ketcham David Klefsaas Kay Kolehmainen Avis Kriebel Marcia Miller Jan Kuehn Nancy Lee Marilyn Legler Pearl LeMieux Ruth Lilley Judith Miller Mark Olson Aurelia Poppler Mary W. Teske Marvel Thorne Ethel Groff Linda Wagner Roseann Zinn Sonya Larson Joyce Senecal Lynn Prazak Iona Ray 0 Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION/BUR OAK HILLS 2ND ADDITION C. Certificate of Correction for Bur Oak Hills 2nd Addition Plat --According to Merila and Associates, Inc., in the processing of platting Bur Oak Hills 2nd Addition, an error was discovered on the plat of Bur Oak Hills. The correction is a technical change that reads as follows: The plat incorrectly shows the bearing on one of the courses on the western line of Outlot C, Bur Oak Hills, as north 00 degrees 50 minutes 08 seconds east, with a length of 64.47 feet. This course begins at a point south 62 degrees 41 minutes 27 seconds east 136.83 feet from the northwest corner of said Outlot C. The correction should read as follows: "The correct bearing for this course on the westerly line of said Outlot C is south 00 degrees 50 minutes 08 seconds east." ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To adopt a certificate of correction for Bur Oak Hills 2nd Addition plat as presented. PROCLAMATION/NATIONAL BUSINESS WOMEN'S WEEK D. Proclamation, Declare Week of October 16th as National Business Women's Week --Mayor Ellison received a letter from Jeanette Hanson of St. Paul requesting an official proclamation to declare the week of October 16 as National Business Women's Week. Enclosed on pages through ' -;j is a copy of the letter to Mayor Ellison and he official proclamation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To proclaim the week of October 16 as National Business Women's Week. e 0?/(1/11V gel//£641/ raff/Fdy/ el3114612P41/i/ iLltd 1441,1I wameiv:I/ riff% s_ < / ( /6 / z cr: - -/ L.% - “, (..„." „--e" e_ / • , — • e _ c 4; ; „ Z (-7 ;, -12 / PROCLAMATION Whereas working women constitute millions of the nation's working force, and are constantly striving to serve their communities, their states and their nation in civic and cultural programs, and Whereas major goals of business and professional women are to help create better conditions for business women through the study of social, educational, economic and political problems; to help them be of greater service to their community, to further friendship with women throughout the world, and Whereas all of us are proud of their leadership in these many fields of endeavor, NOW, THEREFORE, 1 MAYOR OF , MINNESOTA, by the authority vested in me, do hereby proclaim as NATIONAL BUSINESS WOMEN'S WEEK sponsored by The National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, Inc., and locally by Northern Dakota County Business and Professional Women, and urge all citizens in this community, all civic and fraternal groups, all educational associations, all news media and other community organizations to Join in this salute to working women by encouraging and promoting the celebration of the achievements of all business and professional women as they contribute daily to our economic, civic and cultural purposes. Date By `-, Agenda Information Memo Oc-:ober 6, 1988, City Council Meeting RECEIVE PETITION/FEASIBILITY REPT & DETAILED PLANS KINGSWOOD 2ND ADDN E. Project 555, Receive Petition/Authorize Feasibility Report & Detailed Plans (Kingswood 2nd Addition - Streets & Utilities) -- Staff has received a petition from the developer of this subdivision (Jim Horne) requesting the City to prepare a feasibility report and simultaneous detailed plans and specifications for the installation of streets and utilities from Pilot Knob Road through the existing Kingswood 1st Addition. It is anticipated that right-of-way acquisition necessry to implement this public improvement project will be required over Lot: 11 (Alan Notvik). Appropriate guarantees were committed to with the submission of the petition to cover all costs incurred if, for some reason, the project is not approved as a result of the public hearing process. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition and authorize the preparation of a feasibility report for Project 555 (Kingswood 2nd Addition - Streets & Utilities). RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT/STRATFORD OAKS & HIDDEN VALLEY F. Contract 88-35, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Stratford Oaks & Hidden Valley) --At 10:30 a.m. on Friday, September 30, formal bids were received for the installation of sanitary and storm sewer to service the Stratford Oaks Addition and trunk s tary sewer for the Hidden Valley Addition. Enclosed on page /is a summary of the bids received with a comparative analysis to the estimate contained in the feasibility report presented at the respective public hearings. All bids will be checked for accuracy and any concerns will be presented at the Council meeting on October 6. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids and award Contract 88-35 (Stratford Oaks & Hidden Valley) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. (\ HIDDEN VALLEY UTILITY IMPR., PROJECT NO. 511 STRATFORD OAKS UTILITY IMPR., PROJECT NO. 549 CITY CONTRACT NO. 88-35 EAGAN, MINNESOTA BID TIME: 10:30 A.M. BID DATE: Friday, Sept. 30, 2988 CONTRACTORS TOTAL BASE BID 1. S.M. Hentges & Sons $ 104,997.25 2. Lake Area Utility 123,179.35 3. Landwehr Heavy Moving 127,571.00 4. Orfei Cont., Inc. 137,237.67 5. 0 & P Contracting 149,203.50 6. G.L. Cont., Inc. 153,305.24 7. Brown & Cris, Inc. 165,483.45 8. Nodland Const. 176,445.50 LOW BID PROJ. 4 LOW BID (BASE BID) FEASIBILITY REPORT (F.R.) ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE (E.E.) 511 $ 52,725.00 $ 48,030.00 $ 55,000.00 FEASIBILITY REPORT ESTIMATE (F.R.) ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE (E.E.) % Over (+) Under (-) (F.R.) % Over (+) Under (-) (E.E.) $ 104,997.25 549 $ 52,252.25 $ 55,400.00 $ 52,000.00 $ 103,430.00 $ 107,000.00 + 1.5% - 1.8% Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT/COUNTRY HOLLOW 2ND ADDITION & EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PK 3RD ADDN G. Contract 88-36, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Country Hollow 2nd Addition & Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition) --At 1100 a.m. on Friday, September 30, formal bids were received for the installation of trunk sanitary and storm sewer for the Country Hollow 2nd Addition and storm sewer/water main for the 2nd Phase of the Ea andale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition. Enclosed on page '7 is a tabulation of the bids received with a comparative an lysis of the estimate contained in the feasibility report presented at the respective public hearings. The public hearing for Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition (Phase 2) under Project 552 is scheduled for later on in the agenda. Subsequently, this contract award should be subject to the approval of that project through the public hearing process. Al:_ bids will be checked for accuracy and compliance with the bid proposal forms and any significant deviations or concerns will be presented at the meeting on October 6. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids and award Contract 88-36 (Country Hollow 2nd Addition & Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. l� COUNTRY HOLLOW 2ND ADDITION PROJECT NO. 541 EAGANDALE CENTER INDUST. PARK 3RD ADDN. PROJECT NO. 552 CITY CONTRACT NO. 88-36 EAGAN, MINNESOTA BID TIME: 11:00 A.M. BID DATE: FRIDAY, SEPT. 30, 1988 CONTRACTORS TOTAL BASE BID 1. M & M Sewer & Water $ 117,033.40 2. F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. 127,694.00 3. Brown & Cris, Inc. 129,435.45 4. Lake Area Utility 132,139.30 5. G.L. Contracting 137,393.07 6. Orfei Contracting 138,942.84 7. Rice Lake Cont. 148,353.50 8. Ceca Utilities 153,658.09 LOW BID $ 117,033.40 PROJ. # LOW BID (BASE BID) FEASIBILITY REPORT (F.R.) ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE (E.E.) 541 552 Pond Cleanup $ 55,505.50 $ 58,527.90 $ 3,000.00 $ 57,160.00 $ 62,910.00 N/A $ 55,000.00 $ 59,000.00 $22,000.00 FEASIBILITY REPORT ESTIMATE (F.R.) $ 120,070.00 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE (E.E.) $ 136,000.00 % Over (+) Under (-)(F.R.) - 2.5% % Over (+) Under (-)(E.E.) - 13.9% Agenda Information Memo Oc-:ober 6, 1988, City Council Meeting FINAL PLAT/LEXINGTON POINTE 3RD ADDN H. Approve Final Plat - Lexington Pointe 3rd Addition --The staff has received an application for final plat approval for the Lexington Pointe 3rd Addition generally located south of Diffley Road and west of Daniel Drive further defined by a copy of the plat enclosed on page !el All conditions of the preliminary plat approval by Council action on May 19, 1987, have been satisfactorily complied with. All final plat application materials have been reviewed by staff and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for the Lexington Pointe 3rd Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. lg i :1: w w z CD X L zt Ll O U° O c: z. u rD O W en 2,S N7 .LIGO { '2o f z y4 6° H2.29'°TE � 1 N a'+a+d 132 B5 + ;1/ 47 02 3W — W J ocs ,•e• 'o • • • • --Or :.- — N Ss 01 as coq tD 1 'i 1� — _...1 � �17;1----7-; \ 1. I" 1 � �- • _ m —, 1 , —..-07- -e— --,.},6,1,---- ----7:-; ---- -1 i 4'1 \_- • - . 3• � r----:-....--4,---&..,_. i . J ' i 4 r V , ",t ,. •�i ; !' li ,, " \ ...L..--1 F".""M: I SI N 11, \\ v `' o 'I 1' m I • co M N co • r _ 4• 3 ol+,) z 0 f•sr .4, 3 N N31c.:0^31 Acenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting FINAL PLAT/BURR OAK HILLS 2ND ADDN I. Approve Final Plat, Burr Oak Hills 2nd Addition --The staff has received an application for final plat approval for the Burr Oak Hills 2nd Addition generally located east of T.H. 149 & north of Yankee Doodle Road further defined by a copy of the plat enclosed on pagesu/-e,)3 All conditions of the preliminary plat approval by Council action on April 15, 1988, have been satisfactorily complied with. All final plat application materials have been reviewed by staff and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for the Burr Oak Hills 2nd Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. Jo PAGE ONE OF THREE :41 [r ...Zs: • I. “.4 -44 • I " As, •" CC . 1--•-.5';:r;:••. " o f. l• -•le. . It Co0 - :: '." ; y .....- -1, cr) :r.. , •.....r.e.e. 1 io-ino;I I" t • :!: Z-_.— .2 I.6e!.'----7---;Zic'-----"! - / • - ..„. . , ..!....., ...." ..,..!`.:IL:,`,.•'.',..'.. / ! ;•:. Cr) ,. t' I/ :3 ‘..: ' Lo 1•I 2tr ( • I. I 1-1:111 1'1 I -1 g S01.IC59-E • 1 P. I •J. 1 PAGE TWO OF THREE rn., Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting FINAL PLAT/HIDDEN VALLEY ADDN J. Approve Final Plat, Hidden Valley Addition --The staff has received an application for final plat approval for the Hidden Valley Addition generally located east of Pilot Knob Road and south of Skovdale Additio #2 further defined by a copy of the plat enclosed on page • All conditions of the preliminary plat approval by Council action on April 21, 1987, have been satisfactorily complied with. All final plat application materials have been reviewed by staff and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for the Hidden Valley Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. as tat ca vow T larlood x/ -1 ! m zI -....a — o. rrr _ _I 7.; _ ' =I' ti _ —3: Xi :will— Tr` � v‘...... 1\. \ v -Lf rt. ;•./ ♦ y FIs •qq n`'i i/c'�°� '..1\B .1 s (— 1;1 to • :;::::• 1 \. 4 \ s... ,--\".. .. \.,- �• ..; yo-. �\ \ .. _nib _ _J ;ti \ ▪ 1• t4// .4 \ t W 1 w I^ // *\� = 1 / / / \ 1 c I: .. • —Lome Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting FINAL PLAT/COUNTRY HOLLOW 2ND ADDN K. Approve Final Plat, Country Hollow 2nd Addition --Staff has received an application for final plat approval for the Country Hollow 2nd Addition generally located north of Diffley Road and easterly of the existing Country Hollow 1st Addition further defined by a copy of the plat enclosed on% i- All conditions of the preliminary plat approval by t inci action on April 19, 1988, have been satisfactorily complied with. All final plat application materials have been reviewed by staff and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for Country Hollow 2nd Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. "EXHIBIT A" 0 0 0 z 0 uJ (r) COUNTRY • g ••• • -..•••, ; • IS 2.- 2 2 •11.1 t• 4. • • • "',"••• L. - 2 '•) Aa.62.l2.35 coOtOt I-„ Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting SNOW REMOVAL AGMT/INVER GROVE HEIGHTS L. Approve Extension To Cooperative Snow Removal Agreement With Inver Grove Heights For Bur Oak Hills Addition --With the only access to the Bur Oak Hills Addition being provided by Inver Grove Heights, the City of Eagan has entered into a Cooperative Agreement pursuant to the Joint Powers Act to provide for the snow removal by the City of Inver Grove Heights within the City of Eagan on a reimbursable basis. This agreement was originally entered into in October of 1986 and had provisions for annual extension subject to mutual agreement. Due to the fact that the second phase of the Bur Oak Hills development providing access from T.H. 149 in Eagan will not be completed until 1989, it is appropriate for the two cities to extend this agreement to incorporate the 1988/89 snow removal season. The only changes to this agreement are the dates of its extension. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the extension of the Cooperative Snow Removal Agreement between Eagan and Inver Grove Heights until September 30, 1989. a8 Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting PROPOSAL FOR BANKING SERVICES M. Approve Form and Schedule and Authorize Issuance of Request for Proposal for Banking Services --The Director of Finance/City Clerk has prepared a schedule and request for proposal for the solicitation and implementation of proposals to provide banking services to the City for the next three (3) years. The RFP is similar to the one used in 1985, although it has been revised by the Director of Finance to more accurately reflect the current situation. Enclosed on pages 250 through is a copy of the schedule and request for proposal. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Authorize a request for proposal for banking services according to the attached schedule and proposal document. October 6, 1988 October 11, 1988 October 20, 1988 October 28, 1988 October 31 - November 4 November 15, 1988 November 16 - December 31 City Council Authorizes RFP RFP Mailed City Responds in Writing to Written Questions Received RFP Due Back From Banks Staff Review City Council Approves the Agreement Checks are Produced and Logistics Completed - If Bank is Changed January 1, 1989 - December 31, 1991 Agreement Period 0 CITY OF EAGAN REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL The City of Eagan invites banking institutions that maintain an office within the City, who possess the capability and expertise to provide depository and various banking services for the City to submit proposals for the provision of those services, according to the requirements of this Request for Proposal. Although specific requirements are detailed in this document, financial institutions are invited to make proposals for a "better way" of providing a particular bank service or for other prospective services not enumerated herein. All exceptions must be clearly noted, however. The City endeavors to maximize its return on its cash flow and surplus funds. While it is the desire of the City to utilize to the fullest extent possible services of its banker, the natural competitiveness of the investment market does not allow the City to place investments through its banker exclusively. In order to ensure that the City is fully aware of the service which may be obtained, the proposal submitted should provide information about: 1) Investment facilities available, 2) Types of investments the bank can assist the City with. The purpose of this process is to obtain the necessary depository banking services for City operations at a competitive price. Two (2) copies of the proposal (Section IV and bank attachments) should be sealed and marked "BANK PROPOSAL" and returned to: E.J. VanOverbeke Director of Finance/City Clerk City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P.O. 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 Proposals received after the stated deadline will not be considered by the City. Questions arising from the this "RFP" must be submitted in writing to E.J. VanOverbeke no later than October 19, 1988. After that date, responses will be made in writing by City officials. Copies of questions and responses will be sent to each bank which was sent an RFP. It is not expected that any meetings or conferences with institutions (individually or collectively) will be necessary prior to awarding this contract. 1 ES k I. Criteria Used In The Evaluation of Banking Services Proposals: A. Completeness of Proposal: 1. Request for Proposal (RFP) forms must be completed and returned by 4:30 p.m. on October 28, 1988, to the Director of Finance/City Clerk. (Please send two (2) copies). 2. Please respond only on the standard RFP forms provided (Section IV). Alternative proposals for a "better way" of providing a particular service may be attached; however, they will not necessarily be considered in the review and evaluation process. 3. Incomplete proposals or proposals that do not follow the bidding instructions will be disqualified. The City reserves the right to request rebidding using specifications supplied as an alternative by any bank responding to this RFP. 4. For comparison purposes it is necessary for all respondents to address both the Cost Per Unit and the Compensating Balance methods of payment. If either option cannot be addressed, please explain. 5. Submission of reports necessary to determine the financial strength of the financial institution. B. Financial Strength of the Depository Institution In order to establish the financial strength of the depository institution, the following will be derived from reports furnished by the proposing institution, if not provided directly. This information will not be distributed to the general public or to other institutions submitting proposals. 1. Liquidity: a. Bank loans to deposits b. Loans to assets minus plant and equipment. c. Cash and equivalents to total assets. d. Percentage of assets maturing in one year. e. Cash and equivalents to deposits. 2. Asset Quality: a. Current loaned losses to total loans. b. Reserves as a percentage of total loans. c. Nonperforming loans to total loans. 3. Profitability: a. Return on earning assets. b. Return on equity. 4. Strength: a. Capital to deposits. b. Capital to loans. c. Capital to assets. 5. Management: a. Net charge-offs to loans. b. Income before security transactions to assets. C. Ability to meet the City's service requirements. D. The cost of the required services. II. SPECIAL CONDITIONS/REQUIREMENTS: A. Account Requirements: 1. General Account which is the principal account of the City through which all of its operating (except payroll), capital, and investment transactions, are processed. 2. Payroll Account which is a zero balance account through which all employees are paid bi-weekly. This account is funded bi-weekly by a City check drawn on the General Account for the value of the payroll and withholding checks distributed. B. The selected institution shall be designated as the City's depository for an initial term commencing January 1, 1989 and ending December 31, 1989. The depository agreement shall contain an automatic annual renewal clause which may be used in the two (2) following years, thereby providing for three (3) years of depository and banking services, after which the City will decide whether to rebid or continue with those banking services. The agreement may be cancelled at December 31, 1989, and at the end of each annual period thereafter upon 60 days written notice by either party, prior to the close of that annual period. C. All City funds are to be sufficiently insured and/or secured as required by Minnesota law. All bidding institutions are expected to be familiar with these requirements. D. The selected institution is required to designate one bank officer responsible for these services and two other employees authorized to act on his/her behalf. The City is to receive written notice of any change to this designation. 3 3Z3 E. The City of Eagan reserves the right to invest daily available funds in any form of investment with any institution offering the highest yield, in accordance with State Law and applicable City policies. F. The Bank must provide to the City a monthly "Activity Account Analysis" on the General Account and Payroll Account. G. The City shall reserve the right to accept or reject any and all proposals and waive any informality. H. The City reserves the right to use various combinations of the requested bank services at any particular time. I. The bank statements must use calendar month periods and be delivered to the City no later than five (5) working days following the end of each calendar month. J. The bank must provide daily account balances to authorized City representatives. K. Verbal stop payment orders from an authorized City official will be accepted; written documentation will follow within three (3) business days. L. All checks that are returned for uncollected funds and/or insufficient funds will be presented twice before being charged to the City's account. M. Copies of debit and credit entries made by the bank will be provided to the City. N. The bank must provide the capability of transferring funds out of any of the City's accounts, either via personal contact or by telephone instruction, from designated agents of the City. The City will advise the bank in written form of the name of all such designated agents prior to the initiation of the service and at any time that changes may occur in the designated agents. 0. The bank will assume the responsibility and compensate the City for any loss or cost incurred by the City as a result of the bank's failure to transfer wires on time. P. Changes or increases to per unit charges or compensating balances other than those specified by the Federal Reserve should not be requested through the duration of the three (3) year contract. Q. All rates and responses apply to both the City's General Account and Payroll Account unless specifically noted by the proposer. 3 `� R. The successful bidder must be an Equal Employment Opportunity Employer. III. STATISTICAL INFORMATION (All Estimated) A. Average number of checks written monthly: General Account 500 Payroll Account 400 B. Average number of checks deposited monthly: General Account 4,700 Payroll Account 2-3 C. Average number of deposits monthly: General Account 22 Payroll Account 2-3 D. Average number of wire transfers monthly Incoming wires 4 Outgoing wires 4 E. Average number of stop payments monthly: General Account 3 Payroll Account 1 F. Average number of returned items: General Account 5 Payroll Account 0 G. Night depository drops monthly: General Account 3 Payroll Account 0 5 3s IV. PROPOSAL FOR BANK SERVICES A. It is hereby proposed to provide the banking services in accordance with the terms outlined in Section II of this request for proposals except for the following: B. The cost of the above services may be paid in any of the following methods (check those that apply): Monthly service charge as itemized on Page 7 Compensating uncollected balance in a checking account in the amount of Compensating uncollected balance in a N.O.W. account in the amount of Interest will be % compounded and paid Compensating uncollected balance in a Super N.O.W. account in the amount of Interest on the Super N.O.W. account will be % less than the 90 -day Treasury bill rate and will be subject to change every days. Interest on the Super N.O.W. account will be compounded and paid 3(p C. Monthly service charges for bank services to be assessed as follows: Estimated Monthly Units Per Unit Service Month Cost Charge 1. Printing of deposit slips 24 2. Deposits/Credits 24 3. Checks Deposited 4,700 4. Returned Checks 5 5. Checks/Debits 900 6. Wire Transfers 8 7. Daily verbal balance reporting 22 8. Sequencing of cancelled checks 1 9. Stop payments 4 10. Other Charges: 7 31 D. Questionnaire 1. Will the City be allowed to wire transfer out uncollected funds from its account? If not, please indicate an approximate schedule by which deposits of local and non -local checks will be treated as collected funds. 2. How soon will the City receive credit for collected funds in its account for deposits of checks from Dakota County and the State of Minnesota? For other checks? 3. How quickly can it be determined whether a specific check has cleared the City's account? Will there be a service charge when these requests are made? 4. Do you pay interest on uncollected funds in N.O.W. and Super N.O.W. accounts? 5. How are overdrafts handled? What is the maximum number the City would be allowed per month? 6. Describe aspects of your banking services that distinguish your bank from your competitors and how they would benefit the City. 7. Are there any services contemplated which cannot be transacted within the City of Eagan? This response and attachments are submitted by: Bank Name Address Official Title Telephone Date Signature 9 3'1 Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting VACATION/SAFARI PASS N. Receive Petition, Vacation of a Portion of Safari -Pass --Staff has received a petition from the developer of the proposed Safari Estates 2nd Addition to vacate a portion of the existing right- of-way for Safari Pass. The petition is for vacating 20' of the right-of-way on the west side of Safari Pass immediately adjacent to the proposed Safari Estates 2nd Addition. Included with the petition to vacate the westerly 20' of Safari Pass adjacent to the proposed Safari Estates 2nd Addition is a portion of excess right-of-way as defined on MnDOT Right -Of -Way Plat #19-14. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition for vacation of Safari Pass and a portion of MnDOT Right -Of -Way Plat #19-14 and schedule a public hearing for the November 1, 1988, City Council meeting. Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting PETITION/POTTS ADDITION O. Project #556, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Potts Addition - Sanitary Sewer Services) --Staff has received a petition from the developer of the three -lot subdivision known as the Potts Addition generally located south of Cliff Road and east of Nicols Road and westerly of the Vienna Woods development. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition and authorize the preparation of a feasibility report for Project 556 (Potts Addition - Sanitary Sewer Services) FINAL PLAT/COMMUNITY OF JOY CHURCH P. Approve Final Plat, Community of Joy Church Addition --Staff has received an application for final plat approval for the Community of Joy Church Addition generally located easterly of Lexington Avenue westerly of the Lexington Parkview Addition and northerly of the Lexington Hills 1st Addition as further defined by a copy of the plat enclosed on page 9Lli . All conditions of the preliminary plat approval by Council action on February 16, 1988, have been satisfactorily complied with. All final plat application materials have been received by staff and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for Community of Joy Church Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. CZ 30NL2 diRSNmaL iZ NOilD3S NO1111001 Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT/RINK LIGHTING PILOT KNOB PARK Q. Contract 88-38, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Pilot Knob Park - Rink Lighting) --At 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, September 28, 1988, formal bids were received for the installation o ockey rink lighting at Pilot Knob Park. Enclosed on page (.1“4is a staff memo with the bids received and a recommendation to accept the low bid from C.S.I. in the amount of $14,850. Steve Sullivan, Parks Planner/Landscape Architect will be at the City Council meeting on October 6 to answer any questions the Council might have. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids and award Contract 88-38 (Rink Lighting for Pilot Knob Park) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. �3 MEMORANDUM TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: STEPHEN SULLIVAN, PARKS PLANNER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 1988 RE: AWARD CONTRACT I.C. 88-38 HOCKEY RINK LIGHTING - PILOT KNOB PARK Sealed bids were opened at 10:00 A.M. on September 28, 1988 for Improvement Contract 88-38. The bids were as follows: 1. C.S.I. Electric Incorporated $14,850.00 2. Ridgedale Electric Incorporated $20,500.00 Staff has reviewed the bid submitted by C.S.I. Electric and found that it meets the requirements of the contractual documents. Staff requests City Council approval for the award of contract for I.C. 88-38 to C.S.I. Electric Incorporated in the amount of $14,850.00 SS:cm cc: Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and Recreation Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting CHANGE ORDER #1/EAGAN HIGH SCHOOL R. Contract 88-12, Approve Change Order #1(Eagan High School Utility Improvements) --This Change Order provides for the additional payment due to the contractor for changed site conditions. Three changes in the work were encountered as described below: 1. Site Grading: The project as bid provided for utility installation within a graded site. The site was to be graded by the school district, however, the school district was not able to perform the grading prior to the construction of the utility improvements. To keep the project on schedule, the school district requested the City to continue with the project and guarantee the extra costs which would be incurred for the overdepth excavation of the sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main construction. 2. Clearing & Grubbing: The clearing and grubbing of the storm sewer and water main alignments were inadvertently omitted from the proposal. The cost of this work is $4,132.10 and would be split equally between the storm sewer and water main cost categories. 3. Part of the work included the installation of a 20" valve on the existing trunk water main in Diffley Road. Subsequent to contract award, the Public Works Maintenance Division requested the valve be installed in an alternative location than designed to provide greater flexibility in the operation of the water main system. The alternate location required additional work than was required under the bid condition and the cost of the extra work should be allocated to the water main category of the bid documents. The above three items result in an additional cost of $9,124.44 to Project 518 (Contract 88-12). ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Change Order #1 to Contract 88-12 (Eagan High School- Utility Improvements) and authorize the execution by the Mayor and City Clerk. 4S Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting FINAL PAYMENT/ACCEPTANCE/WINDTREE 7TH ADDN S. Contract 86-20, Final Payment/Acceptance (Windtree 7th Addition - Utility & Street Improvements) --Staff has received a request for final payment from the contractor for the above - referenced improvements from our consulting engineering firm (BRAA) along with the certification of compliance with City approved plans and specification. All final inspections have been verified by representatives of the Public Works, Engineering & Maintenance Departments and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the Sth and final payment for Contract 86-20 (Windtree 7th Addition - Utility & Street Improvements) to Lake Area Utilities, Inc., in the amount of $1,043.11 and accept the project for perpetual City maintenance. FINAL ACCEPTANCE/LEXINGTON PLACE 3RD ADDN T. Contract 86-X, Final Acceptance (Lexington Place South 3rd Addition - Utility & Street Improvements) --Staff has received a recommendation for acceptance from the City's consulting engineering firm for the above -referenced improvements. The project consisted of privately installed utility and street improvements to serve the Lexington Place South 3rd Addition. The project was tested and inspected in accordance with standard City policies and procedures. The work is complete and substantially complies with City approved plans and specifications and properly verified by final inspections by representatives of the Public Works Maintenance Division. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final acceptance of City Contract 86-X (Lexington Place South 3rd Addition - Utility & Street Improvements) for perpetual City maintenance. FINAL ACCEPTANCE/BRIAR OAKS OF APPLE VALLEY U. Final Acceptance, City Project 86 -TT (Briar Oaks of Apple Valley - Sanitary Sewer Improvements) --Staff has received a recommendation for acceptance from the City consulting engineering firm (BRAA) of the above -referenced project. The improvements were privately installed in accordance with City approved plans and specifications and all final inspections have been verified by representatives of the Public Works, Engineering & Maintenance Departments and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final acceptance of Project 86 -TT (Briar Oaks of Apple Valley - Sanitary Sewer for perpetual maintenance by the City. in Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting =PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTRACT 88-39/TRAIL ON RAHN ROAD A. Contract 88-39, Public Hearing to Consider Bituminous Trail Installation on Rahn Road South of Diffley to Shale Lane --The City's comprehensive trail plan has included a trailway extension on the east side of Rahn Road to the existing Highline Trail. Appropriate right-of-way was dedicated when the Meadowlands Addition and Sons Addition were platted. There is no public hearing requirement, however as a courtesy to the neighbors it was decided at the last City Council meeting that the public would be given an opportunity to be heard and preview the proposed trail improvements. Enclosed on pages through 4.0 is a letter and location map that was sent to residents adjacent to the proposed bituminous trail between Diffley and the Highline Trail. Also enclosed on page/ SO is a memo from the Director of Parks and Recreation concerning these trail improvements. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission that the City proceed with the bituminous trail from Diffley to the existing Highline Trail south of Shale Lane. city of ocean 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P 0 BOX 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE (612) 454-8100 • September 22, 1988 Dear Resident; VIC ELLISON Mayor THOMAS EGAN DAVID K. GUSTAFSON PAMELA McCREA THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES GN Administrotor EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE ON Clerk At the City Council meeting scheduled for Thursday, October 6, 1988, the Council will hold a hearing on project 88-39; a proposed bituminous trail extending from Diffley to the existing Highline Trail south of Shale Lane. The proposed trail would be 8 feet in width and would be within the existing road right-of-way. Cost for the project would come from the Park Site Fund. There would be no cost to any of the adjacent residents for this project. Attached is a graphic (not to scale) to show the general location of the trail. The City's Comprehensive Trail Plan was completed in 1982 with the trail link. It was not until this year that the City had sufficient right-of-way along the entire length needed to allow for construction. Preliminary staking of the right-of-way adjacent to the proposed trail alignment is currently being undertaken. This staking is to provide information in order to evaluate the design of the proposed trail. If you have concerns or comments, you may appear at the Council meeting on October 6, 1988. Sincere y, Kiln Vraa Director of Parks and Recreation KV : cm THE LONE OAK TREE.. THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY �9 MEMORANDUM TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL itFROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 1988 RE: RAHN ROAD TRAIL - PROJECT 88-39 BACKGROUND The Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission previously recommended that a bituminous trail be placed along the east side of Rahn Road extending from Diffley Road to the Highline Trail. The engineering department has determined that such a trail is feasible. At the City Council meeting on September 19, 1988, the Council asked that this item be placed on the October 6, 1988 City Council meeting for hearing. Letters have been sent (copy attached) to the residents on both sides of Rahn Road notifying them of this hearing for the City Council. TRAIL PLANNING In 1982 the city completed it's Comprehensive Trails Plan program at which time a trail along Rahn Road, extending from Beau D'Rue south to Cliff Road was shown. The planning document acknowledged that many trails would not be completed at one time and that sufficient road right-of-way or development activities would occur prior to or simultaneously with trails construction. Recently, the city acquired sufficient road right-of-way with the Sons Addition to provide for sufficient road right-of-way throughout this area and allow for trails construction. This trail alignment would then connect Diffley Road to the Highline Trail and meet trailway planned for in the Hoffman development project which includes Cub and Target. The funding for the project will come from the designated dollars for trail construction within the Parks Bond Fund, or could be earmarked from the Parks Site Fund. There should be no assessments or related development costs to individual property owners. If approved at the City Council meeting in October, it is possible that the trail construction could be completed this fall under change order to an existing trails contract or bid separately. Due to my absence, I will be unable to attend the October 6th City Council meeting, but Steve Sullivan, Landscape Architect/Parks Planner will be present to answer any questions and provide information to the public concerning this project. KV:cm Std RAFIN ROAD DIFFLE.Y-ROAD f-- ••- --rm.- _ -01- I I. - - t p .4. L , L . •• -sag ' '--4,1/44 \'‘• 11..."Pte _ - . / ‘c - • 1,(Al•,.* ••• — I [ 1 "4. • • .C)1:: 7::+ •••••-• 11-1-• • . • -.• - • • - ". e, , • 0-•,-;•;\ • ,ile;,‘,,c/. • I; to -= '4„. V • • ;\,,r i• • ,,< ,24 .4-1 i.:.' 6 '.,•:•" ' •I";I:::.,..,4".• ! is. C).....,),7\*N. r1.1,Cr:1-"tr--1- ,ir---...--,---"-4 ; • (1 tir--...—, . i_o____, -3.•--, . 1 '.11. -C±? -2. ( --•---11-4 l: 1 ; - ,,, - 1, 1, . ;I . I i • i 1 .- ; .` 1 .,_......... j:1 . 0 • '`IC I L 411 :, 11 •,. 1 "4 i • 1 • 1 IV ;1 HIGH • , - • " 46' - cF • •2 I • • 1 • .r• ;.• ? • c,) MEADOWLAND 'PARK LINE “.• - TRAIL LG EXH13IT 59--- 1 Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting PETITION/WOODGATE SIDEWALK/TRAIL/PROJECT 524 B. Petition, Residents of Woodgate Opposition to Project 524, Johnny Cake Ridge Road - Sidewalk/Trail--At the June 21, 1988 City Council meeting, the extension of Johnny Cake Ridge Road to Diffley Road including the installation of a trailway/sidewalk was approved. Residents of the Woodgate subdivisions have signed a petition that reads: "We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Minnesota, are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as h wn by the attached sketch." Enclosed on pages through is a copy of the petition and the sidewalk/trail that was proposed as a part of Project 524. According to the Director of Parks and Recreation the proposed trailway alignment adjacent to Johnny Cake Ridge Road is integral tg the overall trail master plan. Enclosed on pages `7% through is a copy of additional information from the Director of Parks and Recreation regarding the proposed trailways. Also enclosed on pages through is a copy of the June 21 City Council minutes that approves Project 524. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Since an affirmative action was taken at the June 21 meeting, there is no action required if the trailways are to be included as a part of Project 524. Any action to change the alignment, omit a trail or a related change in specification would require a motion to rescind action at the June 21 meeting and a new motion to change the approved plans and specifications. SI We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. 6 ADDRESS PHONE 2. -0 u 1-0 p5' 6. 8 17e1. 7 Le_9ei1 da `/ -G vs'a 1.799td0533? ef5a-z1631 o4_ J&D31Uaij)7? 345-C/38) 10. 1792 JeLl /779 A4/,74 i . ` z-As6 07 ' o 4 17fr (./ �c,�x�• 'YS�-ayio 11. Or -)-10( / 7 X6 eii/-/a7 12. C71) A.�-� z / (4 Gudi,„r 6f(-- /C 6 7 5� We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NT E ADDRESS PHONE 1. u sign-)S,��(-7) yy o ak oi mss, -01/3F V‘e G..�sz.r Cr" Ys ---Z /3.- 3 i���,��'o r.�/ ys /eo� ariC/� C/ -C-5 30-1' 4 i-fuT) ( Z/9 W4:77/gal- -6 61 2/66 al& 6. 7 (2!)-1,7,1,x) vaix-/41) 8. - 9077 A&LLN(/119 ((-6F7 9 y �� 9. a, ?z..,._ �r . Lo-i•To 14'x-ze.19+; (, $ / - T `/ 6 10. -,Z c'Q-DfW90���e� 51�7�� i 1 . 'ut-t„) tkiiviseitis* Rind 512_4:e, 4 y s V3 12. 5_3 / /16- . V_s-e/VY4of We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed .construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 11,141264) /299 /4».9/ v4,7----iLI4� ��A-71 /775 Z1Jd 4.3t)L,c,, (7'7-) 1 ?f a 2 tit -&4 e/ -5-e/ - / 7 SZIP de/ /78? tatfuj- 66/rv, ?Ya - I,Uzaptax /2 g 02 ii009At4i34-r7J2-1/5.°2 457Y qe2_ cJc- POP -,11---42f S --9y 4, 0.J/'! / uS' L&)h (785 Cd,,o- 3(if 11..DcLu 1779' 1.J oInu Lor z Lise-/-9SKS- / 12. /L l �' PROJECT 524 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. • NAME ADDRESS PHONE ?1/1-/A-GU16h).S 76*gectCV/a1 (76Z -s976 2.D7, kc i -m bu(Vs /6* 3 dllGOCA /(� e Ac /6 _2 AL: 40_1_,, 6./114( 'A //F6) NICW) LPL ?c 7.)dtaktiVi- `7! / - C) 1iGICUYU `// ) e 2- Sb72_ 8. `r 041/,\, f (0 N -N-a.CM 4,11 £-)5o7. 9. /1/ c/71-1 10. 71;jij /67(72. 1 2-2L5'3/ /$'� a Jec/iv41 Gam ' vs -y 7.zS PROJECT 524 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1r,4 CiAidersob /448004/7lane, i/.s2-3$15 /4 7; "Je%nif 144-'44- 7t9/ 3-st.?) 62444zio"-t_. /4 LevtP YrY- 4b IC H,cf{s7 Lway 4S2 -3S 5. (679 424-166-'1oc°`'"e `(S D" .5-- s._t�. At ._ (uocc t4;c_}Ca,,t1 /,?1-150 /"° 7""1-4- O'V- _$',Er 0 5- 8. (46—tc�. 2.) n l to D fI1,,L...ti Asa - 39.0 9. _)6Ys"1 7y dK3' — —bel 10. 11. 7/4-j SG f; ojeef 524 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS PHONE c-ho41 -74/,_?4,1;Yer_X (q) -AO d f,. 3) 446- ZL I1 4Sz `7oq� --5 ,(i.,),,9ezjirt 9. s/u�� Z�i- gaZ_ �51sz-2 63 (2‘-:- �rUU- c00+4 P-� 1 -15 -a -a3 10. / / 7 7 7 i I' (45-,) --a .L �� i x,01, .tel 11. (,UOoQC- (TE 4{5%1- '7 8y 57 aV We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1 &1,Z-- 1,e--zte- (i) g“16(-1- Y0-1401.-- C-6- as -a2- 7/6 .3I ` %� e , (3) (r8 Cv"A.,v� < (-7- �Sz -If 1(°%&MV-va 4 9{/6cil �Y�1a1 ��4a 60.0c604e -2fsa-977' Ad9 (127/7/l,e dAW-/th- 1/7/ Xt-pX 414 IIS --169P 5. B. 3oelvx )17, , 1/ "` 942-22k locN I -63 9. ,'� - Oz 370 G 10 �� y"/y.s wboD6-47l e i ,C/fmxi, Wel c(5-— 3ie m,/ ysN-270 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME 1. Ar, 177ea 2. 3y i V 6 Li 5 4 4_ 1 a c 4 •,d,/ - 77/ g kZ''` 1 4 'e c d >> ADDRESS J 7z) co {� L 4f/ 143Qh /297 L.rGcs'6,176- e/f' - /tI 9,1 PHONE /7 7361 .oal / J . 10. W _ 11. 17 3 >7S-% alio/A.u7' iAive- 12. 57 Aore,1 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 1.626-1-7' -T//ti cfli( 2. \1,c 6lei !I5Z.-9 61 994746 ;731117n , CST e OSS -.2725 5. 44' 6. � %i/Sc/ 3ek,vvcy // 7. 7L . SLL1a4/;y -)27 aec c /%�CyS '6,1So a tie 4/6- 4/6 - sx71302f X60 7 qj`f- 63 32 12 10. 12 -,1966 --/ 9S -V Pay& 95a- 744 (po PROJECT 524 Sce-o&k, We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, )/c : , e`er Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and Z En60E. permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown ysa _ by the attached sketch. y 74/0 NAME 2. 3 'ADDRESS PHONE X700 6z -)9/7U7 /11. 4/S/ ,t-wvk-41 24q \fr /(W atti fz 6r -z (f '1 f(ct$ 6g6i-D6so /‘% -s-77 9. (2Q0 /68)- i116-7,) 5/60- -1/2-W Cm ( 7 `( atie/ r\_ Yr -2 -35-..)_) 10. -� 11. PROJECT 524 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. • NAME 4 �! v Prh iqliv ADDRESS PHONE l r%/k v� Qn e /6 17 GO . 'yfZ ?zo2 WR1n o One &L'( -15 1 I4‘7c) �Q/r, £rl 9. con-, 10. •F49 0)4iptd !RC2 CJdMif aveyf y -igy$ ft- fr WYE We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. fro&c7 NAME 1. //i45 ADDRESS PHONE l 70 r r c)a .(i 17 /(k a/4644r 9452'35-2 12 V tJat%J 5.1271-/ /92divINa, / 7 / 6 (A /64A,,Atar:dt) YS.# So 6. Ykk-a- �.�.., / z /k:, ct.)ait.t- G.1/3 Sys f -65 9 �. \ �l 9. /i&11/ICEL,1 / 7 Y8 McareiiNi< i Li 3C s_)c.Lv. u3‘ Lot., 1-15 10. Ve---y...) lAk-1-1---1-1-- /7 �����-,.�-r (�3 pro � iga We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS Nd< PHONE 4 034,.„ K 5 4 %v.' /n 70 eil 7e.5— s.kg,epte)L 366( /(70_6771-i4 '�� `�,44:111/k o 7,01 f/ As-6,Py a.vke%r e Z .r c�Co9 Lf_7277 d� /7/ i'/A-q"v 10. 7// /4,/<' //, // f �� ,77 foo /70,6 ,f-coAvA4r, riot' 7 (0+ We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS PHONE n4/9 d/e1-6) ,4// gs.2-62)-2).R 3-zeq J Lb � 7 2. 3 4(c 5.A l 7 si i((cfoXy NI 1L F cf-6 ,AJ-- gviizorz).) 753 Go9�iu7L4-- .,9<„ Fig y /jc /d 47 /73-5 (1a4 10. k 11. LizuLei 42yvu tJe Q) . / 7 2- - T./ C� 12. 177-9 0t, sttr--"1-;;z CDS jl20SrcT szc� We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME D-kLL,,9 2. Qt,4, ` Ir4� 5. ADDRESS PHONE / 3 r Cia /0 Sy -9/3F 77( /41 +•0S/ waln,,14'Cr- L'Sa --g<RY / 7Z 117 w r; 6(/ / ii4e410 (1) U 72\10d--,Y/7-2a. Wale vr C7P,30, 8.. 1_0.a p-r/J2 lt%fi/hut Cirole. S. `/s,2 --,/s3 9.� -� 1-118 Ri&/ ,i o; 452--2-2-LO 1o. c ()(7) LPLA-Mr -A. E)077 til ,a(d- /774/16ie 12. /717 `le-elv /70/ (c, We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME 1.% K Are ADDRESS PHONE /GGa fJie-e-Ii f C -n/ S-4 2. 3 4 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 2 7'.( a ci-37/6 7‘WVz:di *De 41/44 A 9--7Z AP., 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. �8 PROJECT 524 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME 2 444d4194,/a/ I1\1 iggi'// ADDRESS PHONE il�s�CJz�e.a5 /2/5-`5(-5-737 A, ys2-48'6 Fr 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. mss? 'C We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. 1. ADDRESS PHONE E T( cid 1-7 41r -z-7//' 2. C 1< 1oit,uy\ Jokn cIL`iS o_kQ Q"th\ o A `.A a.. 4 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 0 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME 1. G ADDRESS PHONE ti 5'1y wt)-.-- 2- avyLtdc(ptAcy Liz/7g </s.--&2- 3 4 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME 2. 61?/ ADDRESS PHONE Tip 4,5-9 a � (75-77- -71(3) 3 AIL -Z /LI Whop c -r �fSa 61.5-r% 4 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 10. 11. 12. 0_ We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. ADDRESS PHONE 2.a&et\J r') 9V -5-V Al f �s'?_ 9537 3 k kkup,AAA }- • cam- q53`1 5. 5Liao �• l/c/!(-/ ,77 . «12 - C,J /14,„/,,P) X11) moo44.7c P74- 51-5-2.--5117 8. WeZe7x-rkJev-x)C°1 4455 l,(�p�'�ate9. cr,QE-1(') vtgi. .cLq-T7 10. PROJECT 524 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS fup ()I Iv /veifirAi I< 3 4 5. PHONE (7r3 of etA ;2 -2 Ifr/5- on %'I �D �! �z �� �� -9S-ay I7 S'o 1735 Oditai 4`y5c2. —tl 7? 6. 8. 10. 11. L-\qQt KV---figr (?6s W-tt.elat?' -fl s /7, ,74 We the undersigned residents of Woodgate, Eagan, Mn. are opposed to the proposed construction and i-\ permanent installation of a trailway/sidewalk as shown by the attached sketch. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 74),6 -6.2e.. 5- /70?6, /16;‘,,z, 4I ' 4./S -.)--0.Z1 3 '--- 3C.903z- (7.210/4 - qSa 6 /7/7 H% c Kor M // 5. e4ritto /17cley 6. �c di /7 30 %✓eLy �-cze 5�35-/ / 5-2 g 7. gal, ) g 3 Z , 8. /:/L 9i1A ivy- e/Syc. uD ,t) y cc ,e_A; 683 “(S3 9. 7(41cr,(4 11. 12. ila s 3 V -CA - Sa 58 /i/ fJ4GFi /t.as ka , y 61 'lS EXISTING 5 4 CONCRETE SIDEWALK PROPOSED 5' PROPOSED 8' BITUMINOUS BIKE PATH CONCRETE SIDEWALK NSPS EASEMENT ASSESSMENT AREA odga' Addy, CS AN NO. 32 • CLIFF ROAO 0 200 400 JOHNNY CAKE RIDGE ROAD SIDEWALK ; TRAIL CO. RD. NO. 32 to WOODGATE LANE NO. CITY PROJECT NO. 524 i Bonestroo ® Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers a Arcnflects Et. Paul. Mw,e+«. Dote: JUNE 1988 Comm. 49450 i (00 Fig. No. 4 J MEMORANDUM TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 1988 RE: HISTORY - COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL SYSTEM BACKGROUND The City Administrator had asked me to prepare a brief memorandum on the planning history of the Eagan Trail System and in particular, the trail on Johnny Cake Ridge Road. EARLY YEARS Prior to 1980 there is not a great deal of information pertaining to an overall trails system. Rather, the trails were designed primarily on major access routes such as Johnny Cake Ridge Road south of Cliff to the Apple Valley Zoo. The City had received a grant for funding the trail along Pilot Knob Road south of Diffley to the Highline Trail and to Nicols Road beneath the Highline. Other trail and planning to this Pilot Knob point were primarily congested. In July of 1980, at the direction of the City Council, Staff began the process of developing a Comprehensive Trails System Plan. At that time, the bicycle trails plan was coordinated through the office of the City Planner with John Voss the consultant planner and an administrative/planning assistant. Also involved was the Director of Parks and Recreation and Director of Public Works. The Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council adopted general policies to provide direction to the trails planning process. The preliminary draft copy of the bicycle trails plan was first presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission in January, 1981. The second draft, in March of 1981 to the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council. Concerns of the Council and Parks Commission members were then incorporated into a final copy, which was adopted by the City Council on June 2, 1981. Guidelines for the Eagan bicycle plan revolved around trends towards, and the demand for bicycling and walking, safety and protection needs of the bicyclists from motor vehicles and high traffic volumes, destination opportunities, i.e., major attractions, commercial or employment areas as well as acting as an interconnection between Dakota County and adjacent communities. ng The trails system plan that year identified three different types of bikeway classifications which included bike trails, bike lanes, and bike routes. Bike trails were a separate facility for bicyclists/walkers while bike lanes were a designated right-of-way for exclusive or semi -exclusive use of bicycles where pedestrians were not allowed. Bike routes were a shared right-of-way designated by signs placed on vertical posts or stenciled on the pavement. Obviously, the preferred classification is the bike trail - separated trails - were possible. In 1983, with the Parks Systems Plan, the Comprehensive Trails Systems Plan was again reviewed as part of the overall planning document. Although substantial changes were not made within the trail systems plan from the original 1981 document, the systems plan went a step further to assess future trails and connections in unplatted or undeveloped areas. JOHNNY CAKE RIDGE ROAD When Johnny Cake Ridge Road was upgraded to the Minnesota Zoo, trailways on both sides from Cliff Road south to the Apple Valley border were constructed. The trailway on the west side continues from the Eagan border to the Apple Valley Zoo and beyond. The 1981 plan identified the Johnny Cake Ridge Road corridor north of Cliff to Diffley and beyond (conceptually) to Deerwood. This trail link was to be one of the major north/south links in the Comprehensive Trail Systems Plan. The other being Pilot Knob Road, Nicols Road and Lexington Avenue. Other north/south trail links are on Rahn Road, Blackhawk and Thomas Lake Road. These last three trail corridors, however, are a much shorter length. For example, the Thomas Lake Trail only extends from Diffley south to Cliff and will eventually go into the residential development south of Cliff. Rahn Road extends from Cliff to Diffley, and although identified to go north of Diffley to Beau De Rue, insufficient right-of-way makes this trail corridor extremely difficult to secure. This is also the case with the Blackhawk/Galaxy trail. Currently the trail extends from Apple Valley to just north of Diffley. Further trail construction on Blackhawk has been identified, but the likelihood of this occurring will be difficult because of insufficient road right-of-way along major portions of the road. The Johnny Cake Ridge Road trail is vitally important because it will eventually connect from Deerwood all the way south into Apple Valley connecting schools, parks and neighborhoods. Users of the Highline Trail wishing to go south into Apple Valley and the zoo along Johnny Cake Ridge Road, now must travel within the roadway in order to get to Cliff Road. It is only after they go south of Cliff Road that they have a separated trail. Given the traffic volumes that will eventually be on Johnny Cake Ridge Road, and in fact the traffic volumes at this point, a separated bike trail system is very important and is consistent with the 1981 planning document and the 1983 parks system document. SUMMATION In 1981 and 1983 Comprehensive Trail Program emphasized the development of trails along major and minor arterial and collector streets. The main reason for using these arterial streets was that they provided links to various areas of the city along very direct alignments, can be constructed at suitable �8 grades, are cost effective and certainly are much safer than trails within a street. The trails plans also connected destinations of significance including schools, parks, shopping and employment centers; and were integrated into the County Trails Plan as well as adjoining communities to allow for safe travel. As you know, I will not be able to attend the October 6th Council meeting because of my absence from the City. However, Steve Sullivan, Landscape Architect/Parks Planner will be in the building that evening and may be available to answer questions regarding this plan. I have provided you with an attachment of the Comprehensive Trail System Plan from the Parks Systems Plan of 1983. Unfortunately, this is somewhat difficult to read. Staff will prepare a "less cluttered" graphic to help illustrate the important link the Johnny Cake Trail is to the overall trails program. Respectfully submitted, Ken Vraa Director of Parks and Recreation KV:cm e\ • •:•;.:4 7 S1H013H aAoas II %I 1 I II •:.--,..--. - . •- % ...4 .............,2 \ ip s,.._.< ,,p,i ..... I i - 11: - if...-........,.... II • l' i i' • f 0 7 ' I I I I - i i'l ='.; ';',. -,!_•.•...fa _ I •,, '). I .."-.--... ....-,1 • ..--: ,i'..'.../ : . )f— -.-..f. I _ , ''',x, , II , I .-5;•• .,,, .__ _,e Liti •;- t I l'---, ii i• I . - ) __. .x. ct. ) g / . . lo • -_- ..; • ---;;;; - ---1,--_-, _11---/... ,•-:-_,. ' . ...-J. , .. . '..... II 01 .11.1,......... "ma • -. _-2, ..,,,, - _ = , :,..,-- - ...-.......-.....--.....-......... . „am um woe ma ma mi mil Nos t is INN gm um mi immi In um me im sait,•1 , _ .11011111.0. r_. ,./. • gi r 'C- 13'1‘ - E I L.E.,, —,ii..____,4„,;,•-• II ''''‘...\,‘ - -4 ''''' 'I': I •-, ' I I ' I 2 I ")`• —., :: ••• i - 1 .. ,..„.. Q- .....r1 ' :: ., , . % '-•-). I / . 4.,-`,"-\ ' - I = ,r',. — - - I • ; 6_,.r'''' \ `,....... ........ ..1.:1• ;: il : ' '-- 11: :'•er ' '''' 11',, II - I 1 ' I ‘‘---) ( \ — 1 / ........7.7.......1 r.—.......i I mum NE mom ......nraisrtsarbrawir.,,um...._, .........,... 17-, 1-7-----ir__,.......,_._ i , II rl'41-.-v•t4., 1.-- • • II il_...... ,.,,- ..„..., 1 „,--.\. •11 ‘. 1;.i...:•:-:;. 0, . . ......„ „,,, ........ ” 1 _. ---„,i________-_ N u tlii....,"'.); ===-Te+a R. "-----c-,. -...N1-3 1 C.•;.. Y.' /- s..u., ) : ; 1 • i',..,: -..-,,,,-,f.,,, ...7 _, : _ .f.;;;;T: c • , + ,--!,, -, ,,..,. , . .....' .. -.., , I - ; 4 I I ..1 1 ?t ;`, ., _ - ......: - ' - . —o-i;'-wo.,..•, 4 I „:- . • cr, - 1,-1-1 • 111 .5e ., . I Z . s, ,,,-".:,.,,\\ It...-/ , 1 i2.14:.: = , % .... , - - • . , ... s , ., 1 i '1/4,‘ 1 i t , , ;. I .c - ".. ' 6 ... /,, v' + / ,, 1 N Ax • ___ ,•••• ../ ••111- - '7;:: • .,- I ...... 6 lilt t, :::—:,,,,,,:::::'-'''C''''-'''''''-:----r-1 , ..,0, ..,, ...; ..... , ,..•04•••• 1 1 ....... ...11L,L...........--- ' `-..2 • .1 t.,,--1-\ ........ "•111 *3--.7-.",:' -.-.:7- -1-".' r 3 • ... _ .. - v. ,--.• - g t d...' ,-... : -a • ! _S \ - 1 r' 1- ................. I — 11 :, .. . ''...% .4‘...:::: .. Ne .. „ .. „! .. : ••• • • •• I! , N4144 • ;,. ' - • • • ,^N...s. I 'al -;i- ' I ' • - ,"—.I.. '.s... i 4 `-•`-`, - , ", i''.- ' ti." • ''1' ' 0 N"', . ',, .,, NIIIIiN_,`.- ,., v....:i7i.n...._.: u t..,•21 ,ir••••.........••__.......•••,_....— .•• A ilk_ . _ ... .. __ -Nli it ; ,, _ ‘2.......z...,„ -t I! --.:.1.--,.„,.. -I- .... ...--- , r --:---s--, ._, 4 ' '11 • • - - .X\ • I 1.....••••••• i • - _ •.• \ /-4t • - i I • 73 •;, fik„ 11.1111--- ,:1,r, •-•• - 1,...1T0113 i• •7;.. 0 t•• PROJECT 524,:::_ 1ORW Y::CARE?:gIDGE ROAD EXTENSION Mayor Ellison openthe first public hearing of the evening regarding the Johnny Cake::Ridge Road Extension, Project 524. Tom Colbert stated that in response to a petition submitted by Wilmus Properties, Inc., the Council had authorized the preparation of a feasibility report for the extension and completion of Johnny Cake Ridge Road to Diffley Road. On May 17, 1988, the Council received the feasibility report and scheduled a public hearing to be held on June 21, 1988. He stated Johriiny Cake:::Ridge Road is designated as a community collector thro:utgh th City of Eagan and it is appropriate to install trailways and'-sidewai:ks on either side of this roadway between Diffley Road and:::C.34t.f::::Roa.d.:::::A:::letter had been sent to potentially affected property::=:tiiiarierinforming them of this sidewalk-trailway improvement. All notices had been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all potentially affected property owners. Mr. Colbert stated one concern had been expressed from the property owners along the north side..:.of Diffley Road (Bieter Company) regarding the compatability of ..theprroposed intersection of Johnny Cake Ridge Road with futur�.::s velopment proposals for that property. Marc Hanson explainecii~he feasibility report for the project in detail to the Council. • Ray Williams asked what the future of the 20 undeveloped acres would be. Mr. Colbert stated only the present improvements requested were being considered at this time. He stated no applications or proposals have been received regarding future development of the 20 acres. Henry Jandewerth stated h i;sopposed to the extended sidewalk and walkway and questioned:::.the necessity of both. Mr. Colbert stated the dual trails were forafety.: nd continuity to other similar trails in Eagan. He stated: the .area was highly populated. Mr. Jandewerth asked::::w r::onlyyth* three additions were being assessed for the improvetitents.. Mr: CoIbert stated it was City policy to assess against single family/residential areas. Mr. Jandewerth asked what would happen to the trees along the sidewalk portion of the improy.em nt.. Mr. Colbert stated as many adjustments as possible wig:]::::::j e:::xiade:::.to save the trees. However, some may need to be removed to::::e:tisure thd:::public's safety. Mayor Ellison reassured Mr. Jandewerth ::t<he City wi1:::: do everything possible to realign the walkway to accommodate threes. Mr. Jandewerth then a..k..d tire curb would abut the sidewalk. Mr. Colbert stated there would be a grass area between the curb and -12- R. Contract 86-18, ::k'ir a1:::::P:aymenitj,Acceptance (Daniel Drive and Rahn Road First Addition)::; It was recommended :to approve the fifth and final payment of $14,573.56 to Nodland Construction Company for Contract 86-18 (Daniel Drive and Rahn Road First Addition) and accept the improvements tor perpetual city maintenance subject to standard warranty provisions. S. Contract 86-23,.:Final Payment/Acceptance (Holland Lake Storm Sewer) . It was recommenced :to approve the tenth and final payment of $32,239.64 to S. M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. for Contract 86-23 (Holland Lake Strom Sewer) and ac.cept:::t:he:improvements for perpetual maintenance subject to stakciard::warranty provisions. T. Contract 88-14, Approve Change Order No. 1 (Briar Oaks Trunk Sanitary Sewer) . It is recommended to approve,ch,alge order no. 1 to Contract .a: 88-14 (Briar Oaks - Trunk Sani.trywer) in the amount of an additional $5,000 and auth.o.r.lz:e::: th.e. Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. U. Contract 88-2, Appro (.1988 Seal Coating) . It was recommended to approve the plans for Contract 88-2, (1988 Seal Coating) and authorize the advertisement for bid opening to be held at 11:00 a.m., Friday, July 15, 1988. V. Resolution Requesti.ng....MnDOT!.s....Speed Limit Studies/Designation (North View Park Road). Mr. Wachter asked sahiat speed limit was being requested. Mr. Wachter stated he is con:cerned:.:ghat the speed limit be consistent with other similar roads:::Mr.....albert..assured Mr. Wachter the speed limit will be consistent ::t ::ot er::z2 hilar roads. It was recommended to approve a resolution requesting MnDOT to perform a speed limit study to establish proper enforceable speed limits for North View Park Road from Lexington Avenue to Elrene Road and authorize the Mayor and...C:t::Clerk to execute all related documents. 14n/..Authorize Advertisement for Bids, Councilmember Gustafson moved, CEs:uncilmember Wachter seconded, the motion to approve the.:::.foregoing consent agenda items and authorized their implement:ation....All...:voted yes to all items except Item N (Vacate Portion ot::: t:ahn R 4 Deceived Request/Schedule Public Hearing) . Wachter voted a:gairist:':'thi's'''item. • the sidewalk to ensure safety: storage in the winter ti;ine::::M project. .pedestrians and also for snow �:a:ncteWerth state he is opposed to the Olga Zehnder, 4558-ohnny Cake Ridge Road, stated the bike path will run along her property. She feels there will be a problem with the existing easement and there will not be enough space for the bike path. Mr. Colbert stated the easement is a utility easement and the trail would be on the other side. Ms. Zehnder stated :she opposed the bike path because it will be an eye sore and will cause safety problems. She stated the bike path will only be used a few months' out of the year. She feels the bike path will devalue her pro:per::y he::::etated not many bikers or pedestrians use the road. She::feels:biike trails are nice when they are planned and bermed before the development exists. However, it is difficult for existing neighborhoods to accept the trails. She requested a survey be performed regarding safety and the number who will be using the trails. Eric Greetins, 4546 Johnny::.:Cake:::Ridge Road, stated he opposes the project. He stated he.._.moed::: irilast year and has three children. He feels his family wilbe*:.'penned in." by the bike path. Mike Wilcox, Walnut Laiit:::QpSosed the project because of the trees which he had planted may now::be::removed by the City. Mr. Colbert stated no permits had been received to install trees on the right-of-way. Mr. Wilcoxstatedhe will pay for the improvement but he will never use it. Councilmember Egan stated he appreciates the residents' concerns and complaints. He f urther.:..sated h.e....has been in support of the pathway system and master::park:0:.4nslhce its inception. He stated there have been many surveys, public hearings, etc. and residents have voiced there desire and needs for the trails. He stated he feels the trails are attractivand a:re an asset to the community. The subject trail should be C ontr.ict.e.d._.to. tie in to the existing trails. Mr. Wachter stated he voted for the bike trails in the beginning and feels they are beneficial to the community. He stated he feels the City should send letters to residents informing them they need a permit to plant trees on the boulevards. Mayor Ellison stated.:te: average. number of people in a household is 1.8. Eagan has 3.9 people per hoiug:ehold. He stated he feels the trails will keep the children off of :the streets. Henry Jandewerth st:a:ed .gen0rally for the sidewalks and the bike paths in Eagan. ;:.B w sre.he::;: s against them in this case because of the trees. He stated•"•2t�en'when the walkways are installed, people still use the streets for biking and pedestrian use. Mr. Egan -13- stated when the trail sys:eii::a:xr:::eiiiipleted and there is continuity in the system, the trails w'Y1r be usea more. Mr. Colbert address0 the concern of the property owners on the north side of Diffley Road regarding future development proposals. He stated if the Council approves the project that they consider approving this portion in concept. He stated the intersection is negotiable for the future design of Diffley Road. McCrea questioned additional assessment cci:ts if-. there is a delay. Mr. Colbert stated if they increase, a new ::publichearing will be set. Mr. Colbert stated?.he recoiiimenas the Council approve the project schedule as follows: - Approve plans and specifications - Fall, 1988; - Open Bid/Award Contracts - Winter, 1988 - 1989; - Complete Construction - Fall .1.989; - Assessment Hearing -Se 89; - First Payment Due:with Real ,Estate Taxes - May, 1990. Mayor Ellison asked Mr. C-ol er:t::f the final plans will be presented to the Council. Mr. Colb*etttated the final plans will be presented to the Council. Wachter moved, Egan seconded, the motion to close the public hearing and approve Project 524 (Johnny Cake Ridge Road - Streets and Sidewalks) and authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications, subject t4he::.fol:ldwing project schedule: - Approve plans andspecifi.cations - Fall, 1988; - Open Bid/Award Co racts;:H Winter, 1988 - 1989; - Complete Construet�ioly. Fal:3;'`1989; - Assessment Hearing - Sept, 1989; - First Payment Due with -.Re , Estate Taxes - May, 1990. All voted yes. PROJECT 536/SOOTH OARS.:-:ADDITION/STREETS Mayor Ellison openetthnex:p:ublic hearing for the evening regarding Project 536, Spt::::Qa}:: Ac3i-tion - Streets. Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS/SIBLEY HILLS DR/STS & UTILITIES C. Project 543, Prettyman Heights/Sibley Hills Drive (Streets & Utilities) --On August 16, the Council received the feasibility report for the above -referenced project and scheduled a public hearing to be held on September 19. However, this public hearing was continued until October 6 to ensure proper notification of all potentially affected property owners. Enclosed on pages dr, through L°(e) is a copy of the feasibility report for the Council's reference and review during the public hearing presentation by the consulting engineer responsible for the report's preparation. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all potentially affected property owners informing them of this public hearing. The consulting engineer and Public Works Director will be available to answer any questions associated with this presentation at the meeting on October 6. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/deny Project 543 (Prettyman Heights/Sibley Hills Drive Extension - Streets & Utilities) and, if approved, authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications. �r. Report For PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS EXTENSION OF SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE Eagan, Minnesota City Project No. 543 August, 1988 Comm. No.4211 Orr Schelen Mayeron & Associates, Inc. Engineers • Surveyors • Planners FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ESTIMATE OF COST PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS EXTENSION OF SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE PROJECT NO. 543 EAGAN, MINNESOTA PREPARED BY: ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS/LAND SURVEYORS/PLANNERS 2021 EAST HENNEPIN AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55413 OSM COMM. NO. 4211 VI September 15, 1988 Honorable Mayor and Council City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re: Prettyman Heights Extension of Sibley Hills Drive Project No. 543 OSM Commission No. 4211 Dear Mayor and Council: Transmitted herewith is our report for the Prettyman Heights Extension of Sibley Hills Drive Project No. 543. This report addresses the necessary street improvements and utility considerations for the extension of Sibley Hills Drive as it relates to the Ridgehaven, Prettyman Heights, and Fred Delosh properties. We would be happy to discuss this report with all interested parties at your convenience. Please give us a call if you have any questions. Sincerely, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC.A Peter R. Willenbring, P.E. RDF:nlj Attachment Approved by: Date: I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. n t Peter R. Willenbring, P.E. Date: September 15, 1988 Reg. No. 15998 Department of Public Works g8 TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. TITLE PAGE I. COVER LETTER/CERTIFICATION II. TABLE OF CONTENTS III. SCOPE 1 IV. DESCRIPTION 1 V. EASEMENT 4 VI. COST ESTIMATES 4 VII. ASSESSMENTS 5 VIII. PROJECT SCHEDULE IX. APPENDIX A X. APPENDIX B XI. SUMMARY - PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL XII. FIGURES 1 - 5 4211 T.C. - 1 21 FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ESTIMATE OF COST PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS EXTENSION OF SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE PROJECT NO. 543 EAGAN, MINNESOTA SCOPE This project includes providing street improvements to both the frontage road from Rustic Hills Drive and Highway 13 to Sibley Hills Drive, and to the first 250 feet of Sibley Hilis Drive east of the frontage road. We are recommending that the name for the north -south cul-de-sac serving Post Addition and Post Addition No. 2 be changed from Sibley Hills Drive to Sibley Hills Court. We will refer to the cul- de-sac as Sibley Hills Court in this report. The project will also include street construction of Sibley Hills Drive from Sibley Hilis Court to the proposed Auge Road and extension of sanitary sewer from the intersection of Sibley Hills Drive and Sibley Hills Court to Parcel numbers 010-76 and 011-77 (Delosh property). This street will provide access to Lots 14 and 17, Treffle Acres; Lot 16 Ehnder Acres; Parcel numbers 160-00, 032-56 and 171-00 (proposed Prettyman Heights); and utility access for the Delosh property. DESCRIPTION A. SANITARY SEWER: An existing sanitary sewer manhole is located at the intersection of Sibley Hills Drive and Sibley Hills Court just west of the Delosh property. This line has sufficient depth and capacity to serve the Delosh property, proposed Prettyman Heights and the lots along Skyline Drive. The proposed Prettyman Heights is planned to extend service from an existing manhole located on the south edge of the Rustic Hills Subdivision. This line can effectively serve proposed Prettyman Heights and the lots along Skyline Road, but does not have enough depth to serve the Delosh property. Therefore, the best alternative is to extend the Sibley Hills Drive line to the Delosh property and to provide sanitary sewer service to proposed Prettyman Heights and Skyline Drive from Rustic Hills. Therefore, this project will include the extension of sanitary sewer from the intersection of Sibley Hills Drive and Sibley Hills Court to the Delosh property. An 8" line will be stubbed to the street right-of-way to serve the Delosh property. Additionally, a 4" sewer service will be placed at the east end of Lot 6, Post Addition No. 2, to provide for a future lot split. The proposed Ridgehaven Subdivision is planned to connect to the existing 36" line located along Highway 13. Proposed Ridgehaven is not able to connect to the Sibley Hills Drive line due to depth restrictions within the subdivision. The connection -1- to the Highway 13 line should be installed before the frontage road street improvements are completed. B. WATERMAIN: Existing watermain stubs are located at the intersection of Sibley Hills Drive and Sibley Hills Court and also along the southwest edge of proposed Prettyman Heights. Due to conflicting pressure zones, a looped connection of these stubs would require pressure reducing stations at both connections. Therefore, the stub along the southwest edge of proposed Prettyman Heights will be utilized as the primary water supply for proposed Prettyman Heights and the Delosh property. The service line will be located within the proposed Auge Road and will be stubbed into the Delosh property. Eventually, this line will be extended down Sibley Hills Drive to the edge of the Delosh property and dead ended with a hydrant. Looping will ultimately be provided through a connection east along Skyline Drive. The watermain construction for this project will be concentrated on the 8" water line located at the Sibley Hills Court intersection. A 6" water connection will be made to this line and extended across Sibley Hills Drive to the proposed Ridgehaven Subdivision. Additionally, a water stub will be constructed to just inside the Sibley Hills Drive street right-of-way for eventual extension to the East Half of Lot 6, Post Addition No. 2 in case of a possible lot split. C. STREET AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS: The existing access to Post Addition, Post Addition No. 2, proposed Ridgehaven, the Delosh property, and the proposed Prettyman Heights, is an 18' wide rural bituminous frontage road off of State Highway 13. This frontage road currently has two accesses onto Highway 13 and is connected to Sibley Hills Drive. The frontage road is located with MnDOT right-of-way and is therefore under their jurisdiction. After several discussions with Dick Elasky, MnDOT District 9, it was determined that the only method of State funding for the project would involve a right-of-way turn back program. However, an agreement on how much funding the State will provide can not be determined until July 1989. Therefore, the assessments will include the total construction cost with the possibility of an assessment credit after the State's decision. Included in this agreement, the State would require that no additional access be provided for this area onto Highway 13. It is also recommended that the north portion of the frontage road be removed and the right-of-way abandoned. Street improvements along the frontage road from Highway 13 to Sibley Hills Drive and along Sibley Hills Drive from the frontage road to the intersection of Sibley Hills Court and Sibley Hills Drive, will be included as part of this project. The street improvements will include concrete curb and gutter on both sides of the frontage road and on the south side of Sibley Hills Drive. The curb will run up the west side of the frontage road and then will tie into the existing curb on the -2- �t 1 north side of Sibley Hills Drive. The existing curb on the north side of Sibley Hills Drive will be salvaged depending on its condition. Bituminous patching and overlays will be incorporated for completion of an adequate roadway. In addition to the curb, the frontage road will be widened to a 32' face-to-face street section. The only existing storm sewer in the immediate area is located within the Rustic Hills Subdivision. The outlet for this storm sewer is a 21" flared end section which flows southerly into the Highway 13 road ditch. Proposed Prettyman Heights is also proposing to direct the storm water runoff for their site into the Rustic Hills storm sewer network. The proposed Ridgehaven Subdivision also intends to use the Highway 13 road ditch for storm drainage after development. Currently, storm drainage along Sibley Hills Drive is transferred via ditch and CMP culverts to the north and into the road ditch on the west side of Highway 13. The improvement of Sibley Hills Drive and the MnDOT frontage road will require the installation of storm sewer to accommodate the additional storm drain runoff. This storm network will include the proposed Ridgehaven runoff and will empty into the Highway 13 road ditch along with the Rustic Hills storm network. The runoff from this area will flow into the ditch and then through an existing 36" CMP culvert underneath Highway 13. The storm water then travels by overland flow to the Minnesota River. The City of Eagan Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan of 1984 shows a 36" R.C.P. storm sewer line capturing the storm drainage from the referenced areas and then conveying the storm water to the Minnesota River. After a complete evaluation, we have determined that the trunk storm line is not required at this time. However, at which time the City wishes to pursue installing the trunk line, MnDOT will participate in funding a portion of the cost based on its proportion of storm water runoff. D. STREET CONSTRUCTION: The street construction of Sibley Hills Drive from the intersection of Sibley Hills Drive and Sibley Hills Court to proposed Auge Road will also be included in this project. The Delosh property is located between Sibley Hills Drive and proposed Auge Road thereby requiring the aquisition of street right-of-way to complete the connection. The most feasible connection route consists of extending Sibley Hills Drive directly to the east and connecting to Auge Road with a 90 degree corner. This route provides a direct line through the Delosh property, which minimizes the amount of street right-of-way acquisition required. The property owners have verbally concurred that this would be the most feasible roadway alignment. It should be noted that several lots in proposed Prettyman Heights will have double street access due to the proposed alignment. -3- ct The grade at the intersection of Auge Road and proposed Sibley Hills Drive will be matched into the existing grade. This will require exceeding the 8 percent maximum grade. Utilizing this plan, the street will match into the existing terrain and into the proposed Prettyman Heights grading plan. The proposed roadway will be a 32' face-to-face bituminous roadway with concrete curb on both sides. EASEMENT Street easement for Sibley Hills Drive will need to be acquired from Fred Delosh. Mr. Delosh owns a 33' strip of land located from the intersection of Sibley Hills Drive and Sibley Hills Court to the main Delosh parcel. The other 27' of the total 60' of road right-of-way was obtained from the Post Addition No. 2. The above referenced strip constitutes approximately a 400' length of land. Additionally, a 60'x380' easement within the Delosh property will need to be acquired. All easements shall be acquired by the City or other responsible party. COST ESTIMATES A detailed cost estimate can be found at the back of this report in Appendix A. A summary of these costs is shown below: A. Sanitary Sewer $ 22,100 B. Watermain 7,400 C. Street and Storm Sewer Improvements 83,600 D. Street Construction 88,200 TOTAL $201,300 The sanitary sewer cost includes providing sewer service to the Delosh property and stub to Lot 6, Post Addition No. 2. Proposed Prettyman Heights and Skyline Drive will be served by Rustic Hills Addition and proposed Ridgehaven will be served by a line located along Highway 13. The watermain cost includes connection to the existing line on Sibley Hills Drive and extension to proposed Ridgehaven and a stub to the street right-of-way for Lot 6. The street and storm sewer improvement cost includes the storm system serving Sibley Hills Drive and the Highway 13 frontage road, improvements to these roads and removal of the northern portion of the front- age road. The street construction includes the new roadway from the intersection of Sibley Hills Drive and Sibley Hills Court to the proposed Auge Road. The street improvements will incorporate the street from Highway 13 to the intersection of Sibley Hills Drive and Sibley Hills Court. The above referenced total estimated project cost includes a contingency factor and all related overhead. Overhead costs are estimated at 30% and include legal, engineering, administrative and bond interest. -4- 93 ASSESSMENTS Assessments are to be levied against eight individual areas; Parcels 010-76 and 011-77 (Delosh); Parcel 012-77 (Oldre); Parcel 011-56 (Ridgehaven); Parcels 160-00, 032-56, 171-00, Lots 14 and 17 Treffle Acres, Lot 16 Ehnder Acres (Prettyman); Parcel 020-56; Post Addition Lots 1-5; Post Addition No. 2 Lots 1-5; Post Addition No. 2, Lot 6; Rustic Hills, Lots 1-15. A preliminary assessment roll is located in Appendix B. The sanitary sewer assessment will be carried by the Delosh property and the East Half of Lot 6, Post Addition No. 2. The assessment is based on a square footage basis. The watermain assessment will be distributed between proposed Ridgehaven and Lot 6, Post Addition No. 2 on a lump sum basis. Each party will pay for the construction costs associated with extending service to their land. The street and storm sewer improvement assessments will be for the street and storm sewer improvements along Sibley Hills Drive and the frontage road. Removal of the northern portion of the frontage road and restoration of that area is also included. Proposed Prettyman Heights, proposed Ridgehaven, the Delosh property, Orlyn Oldre property, Post Addition, Post Addition No. 2, Rustic Hills, and Parcel 020-56, will be the contributing parcels and will be assessed on a square footage basis. A credit may be applied to this assessment after a turn -back agreement is finalized with MnDOT. The amount of State funding is not yet available. The street construction assessments will be levied to proposed Prettyman Heights, the Delosh property, the Orlyn Oldre property, and the East Half of Lot 6, Post Addition No. 2. A front footage rate has been established and will be used for Lot 6, with the remaining costs to be distributed on a square footage basis to the remaining aforementioned parcels. The final assessment costs will be based on the final project cost including overhead. The assessments will be spread over a 5 year period with an interest rate based on the bond sale financing. -5- G� PROJECT SCHEDULE PRESENT FEASIBILITY REPORT PUBLIC HEARING APPROVE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OPEN BIDS AWARD CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION ASSESSMENT HEARING FIRST PAYMENT DUE WITH REAL ESTATE TAXES September 16, 1988 October 4, 1988 November 1, 1988 December 2, 1988 December 6, 1988 August 1, 1989 September, 1989 May, 1990 FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ESTIMATE OF COST PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS EXTENSION OF SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE PROJECT NO. 543 EAGAN, MINNESOTA DESCRIPTION APPENDIX A QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST SANITARY SEWER 8" PVC 0'-20' 450 L.F. @ $ 24.00 = $ 10,800.00 Standard Manhole 2 EACH @ $1,000.00 = 2,000.00 Break into Existing Manhole 1 EACH @ $1,000.00 = 1,000.00 Rock Stabilization 135 TON @ $ 15.00 = 2,025.00 '8" x 4" Wye 1 EACH @ $ 75.00 = 75.00 4" P.V.C. Service Pipe 30 L.F. @ $ 10.00 = 300.00 SUBTOTAL = $ 16,200.00 5% Contingency = 810.00 30% Legal, Engineering and Administration $ 17,010.00 5,103.50 TOTAL SANITARY SEWER = $ 22,113.00 WATERMAIN 6" x 8" Wet Tap and 6" Tapping Sleeve 1 EACH @ $3,000.00 = $ 3,000.00 6" D.I.P. Class 52 70 L.F. @ $ 20.00 = 1,400.00 6" Gate Valve 1 EACH @ $ 500.00 = 500.00 Fittings 100 LBS. @ $ 3.00 = 300.00 Rock Stabilization 15 TON @ $ 15.00 = 225.00 SUBTOTAL = $ 5,425.00 5% Contingency = 271.25 4211 30% Legal, Engineering and Administration $ 5,696.25 1,708.88 TOTAL WATERMAIN = $ 7,405.13 Page 1 of 3 o(0 DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST STREET CONSTRUCTION Subgrade Excavation 11,500 C.Y. @ $ 3.00 = $ 34,500.00 Subgrade Preparation 8 R.S. @ $ 100.00 = 800.00 6" Aggregate Base C1.5 (100% Crushed) 950 TON @ $ 7.00 = 6,650.00 2" 2331 Bituminous Base Course 300 TON @ $ 11.00 = 3,300.00 1" 2341 Bituminous Wear Course 150 TON @ $ 12.00 = 1,800.00 Bituminous Material for Mixture 30 TON @ $ 160.00 = 4,800.00 Bituminous Material for Tack Coat 150 GAL. @ $ 1.20 = 180.00 Concrete Curb and Gutter B6-18 1,600 L.F. @ $ 4.50 = 7,200.00 Sodding 2,300 S.Y. @ $ 2.00 = 4,600.00 Furnish and Install Traffic Signs 4 EACH @ $ 150.00 = 600.00 Traffic Marking Paint 3 GAL. @ $ 50.00 = 150.00 SUBTOTAL = $ 64,580.00 5% Contingency = 3,229.00 4211 30% Legal, Engineering and Administrative $ 67,809.00 20,342.70 TOTAL STREET CONSTRUCTION = $ 88,151.70 Page 2 of 3 97 DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST STREET IMPROVEMENTS Subgrade Excavation 500 C.Y. @ $ 3.00 = $ 1,500.00 Subgrade Preparation 5 R.S. @ $ 100.00 = 500.00 Aggregate Base C15 (100% Crushed) 200 TON @ $ 7.00 = 1,400.00 2" 2331 Bituminous Base Course 200 TON @ $ 11.00 = 2,200.00 1" 2341 Modified Wear Course 200 TON @ $ 12.00 = 2,400.00 Bituminous Material for Tack Coat 35 TON @ $ 160.00 = 5,600.00 Concrete Curb and Gutter B6-18 1,350 L.F. @ $ 6.50 = 8,775.00 Sod with 4" Topsoil 300 S.Y. @ $ 2.50 = 750.00 Traffic Marking Paint 3 GAL. @ $ 50.00 = 150.00 Bituminous Street Removal 1,000 S.Y. @ $ 1.25 = 1,250.00 15" RCP 410 L.F. @ $ 16.00 = 6,560.00 18" RCP 500 L.F. @ $ 18.00 = 9,000.00 21" RCP 10 L.F. @ $ 20.00 = 200.00 Remove and Relocate 21" RCP 60 L.F. @ $ 30.00 = 1,800.00 Standard 4' Catchbasin 6 EACH @ $ 800.00 = 4,800.00 Standard Manhole 3 EACH @ $ 800.00 = 2,400.00 Rock Stabilization 200 TON @ $ 11.00 = 2,200.00 Restoration 900 L.F. @ $ 10.00 = 9,000.00 Seeding with 4" Topsoil 1,000 S.Y. @ $ 0.75 = 750.00 SUBTOTAL = $61,235.00 5% Contingency = 3,061.75 30% Legal, Engineering and Administrative $64,296.75 19,289.03 TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS = $83,585.78 4211 Page 3 of 3 FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ESTIMATE OF COST PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS EXTENSION OF SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE PROJECT NO. 543 EAGAN, MINNESOTA A. SANITARY SEWER LATERAL Parcel Delosh Property, Parcel #011-77 Lot 6, Post Addition No. 2 B. WATERMAIN Parcel Lot 6, Post Addition No. 2 Ridgehaven Parcel #011-56 APPENDIX B Assessable Assessable Total Area (S.F.) Rate /S.F. Assessment 120,000 0.1558 $18,692.57 21,958 0.1558 3,420.43 141,958 $22,113.00 Total Assessment $1,071.52 6,333.61 Totals $7,405.13 C. STREET CONSTRUCTION 4211 Parcel Assessable Total Assessable Area Rate Assessment Lot 6, Post Addition No. 2 309 (F.F.) $53.49/F.F. $16,528.41 Delosh Property, Parcel #011-77 120,000 (S.F.) 0.1304/S.F. 15,649.75 Prettyman Heights: Parcel Nos. 160-00, 032-56, 171-00, 385,506 (S.F.) 0.1304/S.F. 50,275.60 Lots 14, 17, Treffle Acres Lot 16, Ehnder Acres Orlyn Oldre Property, Parcel #012-77 43,691 (S.F.) 0.1304/S.F. 5,697.94 Totals $88,151.70 Page 1 of 2 D. STREET AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS FOR FRONTAGE ROAD AND SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE 4211 Parcel Fred Delosh Property, Parcel #011-77 Ridgehaven, Parcel #011-56 Prettyman Heights Parcel Nos. 160-00, 032-56, 171-00, Lots 14, 17, Treffle Acres Lot 16, Ehnder Acres Orlyn Oldre Property, Parcel #012-77 Parcel 020-56 Post Addition, Lots 1 - 5 Post Addition No. 2, Lots 1 - 6 Rustic Hills, Lots 1 - 15 Totals Assessable Area (S.F.' 120,000 187,545 385,506 43,691 14,409 158,039 187,432 204,130 1,300,752 Page 2 of 2 100 Assessable Rate/S.F. 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643 Total Assessment $ 7,711.15 12,051.56 24,772.45 2,807.37 925.92 10,155.52 12,044.30 13,117.31 $83,585.78 N ZI-Jre) Q W = r --L ct =c7=LnN r\ r. n LC) N N N d' e -I cls LO r --I O al LI) CT rs. M M LC LI) CD LC) Lt) LO N. Is -- LO LO O CO ct N LC) Co) N — O Lt7 M O 01 .4 O O •-1 N • O CO • LO O O M Col .--I ^ eti e --I N •-'-I Li) N. LO LO N O CO CO Cr) r --I to Lt) ct• Q1 .--I M M d .-ti N. r-+ N LO .--I N. N Kt. ••••1 O LO r, N M O O r, r- CO O n CI O O O CO N. • N N d N N N — N Ln c - r\ c d' O LO LO LO LO r,. CC J Ln • Q N I-CCtY CT �--I W W LO Z3I- LLI Q O V) N J •--I PARCEL DESCRIPTION 012-77 (Oldre) LD M M M LO 011-56 (Ridgehaven) E • In >l a) 5- 4-) 0 a) cc S- o_ a) N 4- S- O 4- U O 4) Q S- • --I 1— S- r, a) .--0 N. to W Lt) N. -I t0 M I -I O V) O 0 O J O O LO .-L Ioi r -I ..Zr CO N lti to N 0 Z Lf) C U) c III •--I 0 1 O 1 Lq 1 •r .--I •r e--/ r .--I 4) LO r • F-• Ln • r V) • r V) -n +) -0 i-) +-) = 4-)0 0 O O O O LO QJ ¢J_J UJ LO 1 4- .4 ) O N Ln N O O • CL. a c 1 LO LC) LC) N N CO LC) O LO O O .-y CO CO • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • - J F -- O p C) 8 8 e( 'j TT• T fN 3 �,�•- - T7-1 0 .11 0 � J 0- �y t moo. • • r 1 ti 110 dQV 41, r. k/O 0 o It o PO 2 T 3 D/TlpTy 4 71 A 0. 2 Co URl 1)1/ 04 3 1 • yr M1J• ke Q • O 0 0 -C I•oQ/ 9/ �/ =-O • K r � _ . AUGE ROAD 160-00 17 14 9F T T yft-f 032-56 ^` 1 ,` • .l„ 3 171-00 0 o o on •~! �7 ▪ 9 • O f • • •J n v1 0o-0 16 0 0 !V 1 PI OI ,W Z 0 .s • 13 •n 1 Drawn By• Dote. 8-8-88 30111 Last Orr Mayeron & Associates. Inc. [agln.ara • Sur,eyors • Planners M•u•pla • Mla..•p.Il•. MM • 413 • •111-bl-aaeo 1 Draw,ng ',tie PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS LOCATION MAP CITY PROJECT NO. 543 EAGAN, MINNESOTA Comm. No. 4211 Sheet no. 1 D�- -_-.-:r- J 8 0 0 •t N N 7 -c{ 0 •-• o Z •1 I 1 r •V, M'–� l J I O 1, j T o � I 0 ,r, i', m o -„ i, C - - - 7 1„ o Ir O 0 ;F— ” (4.1 o 1 o O rAUGE ROAD ASSESSMENT AREA � a ri '';.J.n �"7 IIi'- 1', poSr A DO IT,POS I Apo!. -;;:../ !...: 0-.---.. _, 00-061 f'7 r 16 i4 3 -"O —'7 ..1 • • • n1. r)f• - 7n7 n 7 Drown By \'.._ S lq ?E r3 L. Date: 8-8-88 Orr Schelen Mayeron & Associates. Inc. Inelneer,1 • Surveyors • Planners nal But M•s•ep1■ • rlaaeeieu. re 66413 • Et -331-1,160 Drow•ng T;tle PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS SANITARY SEWER CITY PROJECT NO. 543 EAGAN, MINNESOTA Comm. No. 4211 Sheet no. 2 • • ti J 0 V l J •II N • l 4' ...w I� A .1/ KI v 13 • 1v • e♦ 7 7 n 1 0 d- •• K. 1Wio• • .. 11 - r. •" i O ASSESSMENT AREA v r 4'w/ At U � --�._<- . --�U V A/• SKYLINE DRI AUGE G cn J -J S ROAD e 4.31 ,m f n 1 O j 1 I O u as • O / I 093-7 j ' CiIl • ' -> o9,'• / / 4 00 / r• T 0 e_ X C/- 47 C 0 ' C/p , 0• -r O y O • • 0 • " ' 1 PO 41:00I7I 2 3 4 S 4 3 ON N ON PR • OSED WATER MAIN !i, . 2 6 w -J CO 17 o 160-00 EXISTING WATER MAIN 032-56 14 0 0 0 0 l LV O 0 4.1 n O 0 N "A.4 171-00 0 0 • Q• _k 1 ',r fr'- ... t w J .. CC S _ 0 • • 'l 4• 7- ,, ti nn- 7n7 1 i.. d - ^1'- n.7 vs • . < S 1 �„_, Tq rz H Q �Y' 13 I iI ( Drawn By: Dote: 8-8-88 Orr Schelen Mayeron & Associates. Inc. Kagln•.r. • !urv.yor. • Pl•an•re 111311 11.41 r•■..•t. • 111■6•4”11• r11 16413 • 1113-373t-68410 Drawing Title PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS WATER MAIN CITY PROJECT NO. 543 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 1 c7� Comm. No. 4211 Sheet no. 3 3 J M • r` N � - ti r u,r,/, .+ 1"--) _4r 6 , � R 0 0 1 •t• '1J N'.• vl .11►Ar,. • J / W AUGE ROAD r) n ' I q 00-051 F .. O 1 , i`- '•., * I• 5. J1 COST Q_ � 2 Tfp 4 6 0S sI q`- q �i Apo r /i K/1,6 11,00/ Q 'TION O Q tri17 • Z` 0 1\ n O �I lej ,t, ST. 13 Drown By• Dote: 8-8-88 Orr Schelen Meyeron & Associates. Inc. Inglneer. • Sur,eyor. • Planner. IOC 1..1 Ns..gl. • 111N.11.11• WM 66417 • 111f-331-668473 Drawing Title PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS STREET CONSTRUCTION CITY PROJECT NO. 543 EAGAN, MINNESOTA Comm No. 4211 Sheet no. 4 I oS O 8 8 0 1ef o N 4 M - V /- u'�'/, U• a O , o au.c • M .rr0.1 :� lu K, O i, 1 .1 .1O 0 3-pO� j c� _ 7 Ur- d � ▪ � W) - o ▪ c I zASSESSMENT AREA jh r O - 0 c, 0 r W O 0 0 0 00 -OSI 1 „ n •' BEET REMOVAL STRE - IMPROVEMENT F 4 STORM SEWER M r • 13 it w z Drown 6y: Dote: 8-8-88 Orr Schelen Mayeron & Associates. Inc. toilne.r. • Sur•eyor. • Planner• 46X1 Lsi re,.epl, • Y16s..>.11. MP 66473 • elt-331-4660 Drow,ng Title PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS STREET & STORM IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT NO. 543 EAGAN, MINNESOTA Comm. No. 4211 Sheet no. 5 0 Co Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PK 3RD ADDN-PHASE 2 STORM SEWER & WATER MAIN D. Project 552, Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition - Phase 2 (Storm Sewer & Water Main) --On September 6, the Council received the feasibility report for the above -referenced project and authorized the ublic h aring to be held on October 6. Enclosed on pages 0 through is a copy of the feasibility report for the Council's review and reference during the presentation by the consulting engineer responsible for the report preparation. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all potentially affected property owners informing them of this public hearing. In addition, personal contact has been made with the two adjacent property owners and the developer reviewing the impact of this project on their property. The consulting engineer and Public Works Director will be available to provide additional detailed information as a part of the public hearing process. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/deny Project 552 (Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition, Phase 2 - Storm Sewer & Water Main). \s 0 3:Or t 3 cr Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition (Lone Oak Business Center, Phase 2) Utility improver encs Eagan, Minnesota C;ty Project No. 552 August 1988 "47-'1,9 No. 49468 l+ nestr oo Aosene " Anderiik 1 Associates Engineers & Architects August 25, 1988 ..)aorable Mayor and Council City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Otto G. Bonestroo. PE. Robert W. Rosene, FE Josepn C Anoenik, PE. Bradford A. Lemberg, PE Richard E, Turner, PE. James C. Olson, PE. Genn R Cook, PE. Thomas E. Noyes, PE Robert G Schunrcht, PE. Marvin L. Sorvala, P.E. Fenn A Gordon, PE Richard W foster, PE. Donald C Burgarut, PE Jerry A Bourdon, PE. Mark A Hanson, PE. Ted K Field, PE. Michael T. Rautmann, PE. Robert R Pfefferle, PE. David O. Loskota, PE. e: Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition Lone Oak Business Center, Phase 2 Utility Improvements Project No. 552 Our File No. 49468 Dear Mayor and Council: Thomas W. Peterson, PE Michael C tvncn. PE Janes R Marano, PE Kenneth P. Anderson. PE Keith A Bachmann, P.E Mark R. golfs, PE Robert C. Russek, A.I A Thomas E. Angus, P.E Howard A Sanford, PE Charles A Erickson Leo M Pawelsky Harlan M Olson Susan M. Eberlin Mark A Seip Transmitted herewith is our report for Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition which covers water main and storm sewer improvements and preliminary assessment roll. We would be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested mutually convenient time to discuss any aspect of this report. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSEAjE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. ----- Nark`A — Hanson MAH:ci _approved includes a parties at a I hereby certify that this Report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesgta. - .ark A. Manson, P.E. Date: August 25, 1988 by: i Department or Date: / Public '.Corks i:eg. No. 1'+250 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota psi 13612-6So-4a0O Scope: This project provides for the construction of water main and storm sewer to serve Lone Oak Business Center, Phase 2 within Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition and two unplatted parcels to the west. This area i:; located south of Lone Oak Road between Lexington Avenue and Neil Armstrong ::cuievard. asibility and Recommendation: The project is feasible from an engineering 3Landpoint and is in accordance with the objectives established in the Master Water and Storm Sewer Plan for the city of Eagan. The project as outlined herein can best be carried out by combining 1E with Country Hollow 2nd .Jditiun, Project No. 541. ,Scussion: '-.iter ;fain - Nater main proposed herein provides tor constructing a 10" DIP main from the existing 16" trunk main in Lone Oak Road south and east to an existing 8" main that was constructed privately as part of a previous Lone Oak Business Center, Project No. 37 SS. The 10" main will connect to the existing lo' Lain by wet gapping. An 8" water service will be stubbed to the west to serve a future building on lots i-5 of Eagandala Center Industrial Park 3rd .Ldaitiun. Presently, a Montessori School exists on this site. A 10" DIP will also be stubbed to the south for suture looping through lots 14-17 of the 3rd Addition. Also included is the proper number of valves and hydrants. The area L3 located in the Intermediate pressure zone and will experience residual and static pressures of approximately 50 and 75 psi, respectively. 2age 1. RPT49468 Storm Sewer - Storm sewer proposed herein provides for constructing a lateral storm sewer within the 3rd Addition along lot lines to serve Lone Oak Business Center, Phase 2 and the unplatted parcels to the west shown on Figure No. 2. :ha storm sewer will outlet into existing Pond No. 1 which was constructed privately as part of Project No. ui SS and will ie constructed as shown on lgure No. 2. However it is noc proposed to extend the storm sewer west to provide an outlet for the existing low area located on Parcels 010-25 and Ji0-26 until they develope. "he storm sewer is sized to collect direct runoff from the 3rd Addition (Lone ;k Eusiness Center, Phase 2 and Lots 1-5, and 14) and discharge into Pond No. 1. .iowever, it is assumed ponding will occur first on the unplatted parcels co '.ne west before discharging into the proposed storm sewer which is designated as Pond No. 2. Design considerations for Pond No. 1 and No. 2 are as follows: Direct Storage Outflow . nd Drainage Area NWL f.WL (Acre/Feet) (Cu.ft./Sec.) 15.3 Acres 850 860 3.5 2 4.0 Acres 854 356 1.5 1.0 he outflow requirements for Pond No. 1 are ?used on existing pond outlet conditions and a previous study by the Engineers for Opus Corporation. The study was done due to the capacity of the existing trunk storm sewers and the limited ponding areas in this drainage basin. The study defined additional ponding areas on undeveloped parcels. Therefore when the undeveloped parcels aevelope storm sewer and ponding requirements would be known. It should be oaten, :.owever, some future ponuing areas are r:ot 1.,caecd on land controlled entirely by Opus. Therefore, their acqui3ition may 1,e more u_fficuit and may Leceme a responsibility of c_.e drainage basin. RPT49468 1a;e t . AREA TO BE INCLUDED: Assessment & Construction Area Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition Lot 1, Block 5 Lot 2, Block 5 Lot 5, Block 5 Lot 6, Block 5 Lot 7, Block 5 Lot 8, Block 5 Lot 9, Block 5 Lot 14, Block 5 N 1/4, Section 11 Parcel 010-25 Parcel 010-26 Easements and Permits: Permanent drainage and utility easements and temporary construction easements will be required from all parcels within the construction area. It is anticipated all easements within Eagandale Center industrial Park 3rd Addition can be acquired as part of the approval for Lone Oak Business Center, Phase 2. A temporary easement is required from Parcel 010-25 to construct the water main. Permits from Minnesota Department of Health and Dakota County Highway Department will be required for construction of the water main. Cost ''.stimates: Detailed cost estimates are presented in Appendix A located at the back of this report. A summary of these costs is as follows: Water Main Storm Sewer RPT49468 Total Page 3 . $ 44,700 37,080 31,780 The total estimated project cost is $81,780 which includes contingencies and all related overhead. Overhead costs are estimated at 30Z and include legal, engineering, administration and bond interest. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefitted properties. A preliminary assessment roll is i.:cluded at the back or this report in Appendix B. All lateral costs will be revised based on final costs. The assessments will be spread over 10 years at an interest rate based upon the bond sale financing of this project. Water Main: Water main proposed herein is to be assessed on a front foot 'asis to the benefitting properties that abut the water main within Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition and 010-25. Trunk water main for Eagandale Industrial Park 3rd Addition was previously assessed. Parcel 010- 25 was assessed 1 lot equivalent under project 104 in 1974 for trunk water main, therefore they are not proposed to be assessed trunk area water at this time. Storm Sewer: Storm sewer proposed herein is lateral and is proposed to be assessed to the benefitted area. The storm sewer is proposed to be assessed entirely to Eagandale Industrial ?ark 3rd Addition except the oversizing and extra depth required to serve Parcels 010-25 and 010-25. The oversizing and extra depth is confined only to the east -west storm sewer and is estimated at $'.950 ($5/L.F. x 285 L.F. = $1425; $1425 x 1.05 x 1.30 = $1950). Trunk area storm sewer was previously assessed against all properties involved in this project. RPT49468 Page 4 . Revenue: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows: Water Main Lateral Lateral Assessments Storm Sewer Lateral Lateral Assessments Project Cost $ 44,700 $ 44,700 $ 37,080 $ 37,080 Revenue a 44,700 $ 44,700 $ 37,080 $ 37,080 Balance -0- -0- TOTAL BALANCE -0- PROJECT SCHEDULE ?resent Feasibility Report Public Hearing Approve Plans and Specifications Open Bids/Award Contract Complete Construction Assessment Hearing First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes RPT49468 Page 5 . \A 4 September 6, 1988 October 6, 1988 September 6, 1988 October 6, 1988 Fall 1989 Summer 1989 May 1990 APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK 3RD ADDITION JTILI"TY LAPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 552 A.) WATER MAIN 1140 Lin.ft. 10" DIP water main @ $16.00/L.F. $18,240.00 20 Lin.ft. 8" DIP water main @ $14.00/L.F. 28.00 -,O Lin.ft. 6" DIP water main @ $12.00/L.F. 480.00 1 Each Wet tap 10" DIP to ex. 16" DIP @ $1800.00/Ea. 1,800.00 1 Each Connect to ex. 8" DIP @ $200.00/Ea. 200.00 3 Each 10" gate valves and Lu.c @ $600.00/Ea. 1,800.00 1 Each 8" gate valves and box @ $450.00/Ea. 450.00 2 Each 6" gate valves and box @ $350.00/Ea. 700.00 2 Each Hydrant @ $1,100.00/Ea. 2,200.00 2600 Lbs. Fittings @ $1.50/Lb. 3,900.00 1200 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/Ft. 1,200.00 1 Acres Seed w/mulch and fertilizer @ $1500.00/Ac. 1,500.00 Total $32,750.00 + 5% Contingencies 1,640.00 RPT49468 $34,390.00 + 30Z Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 10,310.00 Page 6 . $44,700.00 B.) STORM SEWER LUMP SUM Clear and grub easement @ $500.00/Ea. $ 500.00 290 Lin.ft. 27" RCP storm sewer @ $32.00/Lin.ft. -?,280.00 110 Lin.ft. 24" RCP storm sewer $30.00/Lin.ft. 3,300.00 310 Lin.ft 18" RCP storm sewer ` $28.00/Lin.ft. 8,600.00 3 Each Std. 4' dia. MH w/Cstg. @ $1000.00/Ea. 3,000.00 10 Lin.ft. Manhole depth greater than 8' @ $60.00/Lin.ft. 600.00 1 Each Connect 18" RCP to ex. structure @ $300.00/Ea. 300.00 50 Cu.yds. Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/Cu.yds. 500.00 710 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/Lin.ft. 710.00 0.2 Acre Seed w/mulch and fertilizer @ $1500.00/Ac. 300.00 Total $ 27,160.00 + 5Z Contingencies 1,360.00 RPT49468 + 30Z Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest Page 7 . $ 28,520.00 8,560.00 37,080.00 APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK 3RD ADDITION liTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 552 A.) WATER MAIN PARCEL c'RONT TOTAL DESCRIPTION FOOTAGE RATE/FF ASSESSMENT ?agandale Center Industrial Park No. 3 Lot 1, Block 5 100.00 $21.56 $ 2,156 Lot 2, Block 5 100.00 21.56 2,156 Lot 5, Block 5 250.00 21.56 5,390 Lot 6, Block 5 662.00 * 21.56 14,272 Lot 7, Block 5 100.00 21.56 2,156 Lot 8, Block 5 100.00 21.56 2,156 Lot 9, Block 5 100.00 21.56 2,156 Lot 14, Block 5 400.00 21.56 8,623 NW 114 Sec. 11 Parcel 010-25 261.40 21.56 5,635 TOTALS 2,073.40 $44,700 * 150' Corner Lot Credit Applied Page 8 . RPT49468 B.) STORM SEWER PARCEL AREA TOTAL DESCRIPTION (ACRES) RATE/ACRE ASSESSMENT Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 3 Lot 1, Block 5 1.00 54754 $ 4,754 Lot 2, Block 5 1.00 4754 4,754 Lot 3, Block 5 0.80 4754 3,803 Lot 4, Block 5 1.20 4754 5,705 Lot 5, Block 5 0.57 4754 2,708 Lot 6, Block 5 1.63 4754 7,749 Lot 7, Block 5 0.25 ,754 1,188 Lot 8, Block 5 0.15 4754 713 Lot 14, Block 5 0.79 4754 3,755 TOTAL 7.39 $ 35,130 ;7!a 1/4, Section 11 RPT49468 Parcel 010-25 2.7 271 731 Parcel 010-25 4.5 271 1,219 TOTAL 7.2 $ 1,950 TOTAL $ 37,080 Page 9 . SUMMARY PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL EAGANDALE CENTER 3RD ADDITION UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 552 PARCEL WATER STORM DESCRIPTION MAIN SEWER Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition TOTAL Lot 1, Block 5 2,156 4,754 6,910 Lot 2, Block 5 2,156 4,754 6,910 Lot 3, Block 5 3,803 3,803 'Lot 4, Block 5 5,705 5,705 Lot 5, Block 5 5,390 2,709 8,099 Lot 6, Block 5 14,272 7,749 22,021 Lot 7, Block 5 2,156 1,188 3,344 Lot 8, Block 5 2,156 713 2,869 Lot 9, Block 5 2,156 2,156 Lot 14, Block 5 8,623 3,755 12,378 NW 1/4, Section 11 Parcel 010-25 5,635 731 6,366 Parcel 020-26 Page 10. RPT49468 1,219 1,219 L 0-5 0 LJ z uJ LEXINGTON Bell L on Add. 3 010 -50 LONE OAK ROAD (C.S.A.H. 26) EX 16" D.I.P. 4 GAAPALE I CEILITE i . , ! 4. 5 ! / , 1 1 I 1 1 1 ' LONE OAK BUSINESS 1 EXISTING II CENTER, PHASE 2 BUILDING I A_ 0 \ 0 x tn 1 FUTURE BUILDING r 2 1 PROPOSED 10" DIP 010 -25 41 6 7 8 li'VDblf TRIAL i 9 0 CO LaJ 010-26 10 1 14 '-PROPOSED 10 DIP 12 PARK THIRD ADD. 15 16 17 SCALE: I" = 200' 370-05 ARMSTRONG UJ z EAGANDALE CENTER IND. PARK 3RD ADDITION WATERMAIN 1(1A i A await Pp.(' flosono 1ArAlar iik • Assoc laies E no Irw•r s Architect • St. Pout Oa Irkiwoorta LDate: AUG. 1988 Corn m . 49468 [ Fig. No. 1 (C 46) LEXINGTON Sell L •fGOfl Add. 17° 010 -50 LONE OAK ROAD (C.S A.H. 26) GiA N b145 CENTER \ ---1— FUTURE STORM 4 SEWER FUTURE BUILDING \ Th5 9,— —t1 - LONE OAK BUSINESS I EXIST1N BUILDING I 2 L PND 2 1---11 \ PROPOSED i5 RCP \ 010 -26 0J0 -25 1 CENTER? PHASE 2 z 0 81 N US IAL IOND • 9 370 -05 '.—PROPOSED. 18 RCP 15 771ID ADD. 16 12 PA 7 L- EX. 18" PVC 17 DRAINAGE a ASSESSMENT AREA BOUNDARY EAGANDALE PARK 3RD STORM CENTER 1ND. ADDITION SEWER 4 1 Elartest roe a:won.* Aneserilk • Aturociaitso angloworip 4 Arogillost• Date: AUG. 1988 CQrnm. 49468 N. Pout 114idroimpla ) Fig. No. 2 -.9 Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting SPECIAL ASSMT COMMITTEE/1987 APPEALS E. Special Assessment Committee - 1987 Appeals --As a result of the final assessment hearings held in August and September of 1987, the City Council deleted certain individual properties from the final assessment roll that was adopted and certified to the County. Property appraisals were ordered for these exceptions and the objections were forwarded to the Special Assessment Committee for review and recommendation for each individual property owner. There are 12 individual objections that must be addressed specifically with formal Council action in order for the resulting assessment obligation to be certified to the County for collection with the property tax rolls. The following information is provided with each property owner's objection for the Council's information: * Background information/staff's recommendation * Special Assessment Committee minutes/recommendation * Property owner's written objection * Property location on quarter section map The following additional information was forwarded to the Special Assessment Committee to familiarize them with the project and the property owner's objection: * Property location on land use guide plan * Property location superimposed on original topography * Aerial photo of property location * Construction plan view of assessable improvements in relationship to the affected property * Map showing the assessable limits of the various types of improvements * Calculations of assessments for individual improvements (sewer, water, etc.) * Summary of all assessable obligations * Appropriate Special Assessment Policy (if applicable) * Pertinent excerpts of City's property appraisal report (if appropriate) This latter information is not enclosed with this packet due to its cumulative volume but is readily available should any member of the Council wish to review it prior to the meeting. In addition to reviewing individual assessment objections, the Special Assessment Committee reviewed, adopted and/or revised Special Assessment Policies affecting these and other potential future objections. These Policies will be addressed first so that they may be applied to the affected property owners, if appropriate. The total amount of assessments of the 12 objections is $229,589.66. Based on the Committee's recommendations, (subject to the execution of the appropriate agreements), this cumulative assessment obligation was reduced to $109,897.82 with $100,797.64 being deleted and/or postponed for collection with future development, if any. 1 3- Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 1. Adopt Policy 86-3 & Revise Policy 82-2 Enclosed on pages 1:;Athrough \3,5 are copies of new Policy 86- 3 and revised Policy 82-2 along with the Committee minutes pertaining to these Policies. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To adopt Policy 86-3 and revise Policy 82-2 as presented. �a3 *SPECIAbi.,f ASSESSMENT POLICY 86-3 LARGE UNPLATTED PROPERTY - POSTPONEMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS SUBJECT: Calculation of reduced assessment obligations for large unplatted property when connecting to existing previously unassessed City utilities and/or assessments resulting from new public improvement installations. POLICY: When existing unplatted property meeting the qualifying area and frontage requirements desire to connect to existing previously under/unassessed public improvements or when new public improvements are installed adjacent to similar type property, through the execution of the attached agreement, the assessment'obligation will be calculated on 100 ft. of frontage and 1 acre of land with the remainder of the assessment obligation being postponed until such time that the property is developed to a higher or more intense use. At that time, the postponed assessment obligations will be reactivated and certified in accordance with the agreement. Qualifying properties must have a minimum of 200 ft. of frontage on the public right-of-way incorporating the public improvement and must be greater than 3 acres in area excluding all dedicated right-of-way, ponding easements and/or significant and unusual utility easements. OBJECTIVE: To reduce and postpone the significant financial burden of public improvements on large pre-existing unplatted property until such time that it is developed to a higher and/or more intense use thereby realizing a benefit more directly related to the assessment obligation. It also provides an opportunity for existing homesteaded unplatted property to connect to existing utilities when needed without incurring the burden of benefit for the larger undeveloped property beyond the nominal one dwelling unit property dimensions. JUSTIFICATION: Many times, benefit of public improvements to existing large unplatted tracts of land is not realized until such time that that land is developed to a higher and/or more intense use requiring the benefits provided from the public improvements available. This postponement will recognize the extent of the immediate benefit and will provide a recordable agreement informing perspective future developers and/or investment purchasers of additional assessment obligations if the property is to be used for other than its use at the time of the agreement execution. Reviewed and Acted Upon By: CITY COUNCIL: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE X Approved 10-6-88 Date X Approved 6-30-88 Date Denied Date Denied Date EXHIBIT 1 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY 86-3 CITY OF EAGAN ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT UNDEVELOPED/AGRICULTURAL ZONING PROJECT NO (S) . THIS AGREEMENT dated this _ day of the CITY OF EAGAN, (called City), and , 1988, between (called Owner) of , (address); WHEREAS, the City proposes to assess the following described premises in Dakota County, Minnesota, owned by Owner: (legal description) for the following improvements pursuant to City Project(s) WHEREAS, assessments would normally be based upon the total frontage area of, said premises; and/or WHEREAS, the present use of said property is homestead for a single use; and WHEREAS, the highest and best use of the property may be at a different zoning, higher density or more intense use than presently exists; NOW, THEREFORE, upon consideration of the mutual covenants herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. The City agrees to assess said property for the Project and purposes described above at its present singular use, in accordance with Special Assessment Policy No. 86-3. 2. The Owner agrees for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, that if the actual use of said property is changed in the future to a use or zoning category which is greater than its present use, the City may reassess or levy a supplemental assessment at such time based on the assessable units (frontage and/or area) postponed under this referenced project at the appropriate zoning classification assessment rates, according to City policy, in effect at such future time. 3. a. The Owner for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns waives any and all objections to the City's right to reassess the property in conjunction with the Project if the actual use and/or the zoning for the property is changed. Further, the Owner waives any and all objections to the present assessments agreed to herein and to the proceedings related thereto. b. By executing this Agreement, the Owner does not waive the burden of the City to establish the benefit received by the property under the Project at the time of the change in use or zoning. 4. The undersigned hereby agree that this agreement may be recorded with the Dakota County Recorder and that the Owner shall execute any and all documents necessary to implement the recording of this agreement including the delivery of the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title to the affected lands if necessary. 5. The undersigned agrees that this agreement shall run with the affected land and binds the heirs, successors and assigns of such land. 6. The undersigned heirs, successors and assigns of such land, includes all of the person, firms or corporation that hold an interest in the.assessed land described above, including the fee title owners, contract for deed vendees or vendors or holders of any other interest under contract for deed, option or otherwise. 7. Other conditions: The undersigned have read and understand the above agreement and hereby bind themselves to it in all respects. OWNER: By; CITY OF EAGAN: By: Its: Mayor By: _ Attest: Its: Clerk By: Its: APPROVED: Public Works Department STATE OF MINNESOTA) } ss. COUNTY OF On this day of , 1988, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared VICTOR L. ELLISON and E. J. VanOVERBEKE to me personally known, who being each by me duly sworn, each did say that they are respectively the Mayor and Clerk of the City of Eagan, the municipality named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed in behalf of said municipality by authority of its City Council and said Mayor and Clerk acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed or said municipality. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF �, ) On this day of , 1988, before me a Notary Public within and for saia County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who being each by me duly sworn, each did say that they are respectively the and of the Corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors and said and acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss. COUNTY OF On this day of , 19 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn to be partners of the Partnership named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said partnership and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said Partnership by said _ and and they acknowledged said instrument to be t:ie free act and deed of the Partnership. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19, by Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY; McMENOMY & SEVERSON, P.A. 7300 West 147th Street P.O. Box 24329 Apple Valley, MN 55124 (612) 432-3136 MGD EXEMPT FROM STATE DEED TAX PECIA ASSESSMENT POLICY # 82-2 EXISTING LAND USE VS ZONING SUBJECT: Assessments against land whose present use is different fLLxtt the current underlying zoning. POLICY: Where the existing land use is different (less than the high- est and best use permitted by current zoning) than the current underlying zoning, all trunk area and/or lateral benefit assess- ments against the property in question shall be levied in ac- cordance with the current underlying zoning and not in accor- dance with the current land use unless the attached standard agreement is motorized and executed by all persons holding in- terest in the title to the property. Future rates would be cal- culated in accordance with Policy 82-1. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this policy is to provide a method by which pro- perty owners whose land is developed at a use that is less than permitted by the current zoning, may receive consideration for assessments being levied in accordance with the property's pre- sent use and defer the additional assessments until the current use is upgraded to a use permitted by the underlying zoning. JUSTIFICATION: While trunk utilities are planned, designed and constructed based on the highest and best use of all property in the City in accordance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan and/or current zoning, their benefit is not fully realized by land that is presently developed at a use less than allowed by the current zoning. Further, if the property is presently developed at a different use, it is assumed that it would not change in the foreseeable future. Reviewed and acted upon by: CITY COUNCIL: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMIa 'LE: Approved 7-6-82 Date X Approved 6-14-82 Date Denied Date Denied Date �a9 CITY OF EAGAN ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT LAND USE DIFFERS FROM ZONING PROJECT NO. THIS AGREEMENT dated this day of , 198_, between the CITY OF EAGAN, (called City), and (called Owner) of , (address); WHEREAS, the City proposes to assess the following described premises owned by Owner: (legal description) for the following improvements pursuant to City Project WHEREAS, such assessments would normally be based upon the present zoning classification of said premises, that is, ; and WHEREAS, the present use of said property is different from said zoning classification and if zoned at the present use, assessments would be for zoning. NOW THEREFORE, upon consideration of the mutual covenants herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. The City agrees to assess said property for the Project and purposes described above as if it were zoned at the rates now in existence for property so zoned. 2. The Owner agrees for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, that if the actual use of said property is changed in the future to a use or zoning category which is assessable at a higher rate than the rate for the present use, the City may reassess or levy a supple- mental assessment at, such time equal to the difference between the assessment for the new land iuge and the assessment for the present land use at the assessment rates, according to City policy, in effect at such future time. 3. a. The Owner for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns waives any and all objections to the City's right to reassess the property in conjunction with the Project if the actual use and/or the zoning for the property is changed. Further, the Owner waives any and all objections to the present assessments agreed to herein and to the proceedings related thereto. b. By executing this Agreement, the Owner does not waive the burden of the City to establish the benefit received by the property under the Project at the time of the change in use or zoning. 4. Other conditions: The undersigned have read and understand the above agreement and hereby bind themselves to it in all respects. OWNER This Document Drafted !II_ Hauge, Smith, Eide & Keller, P.A. 3908 Sibley Memorial Highway Eagan, Minnesota 55122 CITY OF EAGAN By: Attest: Its Mayor Its Clerk APPROVED: Public Works Director EXEMPT FROM STATE: DEED TAX STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) 53. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) CITY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT On this day of. , 198_, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared BEATTA BLOMQUIST and EUGENE VANOVERBEKE to me personally known, who being each by me duly sworn, each did say that they are respectively the Mayor and Clerk of the CITY OF EAGAN, the municipality named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said municipality by authority of its City Council and said Mayor and Clerk acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipality. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) Notary Public PERSONAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT On this day of , 198_, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that executed the same as free act and deed. STATE OF MINNESOTA'. ) ) 53. COUNTY OF ) Notary Public CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 198, by (name) , (title of officer) , of (corp. name) a (state) corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. PARTNERSHIP ACKNOWLEDGEMENT COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 198_, by , partner (or agent) on behalf of , a Partnership. Notary Public \3\ MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CammITTEE MEETING OF THE CITY OF EAGAN EAGAN, MINNESOTA JUNE 30, 1988 A Special Assessment meeting of the City of Eagan was held on Thursday, June 30th, 1988, at 4:30 o'clock p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Councilmember Egan; Advisory Planning Commission Member Merkley, Vic Twaddell and Phil Colton. Also present were Public Works Director Tom Colbert and City Attorney Michael. Dougherty. ET .ECTION Egan moved, Colton seconded the motion to elect Twaddell as Chairperson of the Special Assessment Committee. All voted in favor. Twaddell moved, Egan seconded the motion to elect Egan as Vice -Chairperson of the Special Assessment Committee. All voted in favor. AGENDA Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that material to be discussed during the Special Assessment Committee meeting included references to Special Assessment Policy 86-3. Mr. Colbert stated that he could find no record of Special Assessment Policy 86-3 being adopted by the City Council. Egan stated that he felt Policy 86-3 was fair but he could not recollect any'action by the Council on the policy. Egan moved to amend the agenda to include as the first item of new business that recommendation be made by the Special Assessment Committee to the City Council that the Council consider adoption of Policy 86-3. Merkley seconded the motion. All voted in favor. PUBLIC POLICY 86-3 Egan and Twaddell each expressed their belief that Public Policy 86-3 should be given consideration by the Council and that it was a good policy. Twaddell indicated that each of the property owners appearing before the Special Assessment Committee that night should understand that any recommendation made by the Special Assessment Committee that was affected by Public Policy 86-3 was predicated upon the Council adopting Policy 86-3 as offical public policy, Public Works Director Colbert indicated that Policy 86-3 was not contradictory to any other public policy in place in Eagan. Upon motion by Egan, seconded by Merkley, it was resolved that the Special Assessment Committee recommended that Public Policy 86-3 be adopted by the City Council. All voted in favor. tea Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 2. Project 467, Wescott Road (Lot 20, Block 1 - Lexington Square Addition) Enclosed on pages through pertaining to this objection. 1Y?is background information ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 467 (Wescott Road) as it pertains to Lot 20, Block 1, Lexington Square Addition and authorize its certification to the County. IV. OLD BUSINESS A. PROJECT 467, WESCOTT ROAD - LATERAL STORM SEWER 1. Vince Bazzachini (Lot 20, Block 1, Lexington Square Addn.) BACKGROUND INFORMATION This project provided for the upgrading of Wescott Road from a rural ditch gravel road section to an urban 4 -lane roadway with concrete curb and gutter, bituminous surfacing, sidewalks and trailways from Lexington Avenue (County Road 43) to 1/2 mile east (highline power line crossing). The original project public hearing was held on March 19, 1986, with construction beginning in 1986.and substantial completion in June of 1987. On September 15, 1987, the final assessment public hearing was held at which time the property owner submitted the written objection enclosed on page ? Maps showing the relationship of the objecting property to the related improvements along with the calculation of the final assessment figure is included on pages through iT . Contrary to the property owners contention that the project reduces the size of his lot, adequate right-of-way was originally dedicated with the platting of the Lexington Square Addition and the entire improvement was constructed within this previously dedicated public right-of-way, including the bike path. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the improvements completed which intercepts the public drainage and conveys it to an underground storm sewer system instead of the previous situation where drainage was discharged directly onto this property, the staff feels that the assessment was properly levied at a uniform rate equally over all similar zoned properties and provides a benefit in the amount proposed. It is staff's recommendation that the original assessment be reaffirmed. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS SSESSmF, rr CClIITTEE MINUTES • ;988 LOT 20, BLOCK 1, LEXINGTON SQUARE ADDITION VINCE BAZZACHINI Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that Wescott Road had been npgraced from a rural gravel road to a four -lane roadway with concrete curb and gutter, bituniinous surfacing, sidewalks and trailways from Lexington Avenue to a point 1/2 mile to the east. The completed improvements intercept the public drainage which used to run across the private property and collects it and conveys it to an underground storm sewer system. The assessments were levied at a uniform rate equally over all similar zoned properties and amount to a dollar figure of $735.20. Janet Bazzachini appeared as a landowner objecting to the assessment. Ms. Bazzachini indicated that the upgrading of the road had made 25 feet of their land inadequate. Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that the restoration done was to control erosion and that any sodding that would be needed would be the obligation of the landowner but that it may require some raking, etc. to prepare the ground for sodding. Merkley stated that he thought the landowner was concerned that the ground could not be mowed in its present condition; but, the change in the grade of the slope was necessary because of the width of the road and that it appeared to be reasonable. Merkley asked Public Works Director Colbert if it would be possible for the City to have a bobcat go out to the site to perform necessary work that would place the land in suitable condition for sodding. Colbert indicated that it would be done. Egan moved, Merkley seconded the motion to reaffirm the original assessment. All voted in favor. PARCEL 10-01400-030-53/KEU ER BRATLAND Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 467 the City had installed sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer utilities in addition to urban street and trailway improvements upon Wescott Road. Upon acreage, location and development potential of the property the assessments were calculated to the figure of $24,564.55 which could be reduced to $5,':37.30 subject to the property owner executing the proper agreement in ac^ordance with Special Assessment Policy 86-3. This policy would allow the City to levy only those assessments benefitting the single residential use of the property and postponing the remainder of the assessment until the property is further subdivided. A letter submitted by Kelmer Bratland indicated that he objected to the assessment as it conferred no benefit upon his property. Public Works Director Tom Colbert indicated that Mr. Bratland was not in concurrence with Policy 86-3. l3s /1( 7 1 /4zi 2 V L4 lSlc J/-1 /Lc✓Z / c jyir v / • / � v1-e-�i 1C/. I 0-0 13(4 /d- yS07S = oo-o/ Q. if(,7 WESCOT 2 z 4 EC.23 SuasEcr FARCE L SI/4 SET. 1-1 T 27, R; _13171(13111 2 Zai 13 i g ..'71111.1.1113. sn0$ 919/11136 CO 1666 H1 004 301 3000911( _66r•(3717 U I6 � 64 : :�$:•1 7500 I '7703 7500 1303 7303 7501 7126 3.06 ! 3319 '914,. Y: _r;_ _ 1_ :72....43 � a ofy Y H C•20.• I g1A 22 23 (: 24 i 23 _ 2s R: z71 [1° 1 , Y • I4 I^ ..; bn 2• 28 t'_• 30 1 6� 33 v rl " 73 �35 n 3.!5000' �slno 00 '1 0 Y: ► z -3 'z mSRy4.' 0 73-33 "D I7 ii o'b 4 e•�s�vOo.. b . eewo oo'c 339 01 3.17 2 ROAD— �rg�y 35z 3.. .. y...._ _ ...DWIbA+4� •.2 75 C R E: s;';;:' " '----'-4-.. 'ri):1:243'...3.0::;;.'1:.';,.1::.(7:91"TF-4:11'1:3111:-L-"::' ''11,7„.'1"sji:::::.........47:'Ql7::: 9 53 96 Cr fir .50 9 13004 .,''k 2: . ,;1; -'„,, , F }, .4!]' I: 1,4 : ,,, .,,:.1, tt A, : ,O ;4, ,,,, ,,, ; fa' : ,,o, ri s 4roOcet . nil a arm,' : ro 15/.70 lie. si 9 .1 4121 �I A. " — BRIAR CREEK .5 5 3 n 013{ : Fig ‘Z, 5'; 'yx 1• �.. 1 9 ^ ! 7 6 L�y .0 !99900 odc • b13 11 C� 10 i„' "-' - o� ll 6.06 no, 1301 '-1107/ . 7501 7501 eer9Ur71 7501 117501 s 73 )61. AH _ugly • •3vododt 131 67 e 13/20G1c4•'f5 X63017. •ter 7 iris -{SC 11ftt2S7QL__ {�,�t r,•, i)AN aft. i \01 •=1: .1 1% 011 • l• • • e c 31 Agenda Information Demo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 3. Project 450, Williams & LaRue 1st Addition (Parcel 10-01400- 030-53) Enclosed on pages � � through /4f"2 --is background information pertaining to this objection. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 450 (Williams & LaRue 1st Addition) as it pertains to Parcel 10- 01400-030-53 and authorize its certification to the County. IV. NEW BUSINESS B. PROJECT 450, WILLIAMS & LARUE 1ST ADDN STORM SEWER 1. Kelmer Bratland (Parcel 10-01400-030-53) BACKGROUND INFORMATION This project provided for the installation of sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer to service the Williams & LaRue 1st and 2nd Additions which are located adjacent to and west of Mr. Braatland's property. While the sanitary sewer and water main provided service only to the Williams & LaRue Additions, the storm sewer improvements provided drainage to this development as well as Mr. Braatland's property. Mr. Braatland's property had never before been assessed for trunk area storm sewer improvements to finance the major trunk storm sewer facilities necessary to handle the runoff from his property as well as all others within that drainage district. Of the actual 4.75 acres of property, the net assessable area after applying the "large lot" credit per Special Assessment Policy 82-4, the residual net assessable area was reduced to 1.89 acres and assessed at the single-family residential/agricultural rate. After a series of public hearings, the original project installation was approved on July 15, 1986, with the final assessment hearing held on August 18, 1987. Enclosed on page O is the written objection submitted by Mr. Braatland regarding this trunk area storm sewer assessment. Enclosed on pages through are location maps showing the relationship of Mr. Braatland's property to the improvements installed and calculations of the final assessment figure. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS With the proper application of Special Assessment Policy 82-4, staff feels that the assessment was properly calculated and allocated to all benefitted properties consistent with all other Special Assessment policies pertaining to trunk area storm sewer. It is staff's contention that the property benefits by the referenced amount by having a controlled storm sewer outlet provided for the ponding area that incorporates a portion of Mr. Braatland's property. Therefore, staff recommends that the original assessment be reaffirmed. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CCM11TTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 3 Egan moved, Colton seconded the motion to affirm the proposed final assessment subject to the available reduction under Public Policy 86-3, if and only if, Mr. Bratland executes the appropriate documents required under the policy. All voted in favor. WILLIAMS & LARUE 1ST ADDITION STORM SEWER KEL ER BRATLAND Public works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 450 the City installed sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer services to service the Williams & LaRue 1st and 2nd Additions which are located adjacent to and west of Mr. Bratland's property. The storm sewer improvement provides drainage to Mr. Bratland's property. Mr. Bratland had never been assessed for a trunk area storm sewer improvement. Of the 4.75 acres of property owned by Mr. Bratland and after applying the "large lot credit" under Special Assessment Policy 82-4, the residual net assessable area was reduced to 1.89 acres and assessed at the single --family residential/ agricultural rate. The property benefits by having a controlled storm sewer outlet provided for the ponding area that incorporates a portion of the Bratland property. Merkley moved, Egan seconded the motion to reaffirm the original assessment with the application of Special Assessment Policy 82-4. All voted in favor. HOLLAND LAKE TRUNK STORM SEWER MARTIN DES LAURIERS Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 'VVa4R the City installed a complex trunk storm sewer system generally located along Cliff road. It provided for the installation of a storm sewer lift station on Mr. DesLauriers' property providing a controlled outlet structure for the pond located adjacent to and east of DesLauriers' property. The City's appraisal report performed by Dahlen & Dwyer, Inc. indicates that the increased market value is less than the proposed assessment and that the Staff's recommendation is that the proposed final assessment be reduced t6 $9,500.00.per the appraisal. A letter was submitted by Martin and Marie DesLauriers indicating that they objected to the assessment but would be out of town on the night of the meeting. It is the landowners' position that the project did not provide any benefits to their property. Public Works Director Tom Colbert indicated that DesLauriers were not eligible for the ''large lot credit" because their parcel was larger than 5 acres. Mr. DesLauriers was not eligible for the "large lot credit" since it can be anticipated that the lot would be subdivided ata future date. There was a credit given for future right-of-way and easement dedications. Twaddell asked whether or not there was a credit given for the lift station. Colbert indicated that the lift station had just been acquired through condemnation process -77L17it . f , /,(,,,C -Lc - A4tc-- 7' S c\i\I • • SEC. 1 27 T.27. Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 4. Project 467, Wescott Road (Parcel 10-01400-030-53) Enclosed on pages �! through /Li'7is background information pertaining to this o jection. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 467 (Wescott Road) as it pertains to Parcel 10-01400-030-53 and authorize its certification to the County. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. PROJECT 467, WESCOTT ROAD - STREETS & UTILITIES 2. Kelmer Bratland (Parcel 10-01400-030-53) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project 467 provided for the installation of sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer utilities in addition to urban street and trailway improvements. The public hearing for this project was held on March 19, 1986, with construction completed by June of 1987 and the final assessment hearing held on September 15, 1987. Enclosed on page /,P„_ is the written objection submitted by the property owner at that final assessment public hearing. Enclosed on pages 13 through are maps showing the relationship of the public improvements to the affected property. Also enclosed is a summary tabulation of how the assessments were calculated for the final assessment figure as shown. This total proposed final assessment of $24,564.55 could be reduced to $5,667.30 subject to the property owner executing the appropriate agreement in accordance with Special Assessment Policy 86-3, a copy of which is enclosed on Z 7-2 M . This agreement would allow the City to levy only those assessments benefitting the existing single residential use of this property and postponing the remainder of the assessments until such time that the property owner may elect to further subdivide the property creating additional residential lots which would subsequently each receive similar benefits from the improvements recently installed. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS For the acreage, location and development potential of this property, the staff feels that the original assessments are justified and provide adequate benefit to the property in that amount. However, in accordance with past assessment policies, the staff concurs with the reduction in the assessment to be levied subject to the property owners execution of the related agreement. The staff feels that this properly reduces the assessment burden until such time as full benefit from the improvement would be realized with a later potential subdivision of their property. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT cammrrrEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 2 LOT 20, BLOCK 1, LEXINGTON SQUARE ADDITION VINCE BAZZACHINI Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that Wescott Road had been upgraded from a rural gravel road to a four -lane roadway with concrete curb and gutter, bituminous surfacing, sidewalks and trailways from Lexington Avenue to a point 1/2 mile to the east. The completed improvements intercept the public drainage which used to run across the private property and collects it and conveys it to an underground storm sewer system. The assessments were levied at a uniform rate equally over all similar zoned properties and amount to a dollar figure of $735.20. Janet Bazzachini appeared as a landowner objecting to the assessment. Ms. Bazzachini indicated that the upgrading of the road had made 25 feet of their land inadequate. Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that the restoration done was to control erosion and that any sodding that would be needed would be the obligation of the landowner but that it may require some raking, etc. to prepare the ground for sodding. Merkley stated that he thought the landowner was concerned that the ground could not be mowed in its present condition; but, the change in the grade of the slope was necessary because of the width of the road and that it appeared to be reasonable. Merkley asked Public Works Director Colbert if it would be possible for the City to have a bobcat go out to the site to perform necessary work that would place the land in suitable condition for sodding. Colbert indicated that it would be done. Egan moved, Merkley seconded the motion to reaffirm the original assessment. All voted in favor. PARCEL 10-01400-030-53/KELMER BRATLAND Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 467 the City had installed sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer utilities in addition to urban street and trailway improvements upon Wescott Road. Upon acreage, location and development potential of the property the assessments were calculated to the figure of $24,564.55 which could be reduced to $5,467.30 subject to the property owner executing the proper agreement in acTordance with Special Assessment Policy 86-3. This policy would allow the City to levy only those assessments benefitting the single residential use of the property and postponing the remainder of the assessment until the property is further subdivided. A letter submitted by Kelmer Bratland indicated that he objected to the assessment as it conferred no benefit upon his property. Public Works Director Tom Colbert indicated that Mr. Bratland was not in concurrence with Policy 86-3. e6 e _Ae /IP •e,2—/' fr 0/1/42.0- 030.-s-3 0 z 4 0 0 •L 3y0 b 00 h S.W. 1/4 SEC.14,T.27, 10 A d t wtv f • il' 7 -+M r 10 of . � 1Y 8 400011-- Nw 1,•2 001 Y D+� 1.1 •••-- 20 3 0. 0 LMUJ'V.1"-� \s --.1030011 1101 • 02.02 - - 13 210 0u `.•1 +lrw1: • ! ikfkr: PNS ± Ov ,AS 00 s• 20 d W 21 i21 120 1 _.1G--- • 040-u 020 - 12 x 1 •+• W 14 I 310,0 31 n if .30 0010 10271,/11141 1I'IJ1 0OC •1+ 1 WESCOTT 11710 0110 1.21,,7.171 ) • Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 5. Project 444R, Holland Lake Storm Sewer (Parcel 10-02600-011- 52) Enclosed on pages /4 1 through 153 is background information pertaining to this objection. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 444R (Holland Lake Storm Sewer) as it pertains to Parcel 10- 02600-011-52 and authorize its certification to the County. IV. NEW BUSINESS C. PROJECT 444R, HOLLAND LAKE TRUNK STORM SEWER 1. Martin Des Lauriers (Parcel 10-02600-0011-52) BACKGROUND INFORMATION This project provided for the installation of a complex trunk storm sewer system generally located along Cliff Road by Holland Lake. It provided for the installation of a storm sewer lift station on Mr. Des Lauriers property providing a controlled outlet structure for the pond located adjacent to and east of this property. This project was approved on June 17, 1986, with construction being completed by July of 1987 and the final assessment hearing held on September 1, 1987. Enclosed on page In is the written objection submitted by the property owner regarding these proposed assessments. Enclosed on pages Ala_ through lite is some recent information submitted by the property owner further supporting his position regarding his original objection. Enclosed on.pages 11-7 through 3 are maps showing the relationship of the property to the proposed improvements as well as the calculations used to arrive at the finaj assessment amounts. Also enclosed on pages ,(f through are excerpts of the formal appraisal report performed on tt' is property identifying the increased value of property resulting from this improvement. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The improvement installed handles the storm water runoff from the subject property through the City's trunk storm sewer system all the way to the Minnesota River. Proper credits were applied for potential future right-of-way and easement dedications if and when the property should ever develop. It is properly assessed in accordance with City policies and procedures and the current zoning and use of the property. However, due to the fact that the City's appraisal report indicates that the increased market value is less than the proposed assessments, it is staff's recommendation that the proposed final assessment be reduced to $9,500. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 3 Egan moved, Colton seconded the motion to affirm the proposed final assessment subject to the available reduction under Public Policy 86-3, if and only if, Mr. Bratland executes the appropriate documents required under the policy. All voted in favor. WILLIAMS & LARUE 1ST ADDITION STORM SEWER KE 'a' BRATLAND Public works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 450 the City installed sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer services to service the Williams & LaRue 1st and 2nd -Additions which are located adjacent to and west of Mr. Bratland's property. The storm sewer improvement provides drainage to Mr. Bratland's property. Mr. Bratland had never been assessed for a trunk area storm sewer improvement. Of the 4.75 acres of property owned by Mr. Bratland and after applying the "large lot credit" under Special Assessment Policy 82-4, the residual net assessable area was reduced to 1.89 acres and assessed at the single-family residential/ agricultural rate. The property benefits by having a controlled storm sewer outlet provided for the ponding area that incorporates a portion of the Bratland property. Merkley moved, Egan seconded the motion to reaffirm the original assessment with the application of Special Assessment Policy 82-4. All voted in favor. HOLLAND LAKE TRUNK STORM S MARTIN DES LAURIERS Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 6/14R the City installed a complex trunk storm sewer system generally located along Cliff road. It provided for the installation of a storm sewer lift station on Mr. DesLauriers` property providing a controlled outlet structure for the pond located adjacent to and east of DesLauriers' property. The City's appraisal report performed by Dahlen & Dwyer, Inc. indicates that the increased market value is less than the proposed assessment and that the Staff's recommendation is that the proposed final assessment be reduced al $9,500.0O.'per the appraisal. A letter was submitted by Martin and Marie DesLauriers indicating that they objected to the assessment but would be out of town on the night of the meeting. It is the landowners' position that the project did not provide any benefits to their property. Public Works Director Tom Colbert indicated that DesLauriers were not eligible for the "large lot credit" because their parcel was larger than 5 acres. Mr. DesLauriers was not eligible for the "large lot credit" since it can be anticipated that the lot would be subdivided at a future date. There was a credit given for future right-of-way and easement dedications. Twaddell asked whether or not there was a credit given for the lift station. Colbert indicated that the lift station had just been acquired through condemnation process f SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 4 and that the City now controlled the lift station and that no credit was then afforded to Mr. DesLauriers. Egan asked Colbert to cement on the assertion by DesLauriers that his property would be used as a holding pond in connection with the lift station and the culvert connecting the pond to the east of the Destauriers property. Public Works Director Colbert stated that the Staff and the consulting engineers disagreed with DesLauriers and that after the "super storms" of July, 1987, that the water level in the pond to the east of the DesLauriers property did not raise to a level that it would back-up through the culvert to the DesLauriers property. Anne Marie DesLauriers was present on behalf of the property owner. Egan moved, Colton seconded, the motion to modify the original assessment to $9,500.00. All voted in favor. The meeting was then called to recess by Chairperson Twaddell. The Special Assessment Committee was reconvened at 6:30 p.m. PARCEL 10-03000-010-29/HERE ADELMANN Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 460A the City provided for the reconstruction of Nicols Road from an old rural County road ditch to an urban street section with curb and gutter and trailways. The property currently carries a commercial zoning under the Limited Business classification. Its use is under-utilized by the presence of an existing single family dwelling. In accordance with Special Assessment Policy 82-2 (Assessments Against Land Whose Present Use is Different from the Current Underlying Zoning) the property owner could reduce the proposed assessments to $9,112.50 subject to the execution of the appropriate agreements in accordance with the policy. Tom Scott, an attorney at 3460 Washington Drive, Eagan, MN, appeared on behalf of the Adelmanns. Mr. Scott indicated that he believed the present zoning on the property was R-4. Public Works Director Colbert indicated that Mr. Scott was correct. Mr. Scott indicated that the Adelmanns were the only residents on that particular stretch of Nicols Road and that its present use -would be R-1. Mr. Scott objected to the special assessments being at the R-4 classification. Mr. Scott indicated that under the present R-1 zoning that there should not be any amount included in the assessments for a trailway but that because it was being assessed under the R-4 zoning the cost was being borne by the Adelmanns. Mr. Scott indicated that he believed that the Adelmanns were the only residents being assessed at the higher rate in connection with this project. Mr. Scott indicated that his objections were based on his belief that the property had not been benefitted by the $24,000.00 assessment. Mr. Scott submitted a letter from Ray Connelly, a realtor and appraiser, stating that there has been _little if.any increase in the value of the property due to the project. 1 f 9 t --"L% � ��CiL �CJea _C.eA 1 CI <I'deW711-1-ire/ ,,,.,_„ - V /-1 /27 //-/ 8 7 y_/s= 8/ 54/57 XeiANa5t 0/5/Lee_ Z(esq lir z y6--gaS 1 /rb97 ) 0/cz, 2: e.= / X71° �QNE 2 19320 RAVINE 'e5"7W 19d 1� 7 POND y of Eagan rt of 030-00_ 67960 2 9911 d SOUTH 69110 tESMAR EAST �? I SECOND , 94. I5 16 2 4 r Sn9+-7 �,+7 .10 01 3 6 6 99'12 S:•L , 000-53 21 "6124 8 :6 11 90 L 11100 . 25 4. R 1 eY17'SIL 21.04 9 236 73 Y., 26 6696 711664 104 SEC.23, T27, R23 (c-:3 Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 6. Project 460A, Nicols Road, (Parcel 10-03000-010-29) Enclosed on pages /5S through pertaining to this objection. is background information ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 460A (Nicols Road) as it pertains to Parcel 10-03000-010-29 and authorize its certification to the County. VII. NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED) D. PROJECT 460A, NICOLS ROAD - STREETS & UTILITIES 1. Herb Adelmann (Parcel 10-03000-010-29) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project 460A provided for the reconstruction of Nicols Road (Old Cedar Avenue) from an old rural County road ditch section to an urban street section with curb and gutter and trailways. The public hearing approving this project was held on February 18, 1986, with construction being completed in 1987 and the final assessment hearing held on September 15, 1987. At that time, the property owner submitted the written objection enclosed on page _ This property currently carries a commercial zoning under the Limited Business (LB) classification. Its use is currently under-utilized by the presence of an existing single family dwelling which is the homestead of Mr. and Mrs. Adelmann. Enclosed on pages Col through Co -7 are maps referencing this parcel to the improvements as well as calculation sheets showing the amount of the proposed final assessments. In accordance with Special Assessment Policy 82-2 (enclosed on page 69-70), this property owner was given an opportunity to reduce the proposed assessments to $9,112.50 subject to the execution of the appropriate agreement in accordance with this Special Assessment policy. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The affected property was properly assessed in accordance with its zoning classificaion, and opportunities to reduce the assessment in accordance with its present use were extended to the property owner. Therefore, it is the staff's recommendation that the original assessment be reaffirmed based on its zoning classification or that the reduced assessment be certified subject to the timely execution of the required agreements. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 4 and that the City now controlled the lift station and that no credit was then afforded to Mr. DesLauriers. Egan asked Colbert to comment on the assertion by DesLauriers that his property would be used as a holding pond in connection with the lift station and the culvert connecting the pond to the east of the DesLauriers property. Public Works Director Colbert stated that the Staff and the consulting engineers disagreed with DesLauriers and that after the "super storms" of July, 1987, that the water level in the pond to the east of the DesLauriers property did not raise to a level that it would backup through the culvert to the DesLauriers property. Anne Marie DesLauriers was present on behalf of the property owner. Egan moved, Colton seconded, the motion to modify the original assessment to $9,500.00. All voted in favor. The meeting was then called to recess by Chairperson ]Waddell. The Special Assessment Committee was reconvened at 6:30 p.m. PARCEL 10-03000-010-29/HERB ADELMANN Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 460A the City provided for the reconstruction of Nicols Road from an old rural County road ditch to an urban street section with curb and gutter and trailways. The property currently carries a commercial zoning under the Limited Business classification. Its use is under-utilized by the presence of an existing single family dwelling. In accordance with Special Assessment Policy 82-2 (Assessments Against Land Whose Present Use is Different from the Current Underlying Zoning) the property owner could reduce the proposed assessments to $9,112.50 subject to the execution of the appropriate agreements in accordance with the policy. Tom Scott, an attorney at 3460 Washington Drive, Eagan, MN, appeared on behalf of the Adelmanns. Mr. Scott indicated that he believed the present zoning on the property was R-4. Public Works Director Colbert indicated that Mr. Scott was correct. Mr. Scott indicated that the Adelmanns were the only residents on that particular stretch of Nicols Road and that its present use -would be R-1. Mr. Scott objected to the special assessments being at the R-4 classification. Mr. Scott indicated that under the present R-1 zoning that there should not be any amount included in the assessments for a trailway but that because it was being assessed under the R-4 zoning the cost was being borne by the Adelmanns. Mr. Scott indicated that he believed that the Adelmanns were the only residents being assessed at the higher rate in connection with this project. Mr. Scott indicated that his objections were based on his belief that the property had not been benefitted by the $24,000.00 assessment. Mr. Scott submitted a letter from Ray Connelly, a realtor and appraiser, stating that there has been little if any increase in the value of the property due to the project. r SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CCM4ITTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 5 Mr. Scott indicated that it was his understanding that if the property had been assessed at the R-1 rate, the amount of the assessment due from the Adelmanns would be $4,557.60. Mr. Colbert indicated that Mr. Scott was correct and that there was an error in the information delivered to the Committee in that the reduced assessment available under Special Assessment Policy 82-2 would be $4,557.60. Twaddell inquired of Colbert whether the policy would provide that -the Adelmanns would.be assessed at the R-1 rate but at such time as the Adelmanns, or their successors, upgrade the use of the property to an R-3 or R-4, that the remainder of the assessment as assessed would be due. Mr. Colbert indicated affirmative, subject to the execution of the agreements in connection to Policy 82-2. Mr. Scott indicated that it is his belief that the agreement requested to be executed by the Adelmanns provides that a supplemental assessment will take place upon a future subdivision, 10, 20, even 100 years from now, based upon the rates which would be in effect at the time of such change of the use. He feels this could be long after the use and benefit of the roadway have been extinguished. Mr. Scott was fearful that the agreement would be a cloud on the title and that the Adelmanns would have no knowledge of what their responsibility would be under the supplemental assessments-.. Mr. Scott indicated that there may be a willingness to execute an agreement that provided for a set timeframe in a decreasing amount due for the benefit of the road during successive years following the execution of the agreement. Mr. Scott indicated that the present agreement is unworkable and does not foresee the Adelmanns entering into that type of an agreement. Twaddell inquired of Scott as to whether or not he felt there was a problem with the present zoning and whether the Adelmanns would be agreeable to down -zoning the property to R-1. Egan commented on whether or not the postponing of the assessments could leave the City with the burden of proof upon the rezoning or reclassification of the use of the property so that a public hearing would be required at such later date. Public Works Director Colbert indicated to Mr. Egan that the present policy requires the property owner to waive any future public hearings on the benefits derived from the public improvements. Egan inquired as to whether or not there could still be a distinct standard for the City to bear the burden of proving the public benefit at the time of subdivision or rezoning. Egan suggested that the langua in the assessment agreement set forth a waiver of the right of assessment but. not a waiver of the value of the benefit derived by the landowner, and that the value of benefit proved at a later date when the landowner submits a subdivision or zoning change. Egan noted that this was not the proper form, but that the property may be incorrectly zoned which caused a negative impact. Egan stated that he felt Special Assessment Policy 82-2 was a good policy and that he felt the property owner should waive any objection to the assessment but should not waive any objection to the benefit not exceeding the assessment. Egan indicated he would recommend that the agreements in connection with Special Assessment Policy 82-2 be modified to this extent. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 6 Merkley expressed his concern for the Adelmanns. He indicated that because of the present zoning of R-4 and the allocation of the benefits in connection with the zoning, that the Committee's hands were tied because of the miss -classification when the property was better suited as an R-1 zoning. Waddell moved, Egan seconded the motion to reaffirm the assessment of $24,370..20 with a provision that it be reduced to $4,557.60 if either of the following occur: i. The property owners down -zone the property to R-1 prior to City Council approving the reduction, or ii. The City Council approves the modification to Special Assessment Policy 82-2 which would provide for the waiver of the right of the City to assess the landowner but would not provide for a waiver by the landowner of the right to determine the amount of the benefit at the time of the change of the land use. All voted in favor. Committee Member Ray Creegan joined the Committee. LOT 1, BLOCK 2, CEDAR RIDGE 1ST ADDITION RICHARD SCRIM j Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that Project 460A provided for the reconstruction and upgrading of Nicols Road from a County rural ditch to an urban street with curb and gutter and trailways. At an earlier time the landowner indicated that the City denied direct access onto Nicols Road and that at the time of development of Cedar Ridge 1st Addition, the County controlled Nicols Road and restricted the access. Subsequently the County Road has been revoked and the jurisdiction of this roadway has been turned back to the City of Eagan. Richard Schweim appeared before the committee and indicated that he had put in Cedar Ridge Circle to gain access to their property since they were denied access directly onto Nicols Road. He stated that they bore the cost of Cedar Ridge Circle and now were being asked to pay for Nicols Road when he claims that .-ney do not derive any benefit. Mr. Schweim indicated that he is not served directly off of Nicols Road and that due to the diminished volume in traffic that Nicols Road carries, he perceives no commercial benefit to being located next to Nicols Road. Mr. Schweim indicated his willingness to pay his fair share of the assessment which he suggested might be in the neighborhood of $12,000.00, but he objected to the proposed assessment. f OBJECTION TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT #460A Ne-ccL /0-v3ccc — o/o- 2-9 Herbert and Helen Adelmann, the owners of property located at 4325 Nicols Road, Eagan, Minnesota, hereby object to the proposed special assessments against their property. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a copy of the Notice of Special Assessment to which the undersigns object. Dated this 14th day of September, 1987. HERBERT ADELMANN 14 HE EN ADELMANN M IICII. 1• 0 M•CIL 1) n�• w N.W. I/4SEC.30, ti 7 X v • • Weir' [ 14) loo .•1 II 1 • ores .1 l 1 M[ 11 OUTLOT 1 A st\ic 144f, IA "ea.. 1 1 SUBJECT! -PARCEL: r W 14 0 irk0 J n 0 50 t • O } B GLARY DRIVE •Il IIP .14 it e Sr 7P 11•U.1- • CcoO („ 2 • 41. • MMr. • fir.•+• �J 1 .0les [ :I • 7. .0 / 41 to R •A W .11 CEDAR RIDGE CIRCLE ' 1 ;7 ;1 N 0 7. lt • dI oI •••••It[r II/ •• C Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 7. Project 460A, Nicols Road, Lot 1, Block 2, Cedar Ridge 1st Addition Enclosed on pages ILethrough pertaining to this Objection. G is background information ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 460A (Nicols Road) as it pertains to Lot 1, Block 2, Cedar Ridge 1st Addition and authorize its certification to the County. VII. NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED) D. PROJECT 460A, NICOLS ROAD - STREETS & UTILITIES 2. Richard Schweim (Lot 1, Block 2, Cedar Ridge, 1st Addition) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project 460A provided for the reconstruction and upgrading of Nicols Road (Old Cedar Avenue) from a County rural ditch section to an urban street with curb and gutter and trailways. The public hearing approving this project was held on February 18, 1986, with construction being completed in 1987 and the final assessment hearing held on September 15, 1987. At that time, Mr. Schweim submitted the written objection enclosed on page 7 ;1-. Also enclosed on pages '73 through 779 are location maps and calculations pertaining to the amount of the proposed assessments. Enclosed on pages V) through 9/ are excerpts from the appraisal report ordered by the City to' evaluate the amount of the assessments in relationship to any increase in property value. In the submitted written objection, it is indicated that the City denied direct access onto Nicols Road. At the time of development, Nicols Road was then called Cedar Avenue and under the jurisdiction of Dakota County as County Road 23. It was the County who restricted access onto their County road at that time. Subsequently, this County road has been revoked and the jurisdiction of this roadway turned back to the City of Eagan. The City of Eagan does not have similar restrictions regarding direct access to this roadway. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The assessments were properly calculated and allocated in accordance with adopted policies and procedures for all similar zoned type property. Based on the appraisal by the City verifying an increase in market value at least equal to the amount of the proposed assessments, it is the staff's recommendation that the original assessment as proposed be reaffirmed. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS 9ezzsed CJazden & flat ez, Centex Pita • 4381 Nicols Road EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122 E.J. Van Overbeke City Clerk -City of Eagan - •)v Qre`s •� e49;\ tk, � September 1, 1987 Dear Mr. Van Overbeke, Regarding the notice of Special Assessment, Project #160A, against the following property: 10-16820-010-02, I hereby submit a written objection of the assessment amount for your consideration. The property described does not have direct access on to Nichols Road, in fact, the property has already been assessed for access on to Cedar Ridge Court. To stress the matter, direct access on to Nichols Road was requested by the owners at the time of planning and denied. Had the City of Eagan approved this request, the special assessment would be justifiable and the prccrty owners would be anticipating such an assessment. Based on the facts presented, the assessment is invalid, and refusal to requite is implied. Thank you for your consideration and cooperation surrounding this matter. Richard Schweim (612) 454-5311 G3 ,0 00 Ou00 i 11 p:'o 10 7 4 ,d i b ' 4v*,',..;.t w 1s. -- c„..12 i 3r 0. •s'~( \ 4 Is- 14 8 M 2 3 -.�.�•7a'$ O s O 1! X11 asst 14 past 17 . .} mss 7:3S 14 £ tr e cb 19 S w 4 uo» 5 $ -- wse..if.. .2 124...... ,,900 °.3...at o A......2,I,IKnt R 2 .a_L°� a .o P1 n 20 2 .• v• • t 0- e GLORY DRIVE CEDAR RIDGE CIRCLE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMM TTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 6 Merkley expressed his concern for the Adelmanns. He indicated that because of the present zoning of R-4 and the allocation of the benefits in connection with the zoning, that the Committee's hands were tied because of the miss -classification when the property was better suited as an R-1 zoning. Twaddell moved, Egan seconded the motion to reaffirm the assessment of $24,370..20 with a provision that it be reduced to $4,557.60 if either of the following occur: i. The property owners down --zone the property to R-1 prior to City Council approving the reduction, or ii. The City Council approves the modification to Special Assessment Policy 82-2 which would provide for the waiver of the right of the City to assess the landowner but would not provide for a waiver by the landowner of the right to determine the amount of the benefit at the time of the change of the land use. All voted in favor. Committee Member Ray Creegan joined the Committee. LOT 1, BLOCK 2, CEDAR RIDGE 1ST ADDITION RICHARD SCHWEIM Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that Project 460A provided for the reconstruction and upgrading of Nicols Road from a County rural ditch to an urban street with curb and gutter and trailways. At an earlier time the landowner indicated that the City denied direct access onto Nicols Road and that at the time of development of Cedar Ridge 1st Addition, the County controlled Nicols Road and restricted the access. Subsequently the County Road has been revoked and the jurisdiction of this roadway has been turned back to the City of Eagan. Richard Schweim appeared before the committee and indicated that he had put in Cedar Ridge Circle to gain access to their property since they were denied access cirectly onto Nicols Road. He stated that they bore the cost of Cedar Ridge Circle and now were being asked to pay for Nicols Road when he claims that :hey do not derive any benefit. Mr. Schweim indicated that he is not served directly off of Nicols Road and that due to the diminished volume in traffic that Nicols Road carries, he perceives no commercial benefit to being located next to Nicols Road. Mr. Schweim indicated his willingness to pay his fair share of the assessment which he suggested might be in the neighborhood of $1.2,000.00, but he objected to the proposed assessment. ��s SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE -4a1 1988 PAGE 7 Twaddell inquired of Mr. Colbert whether Mr. Schweim had received a corner lot credit to which Mr. Colbert answered in the affirmative. Public Works Director Colbert indicated that there are typical objections to corner lots because of the assessments confronting the landowner for each of the abutting streets, and that is the purpose behind the City granting a corner lot credit. Mr. Creegan noted his concerns and much discussion took place regarding the cost to Mr. Schweim for the installation of Cedar Ridge Circle and the denial of access to Nicols Road. Egan moved, Merkley seconded the motion to reaffirm the original assessment as proposed. Egan, Merkley, Twaddell and Creegan voted in favor; Colton voted against. LOT 3, BLOCK 1, CEDAR RIDGE 1ST ADDITION HAROLD J. MASON Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that pursuant to Project 460A, the City upgraded Nicols Road from the rural County road ditch section to an urban street with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous trailways; that as in the case with the Schweim property, Cedar Ridge Circle was required to be built because of denial of access to Nicols Road by the County. It is a corner lot which was assessed similarly to other corner lot properties located at other intersecting roads along the improvement. Harold Mason appeared as the landowner and likewise as with Schweim complained about the cost associated with Cedar Ridge Circle and the denial of direct access onto Nicols Road, together with the assessment for the upgrade of Nicols Road presently. , Merkley moved, Egan seconded, the potion to reaffirm the original assessment as proposed. Merkly, Egan and Twaddell voted in favor; Colton voted against; Creegan was absent. ,\ '\N Lor 4, BLOCK 1, LOREN PLACE CARLYLE CLARK Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that Project 442 provided for installation of utilities and the upgrading of Becker Road from T. H. 149 to Delaware Avenue. The project provided for the installation of trunk storm sewer facilities to handle drainage from the property into the City's trunk storm sewer system. The property is currently zoned Light Industrial but is currently being used as single-family residential property. That in accordance with Special Assessment Policy 82-2 the property qualifies for reduction in the assessments from the proposed $7,059.60 to $4,706.40 based on the current residential use, with the difference being postponed for the appropriate citizen's deferment, which would defer the reduced assessment under the Senior Citizen Ordinance. Carlyle Clark was present and informed the Committee that he was there solely for the purposes of executing any documents necessary to evidence the reduction under Special Assessment Policy 82-2 and the Senior Citizens Deferment Ordinance. (5(-P Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 8. Project 460A, Nicols Road, Lot 3, Block 1, Cedar Ridge 1st Addition Enclosed on pages through pertaining to this objection. 1'7 f is background information ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 460A (Nicols Road) as it pertains to Lot 3, Block 1, Cedar Ridge 1st Addition and authorize its certification to the County. VII. NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED) D. PROJECT 460a, NICOLS ROAD - STREETS & UTILITIES 3. Harold J. Mason, D.D.S. (Lot 3, Block 1, Cedar Ridge, 1st Addition) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project 460A provided for the upgrading of Nicols Road (Old Cedar Avenue) from a rural County road ditch section to an urban street with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous trailways. This project was originally approved at a public hearing on February 18, 1986, with construction completed in early 1987 and the final assessment hearing held on September 15, 1987. Enclosed on page is the written objection submitted by t1�e property owner at public hearing. Enclosed on pages O through are maps showing the location of the property to the proposed improvemwents as well as calculations used to arrive at the f na1 assessment amount. Also enclosed on pages cl/ through are excerpts of the property appraisal performed for the City evaluating the increased value of the property in relationship to the proposed assessments. that The previous restrictions for direct access onto Nicols Road (previously Cedar Avenue - County Road 23) were requirements of Dakota County as a part of the platting process. With the subsequent revocation of this County road and the jurisdictional turnback to the City of Eagan, there no longer exists the restriction for this access. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The assessments were properly calculated in accordance with all appropriate special assessments policies and procedures for property of like zoning. This corner lot parcel was similarly assessed to other corner lot properties locating at other intersecting roads along this improvement. Based on the City's appraisal verifying that the increase in market value was at least equal to the amount of the proposed assessments, the staff recommends that the original proposed assessments be reaffirmed. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNL-4411 1988 PAGE 7 Twaddell inquired of Mr. Colbert whether Mr. Schweim had received a corner lot credit to which Mr. Colbert answered in the affirmative. Public Works Director Colbert indicated that there are typical objections to corner lots because of the assessments confronting the landowner for each of the abutting streets, and that is the purpose -behind the City granting a corner lot credit. Mr. Creegan noted his concerns and much discussion took place regarding the cost to Mr. Schweim for the installation of Cedar Ridge Circle and the denial of access to Nicols Road. Egan moved, Merkley seconded -the motion to reaffirm the original assessment as proposed. Egan, Merkley, Twaddell and Creegan voted in favor; Colton voted against. LOT 3, BLOCK 1, CEDAR RIDGE 1ST ADDITION HAROLD J. MASON Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that pursuant to Project 460A, the City upgraded Nicols Road from the rural County road ditch section to an urban street with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous trailways; that as in the case with the Schweim property, Cedar Ridge Circle was required to be built because of denial of access to Nicols Road by the County. It is a corner lot which was assessed similarly to other corner lot properties located at other intersecting roads along the improvement. Harold Mason appeared as the landowner and likewise as with Schweim complained about the cost associated with Cedar Ridge Circle and the denial of direct access onto Nicols Road, together with the assessment for the upgrade of Nicols Road presently. Merkley moved, Egan seconded, the motion to reaffirm the original assessment as proposed. Merkly, Egan and Twaddell voted in favor; Colton voted against; Creegan was absent. LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LOREN PLACE CARLYLE CLARK Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that Project 442 provided for installation of utilities and the upgrading of Becker Road from T. H. 149 to Delaware Avenue. The project provided for the installation of trunk storm sewer facilities to handle drainage from the property into the City's trunk storm sewer system. The property is currently zoned Light Industrial but is currently being used as single-family residential property. That in accordance with Special Assessment Policy 82-2 the property qualifies for reduction in the assessments from the proposed $7,059.60 to $4,706.40 based on, the current residential use, with the difference being postponed for the appropriate citizen's deferment, wh;.Ch would defer the reduced assessment under the Senior Citizen Ordinance. Carlyle Clark was present and informs 'the Committee that he was there solely for the purposes of executing any documents necessary to evidence the reduction under Special Assessment Policy 82-2 and the Senior Citizens Deferment Ordinance. RECEIVED SEP 1 19a7 H. J. MASON DDS 2574 90 Street East Inver Grove Heights, MN 55075 1 September 1987 Eagan City Council and Special Assessments City of Eagan - Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, PAIN 55121 My property, identified as 10-16820-030-017, Lot 3, Block 1, Cedar Ridge 1st Addition, is located on the corner of Cedar Ridge Circle and Nicols Road. It is proposed that I should be charged $10,329.51 for the improvement of Nicols Road. My property is entirely located on Cedar Ridge Circle, Nicols Road is on my eastern side and the edge of my property is 20 feet west of the new curb on Nicols. When I built my building I made special recuest that my access be .c`trom Cedar Avenue. The Council responded Fiat my property is located on Cedar Ridge Circle and not Cedar Avenue, therefore my only access was and is Cedar Ridge Circle. This rer.uired me to pay $1Op00.00 for the construction of Cedar Ridge Circle. Further, I had to request special assignment of my address to be "Cedar Avenue" instead of Cedar Ridge Circle so my patients could see I was still in the same area as I was before the Highway construction moved us. I am not interested in donating to Nicols Road improvement as my property and access is on Cedar Ridge Circle. Plainly,this road improvement is for the benefit of Cedarvale Shopping Center and the Federal Land Bank properties on Cliff Road. This road improvement does not benefit my property or my Dental ?ractice, as I have established clientle who find me specifically. In closing, I hope that this letter covers all bases. I do not feel that my property on Cedar Ridge Circle should be assessed any more than any property located on Diffley or Cliff Road or .any other intersecting road. If the assessemnt of my property is not dropped completely, I will have to seek help from several other properties that fall into my same catagory to secure legal help in settling this. Thank you,Att}-°)"\- dear. Harold J. M on DDS • 011-27 20? b st .LL 0 00.RCEL 0 W 0 13 ` ( 1•11T• •0•r• r0 r. - �J2Y• •W, •rr•p IM•T •r. •••:r ,,• M [V••• •1 r. • M'N •• [ OVTLOT 4• TT. . •} 4 Q9• t 2•2.111 i•2 04 DOG NO. 500530 00C_NO. 523 c 50 r c [ Et GLORY c u DRIVE 9 v 1 TAT .7 •,5 00 c • 3 /•0 0.0. f• 2T0 13114 t ••••f\a• StAl4iacr cz_" 'ARca. :Q. 45) .1•Q V 2T[ T• • ••57TT[ •2. 11 • • •fr CEDAR RIDGE CIRCLE s xx•• Co 2 • Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 9. Project 442 Alternate, Becker Road, Lot 4, Block 1, Loren Place Enclosed on pages / %3 through 111 is background information pertaining to this objection. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 442 Alternate, (Becker Road) as it pertains to Lot 4, Block 1, Loren Place and authorize its certification to the County. i '? ;--- VII. NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED) E. PROJECT 442 ALT BECKER ROAD (STREETS & UTILITIES) 1. Carlyle Clark (Lot 4, Block 1 Loren Place) BACKGROUND INFORMATION This project provided for the installation of utilities and the pgrading of Becker Road (Old County Road 63A) from T.H. 149 to Delaware Avenue. This project also provided for the installation of trunk storm sewer facilities to handle the drainage from this property as well as others within the drainage district into the City's trunk storm sewer system. This project was approved on May 21, 1985, with construction being completed in the fall of 1986 with the final assessme t hearing being held on September 1, 1987. Enclosed on page qLi is a copy of the written objection submitted a that final assessment public hearing. Enclosed on pages t_ through /O,3- are maps showing the relationship of the property to the proposed improvements as well as the calculations used to arrive at the final assessment figure. The property is currently zoned Light Industrial (LI), but is currently being used as a single-family residential property. In accordance with Policy 82-2 enclosed on page/05-/0,4/ this property would qualify for a reduction in the assessment from the proposed $7,059.60 to $4,706.40 based on this current residential use with the difference being postponed per the appropriate Citizens Deferrment which could further defer this reduced assessment until the property changed ownership or developed to a different use. This property is currently for sale as witnessed by a real estate sign posted on the property. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that Special Assessment Policy 82-2 be made available to reduce the assessment obligation as referenced with the difference being postponed until a change in use at a later date. Further, it is recommended that the application for Senior Citizens Deferrment be approved which would defer this reduced assessment under the Senior Citizens Deferrment Ordinance. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS '13 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE -441:11988 PAGE 7 Twaddell inquired of Mr. Colbert whether Mr. Schweim had received a corner lot credit to which Mr. Colbert answered in the affirmative. Public Works Director Colbert indicated that there are typical objections to corner lots because of the assessments confronting the landowner for each of the abutting streets, and that is the purpose behind the City granting a corner lot credit. Mr. Creegan noted his concerns and much discussion took place regarding the cost to Mr. Schweim for the installation of Cedar Ridge Circle and the denial of access to Nicols Road. Egan moved, Merkley seconded the motion to reaffirm the original assessment as proposed. Egan, Merkley, Twaddell and Creegan voted in favor; Colton voted against. LOT 3, BLOCK 1, CEDAR RIDGE 1ST ADDITION HAROLD J. MASON Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that pursuant to Project 460A, the City upgraded Nicols Road from the rural County road ditch section to an urban street with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous trailways; that as in the case with the Schweim property, Cedar Ridge Circle was required to be built because of denial of access to Nicols Road by the County. It is a corner lot which was assessed similarly to other corner lot properties located at other intersecting roads along the improvement. Harold Mason appeared as the landowner and likewise as with Schweim complained about the cost associated with Cedar Ridge Circle and the denial of direct access onto Nicols Road, together with the assessment for the upgrade of Nicols Road presently. Merkley moved, Egan seconded, the motion to reaffirm the original assessment as proposed. Merkly, Egan and Twaddell voted in favor; Colton voted against; Creegan was absent. LOT 4, BLOCK 1, LOREN PLACE CARLYLE CLARK Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that Project 442 provided for installation of utilities and the upgrading of Becker Road from T. H. 149 to Delaware Avenue. The project provided for the installation of trunk storm sewer facilities to handle drainage from the property into the City's trunk storm sewer system. The property is currently zoned Light Industrial but is currently being used as single-family residential property. That in accordance with Special Assessment Policy 82-2 the property qualifies for reduction in the assessments from the proposed $7,059.60 to $4,706.40 based on the current residential use, with the difference being postponed for the appropriate citizen's deferment, which would defer the reduced assessment under the Senior Citizen Ordinance. Carlyle Clark was present and informed the Committee that he was there solely for the purposes of executing any documents necessary to evidence the reduction under Special Assessment Policy 82-2 and the Senior Citizens Deferment Ordinance. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 8 Creegan moved, Egan seconded the motion to reaffirm the assessment of $7,059.60 subject to reduction under Special Assessment Policy 82-2 to $4,706.40 upon the appropriate execution of documents and for the further deferment of the reduced assessment under the Senior Citizens Deferment Ordinance. ALl voted in favor. ALOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 1, KSTP ADDITION PAUL ABBOTT Public Works Director Colbert stated that Project 442 ALT. provided for the upgrading of Becker Road with City utilities and upgrading from a gravel rural ditch County road to an urban,comrercial/industrial street. Total proposed assessment obligations against Lots 1 and 2 of the KSTP Addition amount of,$55,969.26 rather than the amount referenced in the property owner's written objection. Because the apparent present use of the property is under utilized from its allowable zoning, the City's appraisal has indicated that the increase in market value in its present state is only $25,000.00. The remainder should be postponed until such time as the property develops to a higher or more intense use which would then reactivate the postponed portion of the assessment. John Bannigan, Attorney with Bannigan & Kelly, appeared representing Paul Abbott. Mr. Bannigan indicated that there is no increase in the fair market value of the property owned by his client and that if the City intended to assess his client the $55,900.00, the fair market value needed to increase by $55,900.00. Mr. Bannigan indicated that the 1985 tax statements as prepared by the County Assessor's Office for both lots showed a market value of $85,400.00. In 1988 after completion of the project, the County Assessor's market value is stated at $103,200.00. Mr. Bannigan asserted that much of that $17,800.00 increase is due to general market value increase for Eagan in general, together with general inflation. Mr. Bannigan indicated that present Minnesota law allows the property owner to submit the County estimated market values as evidence of the value of the given property. Mr. Bannigan questioned the appraisal conducted by Dahlen & Dwyer on behalf of the City and in particular the wording that the assessments were approximately $25,000.00 can be substantiated for the property. He ointed out that the language is not an appraisal and may be hedging on the part of Mr. Dwyer. Mr. Bannigan stated that the burden on the City is to prove that the proposed assessment is directly attributable to the benefits provided to the property from the project. Mr. Bannigan indicated that his client would not voluntarily sign any agreement to pay an additional $30,000.00 over the $25,000.00 set forth in the Dahlen & Dwyer appraisal, let alone accept the figure proposed by Dahlen & Dwyer. In response to inquires from Twaddell, Director of Public works Colbert indicated that the County Assessor's Office may not have been on the site or been aware of the recent improvements when setting its market value. Mr. Bannigan indicated that under the County Assessor's valuations, the interior of the two lots increased by $5,000.00 and the corner lot increased by $12,100.00. In C- t /Js / 0 t -ii , „--:, -(--- ‹.) { I cLs ,c _sic 11/1 v L --f- t (.--' c') e::' __C ..---1 c_‘:, C i I- \ _C r CLL 4-1.7 VI_ _M__ \ , , -) . ._,.._ (.„,., .---) , 1 A J 7 S_C: ___-'.52.;" y-../1 ,e v't_ . 1 1--e.: 1 C- 1 I i ,..c, _ r -- 1,--c; o „A- i, t 2 z ow) — c eva&Le )c,4 -c cu.' 7-/,.6----e7 17(,, Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 10. Project 442 Alternate, Becker Road, Lots 1 & 2, Block 1, KSTP Addition Enclosed on pages 117 through pertaining to this obj ction. is background information Also enclosed on pages through is an Objection to Assessment made to Distri ourt regard ng the above -referenced project. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll 442 Alternate, (Becker Road), as it pertains to Lots 1, KSTP Addition, and authorize its certification to the public for Project 1 & 2, Block the County. VII. NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED) E. PROJECT 442 ALT., BECKER ROAD (STREETS & UTILITIES) 2. Paul Abbott (Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 KSTP Addition) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project 442 Alt. provided for the upgrading of Becker Road (formerly County Road 63A) with City utilities and upgrading from a gravel rural ditch County road to an urban commercial/industrial street. This project was originally approved by Council action on May 21, 1985 with construction being completed during the early part of 1987 and the final assessment hearing held on September 15, 1987. Enclosed on page /0 is a written objection submitted by the property owner at the time of this final as essment public hearing. Enclosed on pages /07 through /j are maps referencing the property to the improvements under this project and also calculations used to arra e at the final assessment amount. Also enclosed on pages //j through /A, is an excerpt of the appraisal performed for the City of Eagan to determine the monetary benefits received by the property as a result of these improvements. It should be noted that the total proposed assessment obligations against Lots 1 & 2 of the KSTP Addition amount $55,969.26 rather than the amount referenced in the property owners written objection. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The assessments were calculated in accordance with past City policies and procedures uniformally against all similarly zoned property. However, because the apparent present use of the property is under-utilized from its allowable zoning, the City's appraisal has indicated that the increase in market value in its present state is only $25,000.00. Therefore, it is recommended that the proposed assessment be proportionately reduced according to the estimated increase in market value of $25,000.00 and that the remainder be postponed until such time that the property develops to a higher or more intense use which would then reactivate the postponed portion of these assessments. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS: SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PACE 8 Creegan moved, Egan seconded t motion to reaffirm the assessment of $7,059.60 subject to reduction er Special Assessment Policy 82-2 to $4,706.40 upon the appropriate ccution of documents and for the further deferment of the reduced ssessment under the Senior Citizens Deferment Ordinance. All voted ' favor. ALOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 1, KSTP ADDITION PAUL ABBOTT Public Works Director Colbert stated that Project 442 ALT. provided for the upgrading of Becker Road with City utilities and upgrading from a gravel rural ditch County road to an urban commercial/industrial street. Total proposed assessment obligations against Lots 1 and 2 of the KSTP Addition amount of $55,969.26 rather than the amount referenced in the property owner's written objection. Because the apparent present use of the property is under utilized from its allowable zoning, the City's appraisal, has indicated that the increase in market value in its present state is only $25,000.00. The remainder should be postponed until such time as the property develops to a higher or more intense use which would then reactivate the postponed portion of the assessment. John Bannigan, Attorney with Bannigan & Kelly, appeared representing Paul Abbott. Mr. Bannigan indicated that there is no increase in the fair market value of the property owned by his client and that if the City intended to assess his client the $55,900.00, the fair market value needed to increase by $55,900.00. Mr. Bannigan indicated that the 1985 tax statements as prepared by the County Assessor's Office for both lots showed a market value of $85,400.00. In 1988 after completion of the project, the County Assessor's market value is stated at $103,200.00. Mr. Bannigan asserted that much of that $17,800.00 increase is due to general market value increase for Eagan in general, together with general inflation. Mr. Bannigan indicated that present Minnesota law allows the property owner to submit the County estimated market values as evidence of the value of the given property. Mr. Bannigan questioned the appraisal conducted by Dahlen & Dwyer on behalf of the City and in particular the wording that the assessments were approximately $25,000.00 can be substantiated for the property. He ointed out that the language is not an appraisal and may be hedging on tha'oart of Mr. Dwyer. Mr. Bannigan stated that the burden on the City is to prove that the proposed assessment is directly attributable to the benefits provided to the property from the project. Mr. Bannigan indicated that his client would not voluntarily sign any agreement to pay an additional $30,000.00 over the $25,000.00 set forth in the Dahlen & Dwyer appraisal, let alone accept the figure proposed by Dahlen & Dwyer. In response to inquires from Twaddell, Director of Public works Colbert indicated that the County Assessor's Office may not have been on the site or been aware of the recent improvements when setting its market value. Mr. Bannigan indicated that under the County Assessor's valuations, the interior of the two lots increased by $5,000.00 and the corner lot increased by $12,100.00. In 1 f D 9 SPECIAL ASSES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 9 is CCM1ITTEE MINUTES conclusion, Mr. Bannigan indicated that out of the $17,800.00, the City would have to ferret out how much was borne by market conditions, general inflation, etc. versus that which is directly attributable to the public improvements benefitting the property. Committee Member Egan inquired of Mr. Bannigan whether or not to resolve all matters, if Mt. Bannigan would accept the $17,800.00 figure Mr. Bannigan indicated that he would need to discuss that with his client, but if he were to say 'yes', that would be premised on the waiver of the City of all future hook-up charges, especially those that may be imposed against a future owner who wants to hook-up to the water system. At this point, Mr. Bannigan would not recommend to his client the acceptance of any figure in excess of the combined increase shown on the tax statements shown by the County. Public Works Director Colbert indicated that it is only fair that if it is determined that there is no benefit for the water main being adjacent to the property, that at some future date they wanted to hook into the water main, that they should pay a connection charge. Mr. Bannigan indicated that the waiver of connection charges was only in response to the committee member's inquiry as to the acceptance of the $17,800.00 figure by Mr. Abbott. Mr. Bannigan indicated that if a recommendation were made to the Council to negotiate a settlement at $17,800.00, it must be understood to mean that the City would waive any future connection charges imposed upon this or any future owner. Committee Member Egan indicated that due to the large discrepancy between the Dahlen & Dwyer appraisal and the $17,800.00, it would be difficult for him to recommend a settlement at $17,800.00. Committee Member Merkley inquired as to how many or what appraisal is determinative as to the benefitted amount. Committee member Egan and Director of Public Works Colbert indicated that it is the most creditable. Mr. Creegan expressed concern regarding the language used by Dwyer in the appraisal and inquired whether or not that could be made more clear. Creegan moved, Egan seconded, the motion to recommend that the proposed assessment be reduced to $25,000.00. All voted in favor. Creegan moved, Egan seconded the motion to amend the previously adopted recommendation to include as part of the recommendation that the remainder of the total proposed assessment be postponed until such time as the property developes to a higher or more intense use which would then reactivate the postponed portion of the assessment. All voted in favor. PARCEL 10-2100-010--07/TODD & ELLEN IRANZ Director of Public Works Colbet stated that under Project 455 the City installed the watetmain and storm sewer utilities along with upgrading Deerwood Drive from its previous gravel road rural ditch section to an urban street with concrete sidewalks and trailways between 35E and Pilot Knob Road. The property qualifies under Special Assessment Policy 86-3 because of its characteristics as a large unplatted property. Under the terms of the policy �S 1 OBJECTION TO ASSESSMENT I, Paul M Abbott, hereby make this objection to assessments as provided in M.S. 429.061. I object to the planned assessments by the City of Eagan against my property at 3.504 Dodd Road, Eagan, legally described as Lots 1 and 2, KSTP Addition, Dakota County, Minnesota. I believe the property identification numbers are 10-40950-010 and 10-40950-020. The grand total of planned assessments by the City of Eagan against my property at this time appears to be $60,716.81. I object to the assessment because my property was not benefited, I did not want the improvments, the planned assessments were not based on the benifits to the respective owners, and the planned assessments is unconstitutional, since it is far more than the benifit to my property. /7/4 rZR174, Paul M. Abbott /S-- 57 p 2oS z`/ Z - IN1 • E 10 PARK ia 404 40 ".T 01 0'0• aa - - • .0 14 5 2 011 3.„ v t- 00 ZS 4.• 2 341 70, 7. 0011 000 0:). 0l • 440.4 14.41. .21 P..,00 0.0. 40 • AK"A gaj Nry JOHN F. BANNIGAN. JR. PATRICK J. KELLY JAMES J. HANTON Municipal Clerk City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P.O. Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 Dear Municipal Clerk: BANNIGAN & KELLY, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 409 MIDWEST FEDERAL BUILDING STH AND CEDAR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 (6121224-3781 September 28, 1988 JANET WILEBSKI LEGAL ASSISTANT RE: Paul W. Abbott vs. City of Eagan Enclosed and served upon you by U.S. Mail please find a copy of an OBJECTION TO ASSESSMENT as it regards the above -captioned matter and Project 442ALT. JB:cge Enclosure C: Mr. Paul W. Abbott Sincerely yours, P.A. John .anniga, John : anniga STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA PAUL W. ABBOTT, Appellant, vs. CITY OF EAGAN, Dakota County, Minnesota, a municipal corporation, Respondent. Case Type: Assessment Appeal DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT Court File No: OBJECTION TO ASSESSMENT IN RE: APPEAL FROM LEVY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR LOCAL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PURSUANT TO MINN. STAT. Ch. 429 TO: MUNICIPAL CLERK and/or PRESIDING OFFICER of the CITY OF EAGAN, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, P.O. Box 21199, Eagan, MN 55121. YOU, AND EACH OF YOU, WILL PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Paul W. Abbott, through the undersigned, his attorneys, objects to the amount of the special assessment proposed to be considered and levied on Thursday, October 6, 1988 for Project 442ALT. The grounds for the objection to the proposed assessment are that the said proposed assessment exceeds the special benefits to the property derived from the public improvement known as Project 442ALT. kg5 The purpose of this objection to assessment is to comply with the provisions of Minn. Stat. §429.061, Subd. 2 thereof, as amended, and to preserve the rights of the owner herein to appeal to District Court pursuant to the provisions of Minn. Stat. §429.081 thereof, as amended. Dated this 28th day of September, 1988. BANNIGAN & .'LY • Banniga ey No. 4546 Midwest Federal Bui . ing 50 E. 5th Street St. Paul, MN 55101 (612) 224-3781 Attorneys for Appellant, Paul W. Abbott -2- Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 11. Project 455 Deerwood Drive - Parcel 10-02100-010-07 Enclosed on pages pertaining to this o through jection. :L. -is background information ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 455 Deerwood Drive, as it pertains to Parcel 10-02100-010-07 and authorize its certification to the County. (27 VII. NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED) F. PROJECT 455, DEERWOOD DRIVE (STREETS & UTILITIES) 1. TODD & ELLEN FRANZ (PARCEL 10-2100-010-07) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project 455 provided for the installation of watermain and storm sewer utilities along with upgrading Deerwood Drive from its previous gravel road rural ditch section to an urban street with concrete sidewalks and trailways between 35E and Pilot Knob Road. A public hearing was originally held on January 21, 1986 with construction occurring during 1986 and completion in 1987 with the final assessment hearing held on August 18, 1987. Enclosed on page 0 is a written objection submitted by the property owner at that final assessment public hearing. Enclosed on pages na) through /3/ are maps referencing the location of the property to the improvements and the assessable areas as well as the calculations used to arrive at the fin _ assessment obligation. Enclosed on pages /3 ..-through %3 is an excerpt from the appraisal performed for the City of Eagan to evaluate the increase in market value to the property associated from the improvements installed under this project. All assessments were calculated and allocated in accordance with present City policies, procedures and applied against all comparatively zoned property equally. While the appraisal report indicates that only $8,500 worth of benefit has accrued to the existing property immediately as a result of this project, it also justifies the amount of the total assessment should the property ever subdivide and be developed to its ultimate density and highest use. Enclosed on pages 139 through '`Ii is a copy of Special Assessment Policy 86-3 which addresses excessive special assessment obligation burdens to large unplatted property. This parcel would qualify to have the assessment reduced accordingly in accordance with this policy. If the appropriate agreement were executed by the property owners, the assessments could be revised as follows: IMPROVEMENT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT REDUCED ASSESSMENT Lateral Benefit from Trunk Watermain $ 3,918.75 Trunk Area Watermain 3,570.00 Water Service 930.06 Storm Sewer Lateral 5,265.10 Streets 10,708.50 TOTALS $24,392.41 B� $ 1,187.50 1,190.00 930.06 1,595.00 3,245.00 $ 8,147.56 Under Policy 86-3, the amount of assessments to be levied against this parcel are within the appraised increase value of the property and in line with postponing the additional assessment obligations until a later date if, and when, the property were ever developed to a higher or more intense use. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information contained in the City appraisal and the availability of postponement of excessive assessments under Policy 86-3, it is recommended that the assessments be reduced to $8,147.56 subject to the execution of the appropriate agreements by the affected property owners within a reasonable time frame. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS: SPECIAL ASSES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 9 is COMMITTEE MINUTES conclusion, Mr. Bannigan indicated that out of the $17,800.00, the City would have to ferret out how much was borne by market conditions, general inflation, etc. versus that which is directly attributable to the public improvements benefitt\ng the property. Committee Member Egan inquired of Mr. Bannigan whether or not to resolve all matters, if Mr. Bannigan would accept the $17,800.00 figure Mr. Bannigan indicated that he would need to discuss that with his client, but if he were to say 'yes', that would be premised on the waiver of the City of all future hook-up charges, especially those that may be imposed against a future owner who wants to hook-up to the water system. At this point, Mr. Bannigan would not recommend to his client the acceptance of any figure in excess of the combined increase shown on the tax statements shown by the County. Public Works Director Colbert indicated that it is only fair that if it is determined that there is no benefit for the water main being adjacent to the property, that at some future date they wanted to hook into the water main, that they should pay a connection charge. Mr. Bannigan indicated that the waiver of connection charges was only in response to the committee member's inquiry as to the acceptance of the $17,800.00 figure by Mr. Abbott. Mr. Bannigan indicated that if a recommendation were made to the Council to negotiate a settlement at $17,800.00, it must be understood to mean that the City would waive any future connection charges imposed upon this or any future owner. • Committee Member Egan indicated that due to the large discrepancy between the Dahlen & Dwyer appraisal and the $17,800.00, it would be difficult for him to recommend a settlement at $17,800.00. Committee Member Merkley inquired as to how many or what appraisal is determinative as to the benefitted amount. Committee member Egan and Director of Public Works Colbert indicated that it is the most creditable. Mr. Creegan expressed concern regarding the language used by Dwyer in the appraisal and. inquired whether or not that could be made more clear. Creegan moved, Egan seconded, the motion to recommend that the proposed assessment be reduced to $25,000.00. All voted in favor. Creegan moved, Egan seconded the motion to amend the previously adopted recommendation to include as part of the recommendation that the remainder of the total proposed assessment be postponed until such time as the property developes to a higher or more intense use which would then reactivate the postponed portion of the assessment. All voted in favor. PARCEL 10-2100-010--07/TODD & ELLEN FRANZ Director of Public Works Colbert stated that under Project 455 the City installed the watermain and storm sewer utilities along with upgrading Deerwood Drive from its previous gravel road rural ditch section to an urban street with concrete sidewalks and trailways between 35E and Pilot Knob Road. The property qualifies under Special Assessment Policy 86-3 because of its characteristics as a large unplatted property. Under the terms of the policy SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 10 and upon execution of the required agreements by the landowner, the proposed assessment could be reduced to $8,147.56 with the balance of the proposed assessments being postponed under Policy 86-3 upon the execution of the appropriate agreements. Todd Franz appeared as the landowner and handed out several papers to the committee memebers. These papers included September, 1987 letter from David Keller to Mr. Eugene VanOverbeke regarding the Bryant property condemnation, minutes of the March 3, 1987 Council meeting, letter from Dave Keller to Mr. Tom Colbert dated February 17, 1987 regarding Project 455 - Deerwood Drive Assessments, letter frau Daniel E. Dwyer of Dahlen & Dwyer, Inc. addressed to David G. Keller dated January 27, 1987 regarding Deerwood Drive assessments and minutes of the December 16, 1986 Council meeting. Mr. Franz indicated that he had received $3,250.00 in connection with the granting of the easement to the City but now was being faced with $24,000.00 in assessments, while the owners of the Bryant and McCarthy properties, also involved in Project 455, had exchanged checks with the City of Eagan with regard to payment for the acquisition of the easements and payment for the assessments in equal amounts. Mr. Franz stated that he did not know that he had an option regarding the handling of the assessment payment. Mr. Colbert indicated that each of the Bryant and McCarthy properties were involved in condemnation and that the payments were made in light of settlement of the litigation. Mr. Franz spoke against postponement of any assessments against his property in that he felt it would be unfair to impose the postponed assessments against his properties which were not done on the Bryant and McCarthy pieces. Mr. Merkley indicated his support of Special Assessment Policy 86-3 in that the only way the postponed assessments would be realized by the Franzs was if they were to change the use of their property. Egan moved, Colton seconded the motion to reduce the proposed assessment to $8,147.56 subject to the execution of the appropriate documents required under said policy and to postpone the remainder of the assessments under Policy 86-3 based upon said policy being revised to reflect the waiver of the right to assess but not the waiver of the proof of the value of the benefit. All voted in favor. PARCEL 10-0210(0)10-08/HENRY & LOUISE FPANZ Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 455 the City had installed a watermain and storm sewer utilities and upgraded Deerwood Drive from_a gravel rural ditch road into an urban street with curb and gutter, sidewalks and trailways. Mr. Colbert indicated that under Special Assessment Policy 86-3 the Franzs would be eligible to reduce the proposed assessment based upon_ their property being a large unplatted property. NOTICE OF OBJECTION TO ASSESSMENT The undersigned, Todd Franz and Ellen Franz, as owners of a certain parcel of property included in improvement project number 455 for the City of Eagan, do hereby object to the assessment as it relates to property owned by the undersigned. Todd Franz 1 ' Ellen Franz 0 1525 Deerwood Drive, Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Street address of owners" property L91 Li Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 12. Project 455 Deerwood Drive - Parcel 10-02100-010-08 Enclosed on pages pertaining to this through ction. alis background information ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 455 Deerwood Drive, as it pertains to Parcel 10-02100-010-08 and authorize its certification to the County. VII. NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED) F. PROJECT 455, DEERWOOD DRIVE (STREETS & UTILITIES) 2. Henry & Louise Franz (Parcel 10-02100-010-08) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project 455 provided for the installation of watermain and storm sewer utilities and the upgrading of Deerwood Drive from a gravel road rural ditch road into an urban street with curb and gutter, sidewalks and trailways. This project was approved on January 21, 1986 with construction being completed in the early part of 1987 and the final assessment hearing held on August 18, 1987. Enclosed on page !!tL is the written objection submitted by the property owner at that final assessment public hearing. Enclosed on page 145 is a recent letter further describing his objections pertaining to these assessments. Enclosed on pages through i51 are maps showing the relationship of the property in question to the improvements installed under this project as well as the calculations used to arrive at the final assessment obligation. Enclosed on pages /5? through /(q ' is an excerpt from the appraisal report performed for the City evaluating the increase in value to the property associated with the improvements installed under this project. Enclosed on pages 6-3 through /(j7 is a copy of Special Assessment Policy 6-3 which addresses excessive special assessment obligation burdens to large unplatted property. This parcel would qualify to have the assessment reduced accordingly in accordance with this policy. If the appropriate agreement were executed by the property owners, the assessments could be revised as follows: IMPROVEMENT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT REDUCED ASSESSMENT Lateral Benefit from Trunk Watermain $ 3,534.12 Trunk Area Watermain 6,545.00 Water Service 930.06 Storm Sewer Lateral 4,748.32 Streets 9,657.44 TOTALS $25,414.94 $ 1,187.50 1,190.00 930.06 1,595.00 3,245.00 $ 8,147.56 Under policy 86-3, the amount of assessments to be levied against this parcel are within the appraised increase value of the property and in line with postponing the additional assessment obligations until a later date if, and when, the property were ever developed to a higher or more intense use. 1Q� STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information contained in the City appraisal and the availability of postponement of excessive assessments under Policy 86-3, it is recommended that the assessments be reduced to $8,147.56 subject to the execution of the appropriate agreements by the affected property owners within a reasonable time frame. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS • SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES .TUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 10 and upon execution of the required agreements by the landowner, the proposed assessment could be reduced to $8,147.56 with the balance of the proposed assessments being postponed under Policy 86-3 upon the execution of the appropriate agreements. Todd Franz appeared as the larowner and handed out several papers to the committee memebers. These papers included September, 1987 letter from David Keller to Mr. Eugene VanOverbeke regarding the Bryant property condemnation, minutes of the March 3, 1987 Council meeting, letter from Dave Keller to Mr. Tom Colbert dated February 17, 1987 regarding Project 455 - Deerwood Drive Assessments, letter from Daniel E. Dwyer of Dahlen & Dwyer, Inc. addressed to David G. Keller dated January 27, 1987 regarding Deerwood Drive assessments and minutes of the December 16, 1986 Council meeting. Mr. Franz indicated that he had received $3,250.00 in connection with the granting of the easement to the City but now was being faced with $24,000.00 in assessments, while the owners of the Bryant and McCarthy properties, also involved in Project 455, had exchanged checks with the City of Eagan with regard to payment for the acquisition of the easements and payment for the assessments in ecual amounts. Mr. Franz stated that he did not know that he had an option, regarding the handling of the assessment payment. Mr. Colbert indicated that each of the Bryant and McCarthy properties were involved in condemnation and that the payments were made in light of settlement of the litigation. Mr. Franz spoke against postponement of any assessments against his property in that he felt it would be unfair to impose the postponed assessments against his properties which were not done on the Bryant and McCarthy pieces. Mr. Merkley indicated his support of Special Assessment Policy 86-3 in that the only way the postponed assessments would be realized by the Ftanzs was if they were to change the use of their property. Egan moved, Colton seconded the motion to reduce the proposed assessment to $8,147.56 subject to the execution of the appropriate documents required under said policy and to postpone the remainder of the assessments under Policy 86-3 based upon said policy being revised to reflect the waiver of the right to assess but not the waiver of the proof of the value of the benefit. All voted in favor. PARCEL 10--02100-010-08/HENRY & LOUISE FRANZ Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 455 the City had installed a watermain and storm sewer utilities and upgraded Deerwood Drive from a gravel rural ditch road into an urban street with curb and gutter, sidewalks and trailways. Mr. Colbert indicated that under Special Assessment Policy 86-3 the Franzs would be eligible to reduce the proposed assessment based upon their property being a large unplatted property. 'Llq(ko SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 30, 1988 PAGE 11 Henry Franz was present on behalf of the landowner. Mr. Franz indicated that he was not sure how he could pay for all of the assessments that the City of Eagan was taxing against the property. Committee Member Merkley assured Mr. Franz that the purpose behind Special Assessment Policy 86-3 was not to force Mr. Franz to lose his property but rather to postpone a large portion of the assessment for benefit his property receives until such time as Mr. Franz chose to change the use. Egan moved, Creegan seconded, the motion to recommend the reduction in the proposed assessment to $8,147.56 under Policy 86-3 subject to the execution of the appropriate agreements by the property owner and that the remainder of the proposed assessments be postponed pursuant to Policy 86-3 as revised. All voted in favor. PARCEL. 10-02100-011-77/ELMER HEUER, Public works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 455 the City installed watermain and storm 'sewer utilities and upgraded Deerwood Drive from a rural ditch gravel road, to an urban street with concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trailways from I-35 to Pilot Knob Road. Mr. Colbert indicated that the appraisal performed by Dahien & Dwyer on behalf of the City indicates that there is only an increase in value of $8,500.00 realized at the present time based on the current use of the property and that an additional $8,500.00 would be realized based on a postponement of $8,500.00 being applied under Policy 86-3 until such time as the property changes its current use to. a more intense use. Mr. Elmer Heuer appeared as landowner before the Committee indicating his opposition to the assessments. Mr..Heuer indicated that he could not foresee how his property could be subdivided at a future date and spoke in opposition to his property being assessed for water services in the total amount of $930.06. Mr. Heuer stated that it is highly unlikely that any future use of this property would include someone tying into the water service at the point where it is presently stubbed in.. Mr. Heuer's present residence is set back quite aways from the road and he does not feel that he should be paying the water hook-up charge. Mr. Heuer also stated that he was not in favor of postponing any assessments in that he did not believe that the property presently could handle the amount of the assessments being proposed. / ,Committee Members Egan,and Merkley each voiced their support of Special Assessment Policy 86-3, further indicating to Mr. Heuer that those postponed assessments were not Mr. Heuer's financial obligation until such time as Mr. Heuer decided to change the nature of the use of his property. Mr. Merkley stated that he agreed with Mr. Heuer that the cost of the water availability charge should not be borne by Mr. Heuer at this time but he -felt that it was too early to further delete the possiblity of payment for such charge until such time as a proposed plat is provided to the City. NOTICE OF OBJECTION TO ASSESSMENT The undersigned, Henry Franz and Louise Franz, as owners of a certain parcel of property included in improvement project number 455 for the City of Eagan, do hereby object to the assessment as it relates to property owned by the undersigned. L� Henry Franz, Louise Franz rig Street address of owners' property: 1535 Deerwood Drive Eagan, MN 55122 u. (9� .010-0 Oi3-05 U.'$SECT 'FARCE 1- .s •, c.:,T• ,•« MINN. DEPT OF TRANS.,T .i,zt •c ( RIGHT OF 'AT PLAT NO l9-50 �o DEERWOOD ... L.i..... .E.1/4 AE. 1/4 SEC.21. . Icn . Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting 13. Project 455 Deerwood Drive - Parcel 10-02100-011-77 Enclosed on pages Q0l throughe?c:LS is background information pertaining to this objection. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/modify the final assessment roll for Project 455 Deerwood Drive, as it pertains to Parcel 10-02100-011-77 and authorize its certification to the County. d'n VII. NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED) F. PROJECT 455, DEERWOOD DRIVE (STREETS & UTILITIES) 3. Elmer Heuer (Parcel 10-02100-011-77) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project 455 provided for the installation of water main and storm sewer utilities and the upgrading of Deerwood Drive from a rural ditch gravel road section to an urban street with concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trailways from I-35 to Pilot Knob Road. The public hearing authorizing this project was held on January 21, 1986, with construction being completed in early 1987 and the final assessment hearing held on August 18, 1987. Enclosed on page /0 is the written objection submitted by the property owners at this final assessment public hearing. Enclosed on pages /7) through /9/ are maps showing the location of the property to the improvements under this project and the calculations used to arrive at the fi 1 assessment obligation. Enclosed on pages /2,„1.. through /S'5 is an excerpt from the property appraisal performed to evaluate the increase in benefit to the property associated with these improvements. The appraisal indicates that there is only an increase in value of $8,500 realized at the present time based on the current use of the property and that only an additional $8,500 would be realized based on its potential to subdivide at a later date. This is significantly less than the amount of the proposed assessments of $20,255.09. All applicable special assessment policies and procedures were properly applied in computing the original assessment obligations for this property. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the information contained in the formal appraisal, it is recommended that the assessments be reduced to $8,500 and the difference postponed until such time that the property changes its current use to a more intensified use. This postponement should be subject to the timely execution of the appropriate agreements. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS .dt, ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JO 30, 1.988 PAGE 11 Henry Franz was present of behalf of the landowner. Mr. Franz indicated that he was not sure how he could pay for all of the assessments that the City of Eagan was taxing against the property. Committee Member Merkley assured Mr. Franz that the purpose behind Special Assessment Policy 86-3 was not to force Mr. Franz to lose his property but rather to postpone a large portion of the assessment for benefit his property receives until such time as Mr. Franz chose to change the use. Egan moved, Creegan seconded, the motion to recommend the reduction in the proposed assessment to $8,147.56 under Policy 86-3 subject to the execution of the appropriate agreements by the property owner and that the remainder of the proposed assessments be postponed pursuant to Policy 86-3 as revised. All voted in favor. PARCEL 10-02100-011-77/Eu1ER HEUER Public works Director Tom Colbert stated that under Project 455 the City installed waterrnain and storm sewer utilities and upgraded Deerwood Drive from a rural ditch gravel road to an urban street with concrete curb and gutter, sidewalks and trailways from I-35 to Pilot Knob Road. Mr. Colbert indicated that the appraisal performed by Dahlen & Dwyer on behalf of the City indicates that there is only an increase in value of $8,500.00 realized at the present time based on the current use of the property and that an additional $8,500.00 would be realized based on a postponement of $8,500.00 being applied under Policy 86-3 until such time as the property changes its current use toa more intense use. Mr. Elmer Heuer appeared as landowner before the Committee indicating his opposition to the assessments. Mr. Heuer indicated that he could not foresee how his property could be subdivided at a future date and spoke in opposition to his property being assessed for water services in the total amount of $930.06. Mr. Heuer stated that it is highly unlikely that any future use of this property would include someone tying into the water service at the point where it is presently stubbed in.. Mr. Heuer's present residence is set back quite aways from the road and he does not feel that he should be paying the water hook-up charge. Mr. Heuer also stated that he was not in favor of postponing any assessments in that he did not believe that the property presently could handle the amount of the assessments being proposed. Committee Members Egan and Merkley each voiced their support of Special Assessment Policy 86-3, further indicating to Mr. Heuer that those postponed assessments were not Mr. Heuer's financial obligation until such time as Mr. Heuer decided to change the nature of the use of his property. Mr. Merkley stated that he agreed with Mr. Heuer that the cost of the water availability charge should not be borne by Mr. Heuer at this time but he felt that it was too early to further delete the possiblity of payment for such charge until such time as a proposed plat is provided to the City. 2988 Egan moved, Creegan seconded the motion to recommend an assessment of $17,000.00 with a reduction to $7,570.94 and that the remainder of the assessments be postponed until such time as the property changes its current use to a more intensified use. All voted in favor. DISCUSSION The statement was made by Egan addressed to Colbert regarding the need to summarize the discussion regarding Policy 86-3 and that the appropriate changes be made in the policy prior to submitting it for Council approval. ADJOURNMENT Merkley moved, Egan seconded, the motion to adjourn. All voted in favor. a,b Mr. Elmer 0. Heuer 1530 Deerwood Drive Eagan, Minnesota 55122 August 17, 1987 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan, Minnesota Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re: Deerwood Drive (I -35E to Pilot Knob Road) Utility & Street Improvements - Project No. 455. Dear Mr. Hedges: This is a formal objection to the amount of assessments to be levied against the hereinabove referenced improvement projects. It was my understanding that an Assessment Committee Hearing was to have been held prior to the regular City Council meeting scheduled for tomorrow night, August 18, 1987, and it was my intention to discuss my objections with the As- sessment Committee at that hearing. To my knowledge, no Assessment Committee Hearing was held on Improvement Project No. 455, for I had requested to be no- tified of such a meeting, and have received no such notice. It is my position that my property has not increased in value anywhere near the assessment to be levied against it, and I am hereby requesting to be placed on tomorrow night's agenda to discuss this matter. Thank you for attending to this request. Sincerely, Elmer 0. Heuer Parcel Number 10-02100-010-77 • DEPT OF TRANS RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NOI9-50A2.1r3-23 i DEERW00D 661.156"1S Jt.)i5" •2. 272•.l.C3" :Y OZ_ 10336 _- =623 YY - --,6•1•45 r 2626 1511133 I - -1 i11irSWSS,OM Link U:Lrt6I YLr tXJ 1.•• r03 66/6/6 • s6t5e9_ SuSSECT RCEL L 5`ri LL a0 lv:n p6P •rtrt e� vv / a / S DEERWOOD SCHOOL ADDITION • c os *44.2 S69•[524t Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting ,OLD BUSINESS NO PARKING SIGNS/TERMINAL DRIVE A. No Parking Signs, Terminal Drive --Staff has received a petition from seven businesses on Terminal Drive requesting the Council to re-evaluate the total parking ban imposed within the entire Sibley Terminal Industrial Park as authorized by Council at the September 6, 1988 City Council meeting. Attached on pages p2Q7through a 0 lis a copy of the letter and petition received and copies of Council minutes authorizing the parking restrictions for the Council's information. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To leave "No Parking" restrictions within the entire Sibley Terminal Industrial Park as authorized on September 6, 1988 or reconsider September 6, 1988 Council action on this item. September 22, 1988 Tom Colbert Public Works Director Eagan, MN Dear Mr. Colbert: Attached is a petition from some businesses on Terminal Drive asking that the parking ban that the City Council recently approved be re-evaluated. We request that any meetings or information on this issue be sent to Bachman's European Flower Markets, 3245 Terminal Drive, Eagan, MN 55121. Sincerely, EUROPEAN FLOWER MARKETS ames W. B rman Exeuctive Director JWB/jml Attachment September 21, 1988 Tom Colbert Public Works Director Eagan, Minnesota Dear Mr. Colbert: We, the undersigned, Business Owners/Managers on Terminal Drive in Eagan, do not feel we were fairly represented on a parking issue that the City Council approved, resulting in a total parking ban on Terminal Drive. We feel the Council should reopen this issue and allow all affected parties to be heard as to their problems and issues with this parking ban. 2. Fall Seasonal Par: high teii iic fee=- 1orkers. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Michelle Vadnais, Cary Stevens, Linda Wulff, Steven Schroeder and William Cass as temporary seasonal park maintenance workers for the f all season. 3. Fall Seasonal Forestry Aide. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Gerald Dalke as the temporary seasonal forestry aide for the fall season. • 4. Parks and Recreatih Student Intern. The Council was informed that Beth Mondy, an undergz`aduate:student at the University of Minnesota, would be interning with the Department of Parks and Recreation for 12 weeks th3:s:::ta13::::::a:s:: part of her course requirements. Ms. Mondy wotilci='not: lie ari employee of the City of Eagan. The item was for the Council's information and no action was required. B. Plumbers Licenses. It was recommended to approve::::11 following plumbers licenses: Berqual Plumbing; Hanson-K1.evei:ing; Huber Plumbing and Heating; N. S. Mechanical; and Nort4ri Plu ibing. C. Receive PetitionJAuth ora:ie: ParM,ng Restrictions (Donald Avenue North of Letendre Avenue). It was recommended to receive the petition and authorize the installation of "no parking" restrictions on the west side of Donald Avenue north of Letendre Avenue. D. Receive Request/Author5ze Parti »g Restrictions (Sibley Terminal Industrial Park) . It was recommended to:::author•e the installation and enforcement of "no parking" restrictioAA:with:a:j the entire Sibley Terminal Industrial Park. • E. proiect 554, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report and Detailed Plans (General Electric Supply Company - Storm Sewer) . It was recommended to receive the petition for Project 554 (General Electric Supply Companyrm sewer) and authorize the feasibility report and detailed plans:::::_.• F. Project 552, Receide:Feasibility:::RepQrt/Order Public Hearing (Eagandale Center Industrie : �ar•k 3rd Agri:ition, ILQne Oak Business tenter, Phase 2 - Storm Sete and W termain) . It was recommended to 'pec eive:•'the 'feasibility report for Project 552 (Eagandale Center Industrial Park 3rd Addition, Phase 2 - storm Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting NEW BUSINESS CERTIFICATION/1989 TAX LEVY A. Certification of 1989 Tax Levy --Each year the City Council is required to certify property tax levies prior to October 15. As a result of several budget meetings and a public hearing, the levy of 1988 real estate taxes payable in 1989 is a grand total of $8,289,070. This total levy includes general fund, road and bridge fund and debt service. The City Council's tax levy is projected to reduce the mill rate that was approved in 1987 and payable in 1988. Enclosed on page o;21I for review and consideration is a copy of a comparable mill rate spread sheet from the 1988 final and proposed 1989. Also enclosed on pages ( .--through ('3 is the final resolution and a breakdown of the property tax levy payable in 1989. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny certification to Dakota County the 1988 general property tax levy payable in 1989 in the amount of $8,289,070 which represents an estimated mill rate reduction for 1989. 0(o r-4 co co ✓ el 0 0 0 $338,560,866 $270,660,726 1 N M• M ri ri • . C▪ O HI CO N CO O L) • •in M c• o N O O �0 O t` lf1 N O O N 10 r-1 (11- N O Ln ri Il Z CO O ;--fl v Ln O t0 '--1 6,481,925 .-. d' O O N d' •01 tf1 O N ri 01 1-1N 0 0• r1-1 N d' ON o M O M 1 co co co ch. In iR 01 N N r-1 5.833,047 M CO ri LCI 00001 N r1 tor( N • � r -I co O r- O O COO tO N U) CO d' i). $4.799,100 N 01 01 8,289,070 co N co ri N 5,921,581 r� N O 0 0 0 CO 1/40 $ 7,609,070 oj 1/40 0 o ‘Co h. M .-Ir-1 01 1N M cm � enin t0 ih CC] In 0 O N ' -I p'0 Ln N O In d' d' i? 1 WHEREAS, a of Eagan, Dakota at 6:30 p.m. at present except RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN LEVY OF 1988 REAL ESTATE TAXES regular meeting of the City Council of the City County, Minnesota, was held on October 6, 1988, the Eagan Municipal Center, all members being , and WHEREAS, upon motion by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby is on record approving and certifying the levy of 1988 Real Estate Taxes for Eagan, Minnesota, which taxes are payable in 1989 as follows: General Levy (Levy Limit): General Fund Road & Bridge Fund Equipment Revolving Fund TOTAL GENERAL LEVY Special Levies: Debt Service General Fund TOTAL SPECIAL LEVIES GRAND TOTAL LEVY Dated: October 6, 1988 $6,276,225 402,625 184,520 $1,220,000 205,700 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN $6,863,370 1,425,700 $8,289,070 BY: ATTEST: CERTIFICATION I, E.J. VanOverbeke, 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 6th day of October, 1988. E.J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk City of Eagan 1988 GENERAL PROPERTY TAX LEVY PAYABLE 1989 Special Levies Bonded Indebtedness 1972 Park and Fire 1973 Park 1979 Fire Station 1982 Municipal Expansion 1984 Park Improvement 1988 Fire Stations, Land & Equip. Equipment Certificates 1984 Certificates 1989 Certificates County Error Sub -Total Sub -Total $68,600 39,600 39,200 122,000 566,200 249,500 $22,900 112,000 GRAND TOTAL SPECIAL LEVY $1,085,100 134,900 205,700 $1,425,700 General Levy GENERAL FUND MAJOR STREET FUND EQUIPMENT REVOLVING FUND $6,276,225 402,625 184,520 TOTAL $6,863,370 GRAND TOTAL 1988/1989 TAX LEVY: $8,289,070 at� Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting ASSESSMENTS/BRITTANY 9TH ADDITION B. Assessments, Brittany 9th Addition --There are seven known properties in the Brittany 9th Addition that have experienced during 1987 a notice to pay an annual installment of special assessments as a part of their property tax statement. Each of the seven (7) properties have paid a sum of $18,610.50 into an escrow account for payment of special assessments with a closing agent when their properties were acquired. The closing agent, under the name Valley Closings, made payments on each of the properties in an amount sufficient to pay the interest charge and the first year installment on the principal of the special assessment, however no additional payment has been made to either the County or the property owners. Typically, a closing company will pay the City prior to certification or the County after certification to avoid any obligation to the new property owner. The property owners are bringing action against Valley Closing in an effort to make payment for the entire amount due and payable to the City of Eagan for the special assessments. Unfortunately, for the property owners, until they collect the principal and interest from the closing company for the special assessments the County and City will continue to levy the assessments based on a five year assessment spread until the final payment is made to the City. The City Administrator and Director of Finance have met with Mr. Jim Bratulich and Steve Devich who are two of the seven property owners, to discuss the issue. Mr. Bratulich who is an attorney has submitted a letter to the City suggesting various alternatives for assistance to the seven homeowners. It is the recommendation of the staff that the City Council consider a respread of the assessments to a longer period of time up to 20 years upon completion of an agreement with each property owner in which any recovery of special assessments would be used to repay the balance of the outstanding assessments. Mr. Bratulich and Mr. Devich have asked that the City encourage the Dakota County Attorney's office to bring criminal charges against the closing company. This effort is currently being coordinated by the city Attorney's office through the assistance of Mike Dougherty. For additional information on this matter, refer to a memo from the Director of Finance to Mike Dougherty, a location map of the parcels and a letter with an attachment as submitted by Mr. Bratulich for Council ,x�eeview. These documents are enclosed on pages p? 1S— through vol -0?.. The City Administrator and City Attorney will be prepared to make some remarks regarding the request by the residents. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To consider a 20 year assessment respread for Brittany 9th Addition with the understanding that an agreement with each property owner for which any recovery would be used to repay the balance of assessments would be prepared. 2l� MEMO TO: MIKE DOUGHERTY FROM: FINANCE DIRECTOR/CITY CLERK VANOVERBEKE DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 1988 SUBJECT: BRITTANY 9TH ADDITION As you recall, on September 19, 1988, I discussed briefly with you the situation in Brittany Ninth where escrowed special assessment payments have disappeared. Please find attached a copy of a letter from one of the involved property owners regarding the problem and their request for City assistance. This item has been placed on the October 6, 1988, City Council agenda for a response by the Council to the property owners. Staff will be recommending that the assessments be respread to a longer period of up to 20 years upon completion of an agreement with each property owner in which any recovery would be used to prepay the balance of the assessments. Staff will not be recommending that any interest charges be abated. I am requesting that you review this material and discuss the property owner's request with the Dakota County Attorney's office for possible criminal charges. I am also requesting an opinion as to whether any letter of credit guarantees in the possession of the City could be drawn upon to provide some relief. We are currently holding a Letter of Credit in the amount of $27,078 for this subdivision. Your office should be prepared to respond to this issue at the City Council meeting and I will be awaiting your written response. v Financ Director/City Clerk cc: City Administrator Hedges EJV/kf- Is 1, 26 25 " . It. I/'4 Jt.L3Z, 016.711 MOM NW "11 /7 1 19l._.1i 1 19739 7211 200 11 $9 19'241. 1042 4 nn $ »` 6 611T10.23" zz '-:g0�tt 3"P1 w.60t R ./-. BLLINGTON `WAYS 2' ""4g'K>� 99 07 J 11b9�111'O2' bOt�J6'IP 77.1 12.9. 242 ,6 10: b�49"E • r69'H'1fE 26.93 ..+. R 4. �1°' 162 101.99 r mg., RSHERWOOD 132 30 1129°37'3r 5.45131W 6 X69^57319 u 911 1 j1 5 69°19' 56 v, -- 777.119-- 74 72 1 1 1 .: 0 1 11 271 29 COY11T7 O7 Da.oTA 010.77 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Daniel J. Bresnahan Richard P. Wright Bruce P. Candlin James M. Bratulich Kent F. Spellman Gretchen R. Schiltz Legal Assistant September 20, 1988 Mr. Tom Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Special Assessments Brittany Ninth Addition Dear Mr. Hedges: 3500 West 80th Street Suite 585 Bloomington, Minnesota 55431-1068 Telephone (612) 835-0123 Thank you for the time that you and Mr. VanOverbeke took out of your busy schedules to meet with Mr. Devich and myself regarding the problems which have arisen with the special assessments in the Brittany Ninth Addition. I represent myself and six of my neighbors in a lawsuit which has been brought as a result of the failure of the builder or the closing agent to pay the special assessments on our respective properties when they became due and payable on or about June 4, 1987. At each of our respective closings, the sum of $18,610.50 was to have been deposited in an escrow account for payment of the special assessments when they became due. The escrow account was controlled by Valley Closings, an assumed name under which Valerie Connor operated her closing service. In approximately May, 1987, each of the affected properties was assessed the sum of $13,463.36, or the total sum of $94,243.52. The special assessments were not paid in a timely manner, and each of the properties was then assessed an interest charge of $1,811.89. Valley Closings has made payments on each of the properties in an amount sufficient to pay the interest charge and the first year installment on the principal of the special assessment. On behalf of the plaintiffs, I have obtained summary judgment in the amount of $75,394.97 against the closing company, the a1� Mr. Tom Hedges September 20, 1988 Page 2 owner, and her corporation. I am enclosing a copy of the Order and Judgment of the Dakota County District Court dated September 12, 1988 for your review. You will note in reviewing the Order and Judgment that I was not successful in obtaining judgment against Tollefson Builders, Inc., Brittany Estates, Inc., or any of the Tollefsons individually. That suit remains active and open, and I anticipate a trial within the next six months. This request for assistance from the City of Eagan is necessitated by reason that as plaintiffs, we are obligated and have a duty to attempt to mitigate our damages. While I have obtained judgment against Valley Closings, I am not hopeful of receiving any funds from her in the very near future, if at all. If the remaining principal of the special assessments is not paid on or before October 15, 1988, then it is my understanding that each of the affected properties will be assessed an additional interest charge. Because of our duty to mitigate, it is unlikely that I will be able to successfully obtain a judgment against any or all of the defendants for that and any subsequent interest charges. Quite frankly, none of the plaintiffs are financially in a position to pay the outstanding $10,770.71 special assessment prior to October 15, 1988. Our request for assistance from the City of Eagan is as follows: 1. The homeowners herein would request that the City of Eagan accept the burden and responsibility for payment of the outstanding special assessments and upcoming interest charge in exchange for an assignment of the homeowners' judgment and right of recovery against all defendants. In essence, we would assign our judgment to the City of Eagan and the City would then attempt co make collection from the defendants. In exchange, the City would relieve the homeowners from the burden of any further payment of that particular special assessment. 2. As an alternative, the City of Eagan would agree to abate any future interest charges, including the upcoming interest charge that will be assessed on or about October 15, 1988. The City of Eagan would then spread the remaining principal assessment of $10,770.71 per property out over a twenty-year period of time. The homeowners do have a duty to mitigate their damages and, in effect, have already paid the special assessments once. The homeowners have been victimized and are financially strapped and will be forced to bear the full brunt of this interest charge if the entire principal assessment is Mr. Tom Hedges September 20, 1988 Page 3 not paid by October 15, 1988. In addition, at this point in time, the City has spread the $13,463.36 assessment out over a five-year period of time which only increases the financial burden to the homeowners. It is my understanding that in existing developments, the City usually assesses improvements over a twenty-year period of time. The homeowners request that this be done in this instance so as to relieve the homeowners of the undue financial burden which has been wrongfully placed upon their shoulders. In consideration thereof, the homeowners would certainly stipulate and agree that any recovery from the defendants would be applied as an immediate pre -payment towards the outstanding balance of the special assessments on the seven affected properties in Brittany Ninth Addition. 3. The homeowners request that the City of Eagan assist the homeowners in encouraging the Dakota County Attorney's Office to file criminal charges against Valerie Connor, a/k/a Valerie Connor -Johnson, as a result of her failure to pay the special assessments, and as a direct result of the funds being misappropriated from Valley Closing Trust Account No. 014533 at the First National Bank of Shakopee, Minnesota. To date, despite the best efforts of myself and Mr. Devich, and despite the fine work of the white collar crime investigator of the City of Eagan Police Department, the Dakota County Attorney's Office has declined to bring criminal prosecution against Valerie Connor. Apparently the Dakota County Attorney's Office considers this obvious theft to be a civil matter and not worthy of their time or effort. I disagree totally with their evaluation and have a very practical reason for doing so. If in fact this is simply a civil matter, then Valerie Connor will be able to discharge her debt through a bankruptcy action. If felony theft can be established, as I believe it can be, then she will be unable to discharge that debt in bankruptcy. In addition, I do believe that as a public policy matter, the theft of in excess of $75,000 cannot be left unpunished. Perhaps through the intervention of the City of Eagan, the Dakota County Attorney's Office can be provided with some impetus to either charge this case out or provide a rational explanation for its failure to do so. 4. The homeowners also request that you check to determine if Tollefson Builders, Inc., Brittany Estates, Inc., or Carl Tollefson were required by the City of Eagan to post either a letter of credit or performance bond to ensure payment of the special assessments. Thank you for your prompt consideration of this request. I understand from our conversation that the Eagan City Council Mr. Tom Hedges September 20, 1988 Page 4 is to meet on or about October 6, 1988, and I hope that this letter will give you and your staff a sufficient amount of time to investigate those issues I have raised and to give serious consideration to our requests. Please feel free to contact either myself or Steve Devich, who can be reached at 869-7521. Thank you again for your courtesy. Very truly yours, James M. ratulich ba Encs a a0 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF DAKOTA James M. Bratulich and Nancy J. Bratulich; Steven L. Devich and Linda • Lee Magee; Fredric A. Holbeck and Sharon R. Holbeck; Larry R. Jackson and Kathleen A. Jackson; Brian L. Russell and Stephanie A. Russell; Gary W. Symes and Joy L. Symes; William D. Wenberg and Jerrilyn Wenberg; FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT Plaintiffs,• Valley Closings, an Assumed Name:- Valley ame;Valley Closing Services. Inc., a Minnesota Corporation; Valley Closing and Development, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation; Valerie:. A.. Connor, aka Valerie A. Connor -Johnson, Individually; Tollefson Builders, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation; Brittany•Estates,_ Inc.,- a Minnesota Corporation;, Carl 42. Tollefson, Individually; Gary Tollefson, Individually; JoAnne Wollschlager.,.- Individually; Defendants... . ORDER AND JUDGMENT File No. C7-88-3195 COURT ADMINISTRATOR DAKOTA COUNTY, MINN. ILE D SEP 121986 ROGER W. SAME% CLERIC 11Y • The above -entitled matter..was.,....heardat the Dakota County -Government Center, Hastings,. Minnesota, on September 12, 1988, upon motions. by the plaintiffs -for:.. summaryjudgment against the defendants. Plaintiffs were represented by James M. Bratulich, Esq. Philip L. Sieff,...Esq., ...repr.esented .• Defendants .Valley Closing, -.Valley Closing .and Development, Inc., and Valerie.A'. Connor,. aka Valerie A. Connor -Johnson. represented the remaining defendants.. .Bradley Cowie,. Esq., <1 , Based. upon. the. file,. record,... and proceedings herein, the oral and written .arguments .of counsel,. -and being fully advised. . I T IS. HEREBY, ORDERED. AS FOLLOWS: 1.. .That plaintiffs'. motion for .summary judgment in i.the amount of $75,394.97 against, ValleyiClosings, an assumed name; Valley Closing and Development, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation; and Valerie. A. Connor, aka Valerie A. Connor -Johnson is, in all respects, granted based upon the stipulation of counsel in open court and due to the factthat there are no genuine issues of material fact for a jury. 2. That all remaining motions for summary judgment brought by all parties are, in all respects, denied since there are genuine issues .of material,...fac.t.. which.. .must be resolved by the trier of fact as set forth more particularly by the Court at the time of the hearing. Dated this 12th day of September., Thomas R. Howe Judge of District Court JUDGMENT I hereby certify that the Order contained in this document shall constitute the Judgment of this Court. Date: September 12th 1988 ROGER W. SAMES COURT ADMINISTRATOR (Seal) . By 8%.12._..:-/•-L-x-yU Chief Deputy Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting APPOINTMENTSJCITIZENS COMMITTEE/COMMUNITY CENTER PROJECT C. Appointments for Citizens Committee/Parks and Recreation Committee for Community Center Project --At one of the early joint planning meetings with the City Council and Parks and Recreation Commission it was determined that a special citizens committee would be appointed by the City Council to work with the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission staff and architect to review and react to preliminary planning issues relating to the proposed community center project. An article appeared on the front page of the Eagan News that was distributed to each resident in early September asking for volunteers to serve on the cit'zens committee. A copy of that article is enclosed on page o 2 To date five (5) app;kcations 4p.ve been received and copies are enclosed on pages /S througheYaq for your review. It would be desirable to have a committee of approximately 12- 20 persons keeping in mind that those persons appointed should represent various geographical areas as well as different age groups and occupations. If members of the City Council have residents to recommend for the committee, please submit their names in advance to the City Administrator's office so a list can be prepared for Thursday night's meeting. The Director of Parks and Recreation and the City Administrator have been contacted by persons who may also be included on the list. It is expected that this committee will meet on a regular basis for approximately 3 - 4 months. The meeting with staff, the architects, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission members and later with the City Council. The obligation would be 1 - 3 meetings per month for that period of time. The committee would disband once the election for the bond referendum is held. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the appointment of a citizens committee of the Parks and Recreation Department to review and react to proposals for the proposed community center project. SPECIAL NOTE: Also enclosed on page c230 is a list of individuals who expressed an interest in serving on this committee. EAGAN NEWS CITY OF EAGAN 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 SEPTEMBER 1988 Volume 11 No. 3 Phone: 454-8100 THE LONE OAK TREE. ...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY COMMUNITY CENTER PLANS ADVANCE During the last six months, planning for a future community center for the City of Eagan took a major step forward as the Advisory Parks and Recreation Com- mission's preliminary study was completed, after nearly thirteen months of effort, with a recommendation to proceed to the next study phase. The City has since hired an architectural firm that has previously planned a number of recreation facilities, to do a site, space and cost analysis for a possible community center. Recently, the firm completed its review of the proposed com- munity center campus site. This site is located on land already owned by the City which is just south of the present Municipal Center on Pilot Knob Road. The firm's analysis of this site, i.e., soils, access, circulation, size, etc., con- firmed the site's adequacy to meet the needs of a community center building. The architects will be using the results of the community survey taken earlier by Decision Resources, Incorporated as a guide to the planning of the future building. Volunteer Citizens Committee to be formed. The Eagan City Council is now seeking citizens who may wish to serve on a task force/community center reaction committee to work with the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission, staff and the architect in reviewing preliminary plan- ning issues. The committee is to be comprised of a broad and diverse group of in- dividuals representing various geographical areas of the City, as well as different age groups, interests and occupations. Residents wishing to serve on the committee should direct a letter of interest to the City Administrator, at 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN 55122. A brief background statement, qualifications, and reasons why the individual is seeking the appointment should be included. Appointments will be made by the City Council. The committee work will extend until February 1989. For additional information concerning the role and responsibility of the com- mittee or the proposed community center, interested residents should contact the Director of Parks & Recreation, Ken Vraa, at 454-8100. INSIDE Election Information .2 1989 City Of Eagan Budget .2 Cable Television Corner.. 4 Aircraft Noise 4 Library News 6 Curbside Recycling 7 Fall Recreation Programs 9 TDD TELEPHONE The City of Eagan has a Telephone Device for the Deaf (TDD) which can be accessed by calling 454- 8100. City personnel recently took part in a training session to properly handle TDD calls. The porta printer, which provides the means of com- munication, is "user friendly" and Eagan receptionists can respond to questions with a minimum of delay. Eagan residents who have TDD phones are encouraged to call City Of- fices for community information. CITY OF EAGAN Mayor: Vic Ellison Councilmembers: Thomas Egan Dave Gustafson Pam McCrea Ted Wachter CAPON' STUDIO AND SCULPTURE GARDENS September 16, 1988 Tom Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 p Dear Tom, I wish to be considered as a candidate for the task force/community center reaction committee. As a mother of two and an interested resident of Eagan for the past ten years, I would like to contribute to the committee my experience and qualifications as a University of Minnesota art graduate, a former camp counselor and a life guard and swimming instructor at a comparable community center. As you know I am directly involved in the creation of the Art Park here in Eagan and as a family we have been active in the development of city parks. I value this opportunity to make a personal contribution to a project that is close to my heart and corresponds to my interest and competence not only in the function and contents of a community center but also the visual architecturalqualities of the building itself. Thank you for considering me. Sincerely, nka4 eapAAA, Cheryl aponi 1215 County Road 30 , 55123 • (612)454-4338 POSITION SOUGHT: VOLUNTEER CITIZENS TASK FORCE COMMUNITY CENTER REACTION COMMITTEE APPLICANT: Charlie Kinney 4083 Vermont Avenue Eagan, MN 55122 456-9402 Age: 35 Occupation: Minnesota Vikings Food Service Driver INTERESTS: I currently hold an elected position on the board of the Eagan Athletic Association (EAA). I have been a volunteer coach for youth baseball, soccer, track and basketball. When the director of EAA grades K-4 baseball resigned, I took over the position. At present I am also an equipment director for EAA and work with baseball and soccer signups. I have been certified to coach soccer since 1986. I serve at St. John Neumann church In Eagan.as the elected Maintenance Chairman and do volunteer work in that field. In addition I welcome new people by working with what we call "Welcoming Sunday." I also register new people into the church by going in their homes. REASONS FOR INTEREST IN POSITION: I am a family man who has been involved with young people and their parents in athletics as well as with people who are new to the area both at church and with EAA. With my broad background in community work, I come into contact with a variety of people. I presently am spending many hours volunteering as well as telephoning, and I am willing to give the time it takes to serve on this committee. September 27, 1988 Thomas Hedges City Administrator 3820 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Dear Mr. Hedges, I would like to submit my name for consideration for the Citzens Community Center Reaction Committee. I am a 14 year Eagan resident who has been on the Eagan Hockey Board of Directors for the last 4 years. I am acutely aware of our dire need for indoor ice but I believe a multi-purpose facility will serve a greater portion of the people of Eagan. My hockey involvement has taken me to most of the ice arena/ community centers in the area. These facilities say alot about its community and I have sensed the pride their people have in them. I believe we have the potential to make a positive statement about our community. I would like to help in any way I can. Sincerely, /Q6kAz Daryl Rogers 452-1392 cam- Att 383 o P; /ot- linn-6--/eQ • altn, 21' u 6.6140- 00-wc ce4: J ,Eowtho- alt-titt --/-4-d-kje-tet/ urnv~air eam-40c 1ce.1-61-ro7t ter-mxn,dtu2 ran(0/(7644-euj- v -A.10-1- 1(40-6-- ,ed Maae iweite;r(- ct•,Act' ,4 (LI- /304 baz_e_ry) )4"-/-4<4.*A yeait, aAti nub- .AQ o 1-LeAt� / as �uh.o Q,yvl. ,(�yL�L'LG�- fin. >dC.k.!)-ur2a, waL. AiiiP • :eLfruk dn/eid eont, a,f74 ente, ,idte,ttrj--- ( a- ,c-&-v-.A1 a dy 6eAv&t, Pd, w -Bow !we_ tipo-tiezi .14.(;(e �1 kW? 4/144dAtftd .cam 5z40--�c.d aio4 d,(t OditAieA/14° d I .4 WOLK- etkatti-4 eut,t weik .JV (LAI etivbd . lu/e4-6,61-44/1-1",_172t. 7tutl-4, ?liAPIAtt fo4d.;f-tozdrat7tLija.--tt.-0-e4 etn,tvGd ,?-1/1- ItttoAidvaA ;7,4 outdz kryi eGA_II a -tea -n -1;p) a-itd_ frot -6q-1-Atwcte erx-44-1-A, me. frt 11.6d / 1, /&i66 Adf-J etA September 20, 1988 Mr. Tom Hedges Eagan City Hall P.O. Box 21 199 Eagan, Mn. 55122 Dear Mr. Hedges, I am submitting, for the City Councils concideration, my letter of intrest to serve as a volunteer on the community center task force. Below, I have briefly outlined my background and qualifications. Background: * Married and have two children * A resident of the community for 14 years * Employed with a major insurance firm in Eagan * Past board member and president of the Eagan Hockey Association * Envolved with Eagan Athletic Association as a coach, asst. coach and PARENT * Presently I am an Assistant Scoutmaster with one of the Boy Scout Troops in Eagan * Author of the community center petition Qualifications: I have no formal qualifications such as, former task force member for or have been a member of this committee. My only qualifications that I have are, I am a parent, a 14 year resident of the community, and a concerned citizen that feels that a community center would provide a place for recreational and social activities which would normall'y have to be done outside our community, and promote the community and community pride. Thank you in advance for your concideration, I will be looking forward hearing from you. ' Sincerely, Robert J. Smith MEMORANDUM TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 1988 RE: REACTION COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS - COMMUNITY CENTER The City Council may also wish to consider the following individuals who staff has contacted to see if they would be willing to serve on the Committee. These individuals had earlier expressed an interest in the Community Center via telephone or direct contact with department staff. Mr. Gary Pietig - Mr. Pietig is on the "focus" team for the arena portion of the building. He also served on the 1983 Parks Citizens Committee/Bond Referendum. He lives the the Oak Pond Hills Addition and is the Facilities Manager for the City of Apple Valley. Pastor Loren Nelson - Pastor Nelson has lived in the community for about 5 years and is the pastor at United Methodist Church on Lexington Avenue. He has two daughters in Rosemount High School and resides at 4350 Andromeda Way (neighbor to me). Cindy Landgrebe - A resident of Eagan for several years, residing in School District 196. She has three small children and has been active in youth sports and community activities. She has expressed interest in the swimming pool/community center. Lives at 4721 Westwind Trail. Carol Ann Wilson - A resident of Eagan for 10 years and resides within School District 191. She has been involved in numerous school issues, Scouts and sports. Expressed interest in seeing Eagan have a community facility of it's own and is willing to dedicate the necessary time and energy. Mr. John Ayotte - Has repeatedly expressed interest in a community center/ice arena. Was also involved in the 1984 Parks Bond Committee. Previously indicated he was going to send a letter of interest to serve on Reaction Committee. Lives in School District 196. 3 0 Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting WORK PLAN/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION D. Work Plan for the Economic Development Commission --For the past several months the Economic Development Commission has regrouped to define a new work program by the establishment of objectives and of corresponding priority. Originally, the Economic Development Commission was appointed to satisfy Star City requirements and continue its regular meetings to fulfill objectives that were originally adopted as a part of the Star City certification. Most of those objectives have been met and during the months of March and April following the new appointments to the Commission, the City Administrator facilitated meetings in which the commission developed a set of objectives. Those objectives were reworked and a work program that divides the objectives into three subcommittees of the Economic Development Commission has been adopted by the Commission as a whole and recommended for City Council consideration. The three subcommittees are 1) Data Gathering, 2) Communication/Promotion and 3) Contacts. For a copy of the objectives nd corresponding priority, refer to pagescR through Most of the objectives are self explanatory. Members of he Economic Development Commission will be present at the meeting on Thursday to answer any questions the City Council might have regarding the proposed work plan. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve, deny or approve with modification the work plan for the Economic Development Commission. tr tr g g r O 0 0 44 tr 01 tr cco 0 0 a 0 0 b a) aT >4o H(13 ,q • CO 131 01 U P4 0 0 H w a........ PRIORITY as at as al at 11'l El o aso b 4)Nr•i isfd•-4 0t 4301•a) O Oa) $4 7 00 •I-1(1, •r -I PN O N -/-1 1P•Q� ?, r-1 0 0 +) a) 0 r4 4-)0 a) #~ W •r1 g R 0 g r-1 A U) 4 a) •H 0 O cd •r1 • -1 d -r1 a) Id 0 a) a) -rd 1 ' g z -I -l-) N w -n w 9 4-) b X A > 0 0 O H 0 a) 0 a) A a) a) N o cd 4-1 0 +-) O O4 co P Pel A O L1 '0 W -ra Z 0 G4 N 0 W V) CATEGORY CATEGORY DATA GATH OBJECTIVE tr O E_ -r4 a) ca O z 0 a ' a) en >I 0 al H A 4 P4 C4 U 0 H W IX •r1 PRIORITY OBJECTIVES CATEGORY CATEGORY NICATION/PROMOTION OBJECTIVES 04 0 01a 0 43 0 0 id > 0 q .. •r1 to 94 •rl Id 0 • O 43 m1 O +1 r4 0 C1 0 01 a44•,i •A w b a�� •4 1 0000. Id O •r1 •r1 > O 0 •r1 > a •r1 +1 N +1 N +1 +1 •r1 +1 ' a, a•� a43 •° a, 4 •V 4l o 02 g ie 43.1 0 14 0 0 r4 A IO •al Uma) ri O O •r1 • •r1 R 47 +1 U b 41 k 4) 43 to) +1 •r1 0 • A0000 aaamro sm ♦1 Id Id O N 0 0 W A 0 0 •r1 4 .0 •r1 a •d +1 u1 •14 +1 i1 4i 3 0 0 0 0 rO�l 0 OaA N 11.1+01•, HO4!O•k >el4i•ri oildo0•O43 O00t1a 0O1O•rI0O43 % 0 Id 00-, A 0 Id A 41 Id X Id X33 r;s E-+ fz4 0) 0-. .� a a a \0 o ul a Z 0 C " a S 0 PRIORITY CATEGORY AND OBJECTIVES CATEGORY MADE AT THE SEPTEMBER MEETING OBJECTIVES CO• 0 Nw 3o o 3 a +) U N - U.0 )4 M� ,cam 4-) w 0 as - 0 ncl N !-t RS -P 0 4-) 3(c1 to k a -I-1 OZE 0 U • • • -r-I OU O 4 U at M U 0 N •rU ' j 03 V1 NWQ) N•� N4-) f11 NO 0)• -' 0UU)) AN •'1'4+ •I t. Q U •r -I z > -rl •r4 •rl -rl .{.) Q 04-1 0 'd 0 W O N O E U O as •ra a fly PI rcl U A a3� Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting WAIVER OF PLAT/DENNIS SHAW E. Waiver of Plat for Dennis Shaw, Realign Common Property Line Between Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, Blackhawk Glen 2nd Addition --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission to consider a waiver of plat application submitted by Dennis J. Shaw to realign the common property line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, Blackhawk Glen 2nd Addition, at their September 27 meeting. Action was taken by the APC to recommend approval. Currently, there are homes on both lots and the home located on Lot 5 does not meet the 10' side yard setback due to an error in the construction process. Enclosed on pages a 3 through 437 is a copy of the Planning and Engineering report on this item. The APC minutes on this item will be included in the Additional Information packet. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a waiver of plat for Dennis Shaw to relocate the property line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, Blackhawk Glen 2nd Addition. a35 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT APPLICANT: DENNIS J SHAW LOCATION: LOTS 5 & 6, BLACKHAWK GLEN 2ND ADDITION (SW 1/4 OF SECTION 16) EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (SINGLE-FAMILY) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 DATE OF REPORT: SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 REPORTED BY: PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS APPLICATION SUMMARY An application has been submitted requesting a Waiver of Plat in order to relocate the property line between lots 5 and 6, block 2, Blackhawk Glen 2nd Addition. Currently there are homes on both lots and the one on lot 5 does not meet the 10 -foot side yard setback due to an error in the construction process. This Waiver of Plat will rectify that situation by shifting the lot line slightly to the east. If approved, this Waiver of Plat shall be 1. The vacation of the existing drainage and the rededication of one along the line (5 feet on each side). 2. All other applicable Ordinances. YANKE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY RE/RUC WORKS GARAGE dCTT PL. R p FPI tTOM AOM. • (Roar A0 $g I� 5 V subject to: and utility easement newly created property > W 0 CERTIFICIATE : 1 • ! f E . , 22! |,i!! ••: 99 9 ;!- !a ,) | 3| |:! a|! ., 8) ! 2 4,2 31 0 PIETSCH BUILDERS CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Laj 1j Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting WAIVER OF PLAT/TOWN CENTRE 100 6TH ADDITION F. Waiver of Plat, Federal Land Company to Relocate Common Property Lines Between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Town Centre 100 6th Addition --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission to consider a waiver of plat application submitted by Federal Land Company to relocate common property lines between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Town Centre 100 6th Addition, at their September 27 meeting. Action was taken by the APC to recommend approval. Federal Land Company is requesting a waiver of plat in order to relocate a property line between two buildings currently under construction along Town Centre Drive and Denmark Avenue in the Town Centre 100 Planned Development. The relocation of this property line of 4' to the south is required due to provisions in the Uniform Building Code with respect to minimum setbacks and building separation. For additional information on this item, refer to the Panning and Engineering reports, enclosed on pages c) 59 through The APC minutes on this item will be included in the Additional Information packet. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the waiver of plat as requested by Federal Land Company to relocate the property line 4' to the south of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Town Centre 100 6th Addition to satisfy building setback and separation requirements. a 3� CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT APPLICANT: FEDERAL LAND COMPANY LOCATION: LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1 TOWN CENTRE 100 6TH ADDITION (NW 1/4 OF SECTION 15) EXISTING ZONING: CSC WITHIN TOWN CENTRE 100 PD DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 DATE OF REPORT: SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 REPORTED BY: PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS APPLICATION SUMMARY An application has been submitted requesting a Waiver of Plat in order to relocate a property line between two buildings currently under construction along Town Centre Drive and Denmark Avenue in the Town Centre 100 Planned Development. The relocation of the property line 4 ft. to the south is necessary because of the provisions in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) with respect to minimum setbacks and building separation on adjacent properties. This Waiver of Plat adheres to all City Code and UBC requirements. CONDITIONS: 1. All City Code and UBC requirements shall be adhered to. 2. The existing easment shall be vacated and a new one shall replace it. 2 3') PLATTING J -- t z -- it. SNOOSNTT !ASCRIPTIONS 100 SIXTH 0001TION. ...dam to tn. tdwtddd . a= . .3i1 is 3f1N3AV 4,..10W.1111 MHVMIN3a 1 a a Li° Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting WAIVER OF PLAT/KRAFT INC. G. Waiver of Plat for Kraft Inc., Lot Split to Allow Individual Ownership on Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Industrial Park #8--A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission to consider a waiver of plat application submitted by Kraft Inc. for a lot split to allow individual ownership on Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Industrial Park #8, at their September 27 meeting. Action was taken by the APC to recommend approval. Kraft Inc. is purchasing the southern 3.3 acres, Parcel B, of Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Industrial Park 8th Addition. The applicant is requesting that a waiver of plat be approved in order to split the aforementioned lot into two parcels for separate ownership. For additional information on this item, refer to the Planning an Engineering4Dgrpartment report, a copy is enclosed on pages through The APC minutes on this item will be included in the Additional Information packet. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the waiver of plat for Kraft Inc. for a lot split to allow individual ownership on Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Industrial Park #8. aye CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT APPLICANT: KRAFT, INC LOCATION: SE 1/4 OF SECTION 3 EXISTING ZONING: LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 DATE OF REPORT: SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 REPORTED BY: PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS APPLICATION SUMMARY An application has been submitted requesting a Waiver of Plat in order to split lot 2, block 1, Eagandale Industrial Park 8th Addition into two parcels for separate ownership located southwest of Eagan Industrial Road. There are no buildings on this 9.9 -acre lot at this time. The southern 3.3 acres (parcel B) will be purchased by Kraft, Inc., the parent company of American Fruit and Produce which occupies the lot to the west. The additional land is for future expansion possibilities. Parcel A, the northern 6.6 acres, will continue to be marketed as a buildable Light Industrial site. In March 1987, revisions to the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan were recommended by the engineers for Opus Corporation for this area. These revisions provided for additional ponding due to the limited capacity of the existing storm sewer system. It was recommended that a pond be provided on this site and a drainage and utility easement was dedicated in the northeast corner of proposed parcel A. However, the pond was never built. Design considerations for the future pond are as follows: Pond # Drainage Area Storage Outflow High Water Elevation HP -3E 12.5 acres 1.4 acre ft 6.7 CFS 895 The future development on either parcel A or parcel B will necessitate the need for the development for the proposed ponding area. If approved, this Waiver of Plat shall be subject to all applicable Ordinances and; 1. Parcel B shall be attached to the American Fruit and Produce lot at the County Recorders Office (lots 2, 3, and 4, block 5, Eagandale Center Industrial #1). 2. Development of proposed pond HP -3E is required prior to any further site development on either parcel A or parcel B and shall be in accordance with City storm water storage volume requirements. Lta-- Lcz-A-Tiat--1 FA,A.orA L. frve • vvrE star( .78 AC WAIVER OF PLAT SURVEY FOR. NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. KRAFT, INC. run,,, r 14e011 e I. Ilr. 1. 1.1.01 t Irr1111r IW N. 4. 41rlI41 t..4 rm.. oho Mere.. W...1r.1. • A1fr t 1*11111 111111/1101 101 14111 . Mat er..01 ( .. 4. 1. .. 4 ;1.1.1 I4u1414 1.1X o. 1, r r.1y . .I4 •.0101 101... (.1.. X rr... I0. 14 of • 1. 141.01 14ll ern .wwN 01 11 14 .11.1 Ne I4 rt441r,1 Ilr N•ele .111. 1101111.• MOP.. r1t1N1101 401111.1 that pa. N W !. 4 le. I. 1441(. u.11I 11r:41Y .1 r. 1. 4 4.111 te tee .4 1 eeeste. . of • 114 111.01' Iotr,el....wy1 N 1 1 • t4 w.4414ie Ile N ..11 et 1. ( • ) ) • } \ ;. :CC1 7% i.. ✓/v/ (/ i� ---� / // /% / /' • 6.667 ACRS ,400 SO Fr � • 1, / /' pAR GEL \///�/ Ii`• 1J• STRIAL %/ '1-7 r. -/i/ r. �i` //�' N •� _•, iii . _ 7/ t / ' / .4, 144,928 SO �E/ / y CENTER / ' /� i • 8 g0 Zd ssisk .' (} 1 40 SQ.! • . ..1144.n 4».•011 .1444 Y SS11.11.111.1. 14 I. 1I.....41. . .er .. _I., e 1. • Ile. l.(. .etre .4 .. el..Ie.. 11.1. 4.4... Nr. l .. ' •► ..e. 4011. N I. Wee. Ilr. .we. L 11.01.. "Ow .14141. 1.1 1.1 ru 41..1 .4 *11 1. 014»•»4. r.. n..4 .rt .0114 .r 14.11.1 4IM. 1...011, e1 lS4(4Nr. a• cora orgy. Le.n 11. a Ml.n if .ri.i� ••••=••• 44 r .••..4.�, 14.14 1...4014. aow 11.1 r.1444 41.101. • 4• :: 11•.It , lZ4=11 rl(: IiYf;.1/16.1iM ;V r. N .4 erg .r. r t 4114101.144 •111111 101011111. (101 P. 11144.44.4. 1.1.1 (..4.1014 W.•..4.. 1.41411. 01 fere. tr111I 11. t It r. W erre. tornr441.r N. . N l e N w e t Owe r to ee4414 N ell e4INyl. 14 011. M.rrob r14 M. 01e 1.. .g4 Ay. . 1..1. • NS 111ONI.W a .U1 tllunde roma br.a^.-wver/ ■sac. 1 4111•11••••••••••••• r.. Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting VARIANCE/JAMES R. JENSEN H. Variance, James R. Jensen Jr., Setback Located on Lot 6, Block Jensen Jr. who resides at Lot 6, requesting a two foot variance to a 24' X 24' garage addition to an Two Foot Variance to Side Yard 2, Lake Park Shores --James R. Block 2, Lake Park Shores is the side yard setback to allow existing house and garage. For additional information on the item, refer to thePlanning Dep};tment report, a copy is enclosed on pages through ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the variance as proposed by James R. Jensen Jr. for a 2' variance to a side yard setback for Lot 6, Block 2, Lake Park Shores, to allow a 24' X 24' garage addition to an existing home and garage. CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: JAMES R JENSEN JR LOCATION: LOT 6, BLOCK 2, LAKE PARK SHORES EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: OCTOBER 6, 1988 DATE OF REPORT: SEPTEMBER 29, 1988 REPORTED BY: PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted requesting a 2' Variance to the side yard setback. The applicant is proposing a 24'x24' garage addition to the existing house and garage. The purpose for the garage is to allow the applicant storage space for a van and boat. Mr. Jensen contends that in order to obtain an aesthetic roofline and appropriate contours and angulation for the garage to match the existing structure, a 2' Variance is needed. If approved, this Variance shall be subject to all applicable Code requirements. .41 ).4 r :.373 ‘ •0 ---lq0 J rf--\ Iran 1.11.1101.1. M0101 pRK 0.... !111'0; 395. - -125I K - - OUTLOT • 11 :11,.141. ie0 uu ,0. 11 LAT II BLOCKI RASMUSSEN AOOITION 10 �cq 004 •M1r'w to �G s. .10 4295'1.-• t =Q / p000 SI • S /19.51 iii 77 j' 7..1.4i Ort +r�► , 6 y 10 ,t ,•`111 r h STATE 8 ' DAKOTA L' COUNTY 8 1 11 : (CLIFF 'L ,�,,,,r,mROAA1D ,• py.'r11�� 00.0 1(111. 1 I I i'4 T 27 R.23 050.01 ROAD RIGHT OF WAY MAP 27 A re HIGHWAY 401.00 •CML 101 1411 4019 r M 40 H 401. S11/4 11 711 40 1. - - - 1 Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting SPECIAL PERMIT/JAMES BARTIZAL I. Special Permit for James Bartizal, B & Z Farms, A Temporary Permit to Sell Christmas Trees in the Thomas Lake Centre Shopping Centre --An application was submitted by Mr. James Bartizal requesting a special permit to allow temporary Christmas tree sales from November 25 to December 25 at the Thomas Lake Center shopping mall. For additional information on this item, refer to a copy of the Planning Department report, a copy is enclosed on pagesok5.0 throughrs 1. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the special permit application as submitted by James Bartizal for the temporary Christmas tree sales at the Thomas Lake Center shopping mall. <A1 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICANT: LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: DATE OF REPORT: REPORTED BY: JAMES BARTIZAL LOTS 1, 3, 4 & 5, THOMAS CSC - COMMUNITY SHOPPING OCTOBER 6, 1988 SEPTEMBER 28, 1988 PLANNING DEPARTMENT LAKE CENTER CENTER APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted by Mr. James Bartizal requesting a Special Permit to allow temporary Christmas tree sales at Thomas Lake Center shopping mall. The applicant would begin sales on November 25, 1988 and end December 25, 1988, with set up of the operation to begin October 25. Approximately 650 trees will be in stock on this sales lot. At a special meeting held November 23, 1987, B & Z Farms (James Bartizal & Steve Zender), the City Council approved a Special Permit for sale of Christmas trees at this location. If approved, this Special following conditions: 1. The permit is temporary 1988. Permit shall be subject to the and shall expire after December 25, 2. The permit shall be subject to all applicable Code requirements. aco g:713W-1C-1 >4-1 • ITart o-- P-PlipLA I PARK ,t 12 - S•akt Pi i 13- J.CstS (ONE PT t tAthaut$ pi • IS- ift.{P51 PI SOMO., c 05 ( Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting COMP GUIDE PLAN/PD AMENDMENT/PRELIMINARY PLAT OAR MEADOW ADDITION J. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, Oak Meadow Addition, Meritor Development Corporation, Planned Development Amendment of 21.5 LB Acres Within the Blackhawk Park Planned Development to R- 1 and a Preliminary Plat Containing 30 Lots Located Between Highway 35E and Pilot Knob Road --At the September 27, 1988 Advisory Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held to consider a planned development amendment of 20.51 acres zoned limited business in parks/public facilities within the Blackhawk Park PD to an R-1 district consisting of 30 lots, a preliminary plat entitled Oak Meadow Addition and a variance to exceed the cul-de-sac link in excess of 500 feet. The APC is recommending approval. For additional information on this item, refer to the Planning and Engineering epartment report, a copy is enclosed on pages through c( The minutes of the APC meeting will be included with the Additional Information packet. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny 1) a planned development amendment to rezone 21.5 LB acres to R-1, 2) a preliminary plat entitled Oak Meadow Addition and 3) a variance to exceed the ordinance requirement of a 500 foot cul- de-sac. SPECIAL NOTE: Since this application was received by the City, the Metropolitan Council has adopted our most recent Comprehensive Guide Plan update which included a redesignation of this parcel to a D -II, therefore, an amendment will not be necessary. s CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT (REZONING) PRELIMINARY PLAT, VARIANCE (OAK MEADOW ADDITION) APPLICANT: MERITOR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LOCATION: SE 1/4 SECTION 16 EXISTING ZONING: LB (LIMITED BUSINESS) AND P (PARKS/PUB- LIC FACILITIES) WITHIN THE BLACKHAWK PARK PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 23, 1988 DATE OF REPORT: AUGUST 17, 1988 REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS APPLICATION SUMMARY Separate applications have been submitted requesting a Planned Development Amendment (Rezoning) of 20.51 acres zoned Limited Business and Parks/Public Facilities within the Blackhawk Park Planned Development to an R-1 (Single Family) district consisting of 30 lots located between Hwy. 35-E and Pilot Knob Road just south of Englert Road. This plan is in conformance with the City's most recent Land Use Plan that designates this area D -II Mixed Residential (0-6 units/acre), therefore, an amendment will not be necessary. A variance is necessary for the cul-de-sacs in excess of 500'. EXISTING CONDITIONS/SITE PLAN Currently, this site is primarily grassland with steep slopes falling towards a ponding area in the center of the plat. Trees in the low lying area will be left intact for the most part with the proposed grading. This site is directly north of the Kingswood 2nd Addition and it will serve that plat with streets on both sides of the ponding area. With the Kingswood 2nd Addition preliminary plat, townhouses were proposed in that area. The zoning to R-3 was not approved and the area remained agriculturally zoned. It was anticipated that if the Meritor piece were down zoned to an R-1 district, the Horne land would do the same. At the time the Kingswood 2nd Addition received approval, this subject site was reviewed conceptually and it was determined that an extension of Wescott Road west of Pilot Knob Road was not feasible. Therefore, it will be necessary to coordinate the detailed alignment with the Horne property prior to the final plat approval so that both developers are satisfied. a s3 The access from Pilot Knob Road was originally to the south approximately 150'. With a great deal of cooperation demonstrated by Meritor, the property owners to the north, and the County, this access was shifted to the north so the two single family homes can now have street access and eliminate the shared driveway on to Pilot Knob Road. This will also provide left turn lanes from both north and southbound Pilot Knob Road into this development. The lots vary in size from 12,240 square feet to 42,500 square feet, all at least 85' wide at the setback line. The net density of the plat is 1.75 units/acre. ash GRADING/DRAINAGE/EROSION CONTROL: The preliminary grading plan submitted as a part of this application proposes cut and fill areas ranging from 20' +/- to approximately 8' +/- respectively. The development is proposing to construct two timber retaining walls along the northerly boundary of the property. The development will be required to submit detailed plans and specifications for the proposed retaining wall construction for staff's review and approval. All proposed slope areas meet the City's 3:1 slope requirements. All proposed grading is confined within the boundaries of the property with the exception of the property directly north of proposed Lot 1, Block 1. All site generated storm water runoff is required to be conveyed to Pond JP -5. Pond JP -5 is a designated ponding area in the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan. The development is proposing to construct an additional outlet into Pond JP -5. The development will be required to utilize the existing outlet structures into the Pond JP -5 where appropriate. Revisions to the proposed grading plan will be required along the northerly side of the property. It is unclear from the proposed grading plan as to how the storm water runoff in Lots 1 - 7, Block 1 will be conveyed from the northerly adjacent property across the backyard areas, along the side lot line areas and into the proposed internal storm sewer system. A preliminary erosion and sediment control plan was submitted as a part of this application. The following items had not been addressed in the erosion control plan: sediment basin construction, cut and fill slope stabilization, storm water management, storm sewer inlet filters, and disposition and maintenance of the proposed erosion control measures. The major water resource issue for this project is the impact of site development on the water quality of Blackhawk Lake. Runoff from the site flows into Pond JP -5 prior to discharging into Blackhawk Lake. The pre and post development phosphorus loading rates to Blackhawk Lake were estimated using a model developed by William Walker, Jr. The model indicates that the phosphorus loading rate will increase from 9 lbs/year to approximately 20 lbs/year after site development. The ponding volume necessary to maintain existing nutrient loading to Blackhawk Lake was estimated to be approximately 1 acre foot. However, since the outflow from Fish Lake and runoff from I -35E also enter Pond JP -5, a wet pond volume of approximately 3 acre feet is necessary to provide adequate treatment of storm water runoff. Construction of a dike across the narrow area of Pond JP -5 appears to be the most economical way to provide the necessary wet pond volume to protect the water quality of Blackhawk Lake. Any proposed modifications to Pond JP -5 requires the approval of MnDot. ass UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer service of sufficient depth and capacity is available to the site in I -35E right-of-way at the southwesterly corner of the proposed development. The development will be required to extend sanitary sewer service to its southerly boundary in two locations at a low enough elevation to serve the southerly adjacent property. Water main service of sufficient pressure and capacity is readily available in Pilot Knob Road and has been stubbed to the property line as a result of the ongoing reconstruction of Pilot Knob Road at this time. The development will be required to provide water main service to the southerly adjacent property in two locations. STREETS/ACCESS/CIRCULATION: Public street access to this site is readily available and is proposed in one location from Pilot Knob Road. Street access through the development is proposed through the use of two lone cul-de-sac streets. The development will be required to construct temporary cul-de-sacs at the southerly terminus of the proposed streets. EASEMENTS/RIGHTS-OF-WAY/PERMITS: The development has proposed to dedicate the necessary right-of-way for the upgraded Pilot Knob Road. The County will be requiring restricted access along the Pilot Knob Road frontage. The proposed access location and how it ties into the current reconstruction of Pilot Knob Road is subject to review and comment by the County. The development will be required to supply the appropriate easements for those public utilities constructed outside of the dedicated public street right-of-way. The development will also be responsible for acquiring the appropriate slope easement and street right-of-way from the northerly adjacent property. The development will be required to provide the appropriate ponding easement for Pond JP -5 to incorporate the required high water level and storage volume requirements in accordance with the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan. All regulatory agency permits shall be acquired within the appropriate time frame as required by the affected agency. ASSESSMENTS: A search of the City's special assessment records show the following pending assessment of record: PROJ # DESCRIPTION RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT 466 Pilot Knob Road $17.72/ff(1) 460 $8,151 TOTAL PENDING ASSESSMENT $8,151 (1) One half of the normal residential rate per front foot. C C The following assessments are proposed as a condition of the plat approval in accordance with special assessment policy 82-1: PROJ # DESCRIPTION RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT 466 Pilot Knob Road $24.03/ff 460 $11,054 24 Lateral Benefit Water Main $ 6.55/ff 460 $ 3,013 TOTAL PROPOSED ASSESSMENT $14,067 All final assessment obligations will be calculated based on the quantities and dimensions of the final plat and in accordance 'with the rates in effect at the time of the final plat approval. OAK MEADOW ADDITION CONDITIONS: 1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on September 15, 1987 shall be complied with: Al, B1, B2, B3, B4, Cl, C2, C3, C4, C5, D1, El, Fi, and G1. 2. The development is required to limit phosphorus export to Blackhawk Lake to pre -development levels. 3. The development will be required to submit detailed plans and specifications for the proposed retaining wall construction for staff's review and approval. 4. The development will be required to utilize the existing outlet structures into the Pond JP -5 where appropriate. 5. The development will be required to extend sanitary sewer service to its southerly boundary in two locations at a low enough elevation to serve the southerly adjacent property. 6. The development will be required to provide water main service to the southerly adjacent property in two locations. c2S7 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL A. Assessments 1. This development shall accept its additional assessment obligations as defined in the staff's report in accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval. B. Easements and Rights -of -Way 1. This development shall dedicate 10' drainage and utility easements centered over all common lot lines and adjacent to private property or public right-of-way. 2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially guarantee its proportionate share of the acquisition costs of additional drainage, ponding, and utility easements as required by the alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required public utilities and streets located beyond the boundaries of this plat or outside of dedicated public right-of-way as necessary to service this development. 3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way and temporary slope easements for ultimate development of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate jurisdictional agency. 4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and ponding easements to incorporate the required high water elevation necessitated by City storm water storage volume requirements. C. Plans and Specifications 1. All public streets and utilities necessary to provide service to this development shall be designed by a registered professional engineer in accordance with City codes and engineering standards and policies, and approved by staff prior to final plat approval. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current City standards and approved by staff prior to final plat approval. 3. This development shall insure that all temporary dead end public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in accordance with City engineering standards. 4. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted on the proposed grading plan and approved by staff prior to the final plat approval. The financial guarantee shall be included in the Development Contract and not released until one year after the date of installation. asg STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL PAGE TWO 5. All internal public and private streets shall be constructed within the required right-of-way in accordance with City design standards. D. Public Improvements 1. If any public improvements are to be installed under a City contract, the appropriate project must be approved by Council action prior to final plat approval. E. Permits 1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition of all regulatory agency permits in the time frame required by the affected agency. F. Parks Dedication 1. This development shall fulfull its parks dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission and approved by Council action. G. Other 1. All standard platting and zoning conditions shall be adhered to unless specifically granted a variance by Council action. Advisory Planning Commission City Council Approved: August 25, 1987 September 15, 1987 Revised: LTS#2 STANDARD tipr 40t,t-1, neri Caltt cs/roocc dn I -, I 6 '10 °Err •.• • sstiaN . L V! i \ 1 f ttn rIalr . 876/1060 E,5.9/Eeill 2" (i73)1Ct'l 8 0" 607/ de 61.0 9501 CD887/ 1060 • ,c0 5.0/650 FOX 1 -1 RIDGE 20" -77 z30 CDTREAf•MENT SJR 688/840 PsLitir (321160.) 579/730 463/620 7 E 1,4 HEIGH:SR.. 1 51/920 vi;.7,,;,1 56 2/ 67.,031. / 2ND 69 5/84.0 , " 301 1 60.4/780 OEM 6111 1111 I 9. 16.: 1, tj I -1---- -7,S2C;1•:-., ) 73 3/74 0 flIckl /102 ,riqbo 9LR 1 950 1 a 4 7-1-78 63' 55.i/ io 0 CD -7 4N+001=1, 41=11 4WD IMMO .7/98.0 411, 1' — I - • 16" Q/71 20", /.. r (6Y/ 60 3/P366)7 KNOB 444. 24" , awns -1S4 30" CENTER Aft 1 _-__4&66/720- „ ).0 (1)5_798.50.-..:919)111. IN. Eit-Act , 643/840 11 56.2/77.0 • 6LAEKHAWK PARK :-!• :14f 2.0 18" 1tfEF)91 11 7 5 0 Q.1 • 1.144a1I 1I ,i . 1 -,-.1 I re. e , _..... MMIIL- • , , . . . / de 07 g2.4; ' ' r •..- de -- ' • ; 711 51 7/67 0 .-.•--' '• r • 12_, '1 1 , .••• - 4*(121) '.. 18" - 5.2• 7 ..... de 4.(' 5 2 6 1 7 0 ki 0 , 12-7 ,5 !•1 0 e" 24..-\,......0 " • 16" ...------ --r R.W L. 1059 .--6ROUNO STORAGE 1 44 6/59 0 i .." ------ 126 37'616170 E —'! • 16 '• / • I \ 34 2/60 0_ • 160 21.8/ 31.0 40 49 88 5/ 82.8/1i4 0 0) 10 (16"0.0 6 5 4 /107 0 51 0/65 0 1 r i -1?" • 12" 110 2 0 1 A,41:1) 38 3/940 10-5 53 2 /68 0 11 FA'S- 16'tK E 1:?„0,' NO • -1 • ,• c 'LOT KNOS MM. MN 12" 1 2•Er:c 02" r/ 8.6/ 43 43 2/580 • SU BJECT PARCEL FIG 4* 3 4 city of eagan PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMEN WATER MASTER PLAN approved: standard plate if: Interstate 35-E HORNE PROPERTY Possible Single Family Development / d '‘,,?-,,•\, ' / / ` I ! 1 ' 1 i 11 if � i' 1 1 1: 11 r1 1; FT -11 , . 1 1 1 11 1 111• 1. 11 11.1, 11,,'Lir . 1 it 1 :1 1 1 1 1; 1 11' 111 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 {1 1 9 I r; It y i 1 1r ' '' i /1 111 1.11 -�-1, 11+4-4." 1 <<�,';f,, ),/.i l,, X111 1 t/ , 1 1 ' ' ' 1 I ,i\; 1 . / . 1 1 tot t I h,1 \ _ / _.L 1. 1. 1-1. 1 i1 \ i << 1--- / IL I I t_,• ► It, '1 ;•t 1 lit`, 0 0 tow a * c r E,17:)¢.C1 V A'T i LA1rW,(4E IlI WATE r I • IJORTH 0' 50 100' 200' 2-(475 1iI'li);;;i I I ' 11,i;; r / "11 1 I III iIII11I I I I ',it' 1 // /�! j�'. ��Ill �11111 1 1 1 1r1 1 / 1,///,, / I ,1! II1i� 11 r Il l iii/�� �, jI 1��111ii!i`r1 %�' f ,4 '41_41_4 1 il;" 11.1, 111 11\ 1 1 1 1 1/ 11 1 1: i i '. ,, 1 \ 1 I I 1, 11 1 \ 1 � 11 , Illi I11 I1 .11 11.1 11 11!iil;11 1!1,1\111) I-Ijjtil/i,, .II111ii,` 11\` 1i r.i ii I! i 4 I I I I� �1 ti,\` \i\\. 11 I I �►j / 1 �/!/1' � _— Iil Ii •\\, 111 1 ► rlt' fir ,- O 5 r l • f. t • o' 50' g oo zoo' / /% - t1 1 HORNE PROPERTY Possible Single Family Developnt' Agenda Information Memo October 6, 1988, City Council Meeting ADDITIONAL ITEMS RELOCATION/OLD TOWN HALL A. Relocation of Old Town Hall --The Ad Hoc History Committee, chaired by City Councilmember Wachter has met on two occasions and at the most recent meeting toured the old Town Hall, viewed the Lone Oak Tree and inspected the McCarthy house. Regarding the old Town Hall, it was the recommendation of the committee that the old Town Hall be retained and eventually restored for historical significance. It was also their recommendation that the building be moved back adjacent to the Northwestern Bell switching station and adjacent to the Fire Administration parking lot. The Planning Department has prepared a drawing that will illustrate the proposed location of the Town Hall, the Chief Building Official has discussed relocation of the Town Hall with a moving company and the City Administrator is confirming a time schedule for the official relocation of the building. City Councilmember Wachter will request authorization from the City Council to proceed with the project understanding that moving the old Town Hall is an expense to the Pilot Knob Road improvement project. Restoration at a future date will be an expense incurred by the City. With the assistance of City Councilmember McCrea, letters have been sent to a number of agencies that may have funding programs available for the restoration of a town hall given its historical significance. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the relocation of the old Town Hall as recommended by the Ad Hoc History Committee. SPECIAL NOTE: The drawings prepared by the Parks and Recreation Department will be available for review and inspection at the meeting on Thursday. J(e'l MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 1988 SUBJECT: INFORMATIVE POLICE CHIEF SELECTION The City Administrator is proceeding with advertisements and a schedule for selection of a new police chief. Advertisements will appear in the League of Minnesota Cities magazine, Minneapolis Star & Tribune and the Saint Paul Pioneer Press. It is anticipated that the advertisement, receiving of applications, and screening process will take approximately 60 days, allowing for interviews in early December or immediately following the holidays in early January. In any event, selection should correspond with Chief Berthe's retirement which is scheduled for January 20, 1989. The City Administrator will provide a more specific schedule for Council information in the near future. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE The City Administrator has learned that Mary Martin, our Metropolitan Council representative, will not be seeking reappointment when her term expires in January. At the Mayor - Manager breakfast on October 21, there will be some discussion among Mayors at that meeting regarding a viable candidate. Please refer to a memo that was prepared by Kevin Frazell, City Administrator for the City of Mendota Heights (page7']In). COMMUNITY CENTER UPDATE Enclosed on page(s)6777/'-c271/1 is a community center update as prepared by the Director of Parks & Recreation. AIRPORT ADEQUACY AND CORRIDOR ISSUES The City Administrator and Administrative Assistant Hohenstein attended the last airport adequacy meeting held on Thursday, September 29, at the Federal Building adjacent to the International Airport. The time for decision making on various alternatives is drawing near and the City Administrator has asked Administrative Assistant Hohenstein to prepare an executive briefing of issues that will require attention and potential action by our City Council. Attached for your review is the Executive Summary and a more detailed analysis of the report and attached letters that address various aspects of alternatives that have been discussed in the •rport ad y study. These documents are enclosed on page(s)75-3.The executive summary was distributed at the Thursday, Sep ember 29, meeting. I would strongly encourage the City Council to read this document a�8 and specifically study page 10 and pages 25 - 26 which address the various alternatives and conclusions of the report. Sorry for all the information on this but the airport adequacy issue is important and as Councilmember Gustafson can attest, this is the condensed version of the volumes of information that have been reviewed during the past several months. City Administrator TLH/kf a c0.9 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 TO: Bill Craig, West St. Paul pob Schaefer, Inver Grove Heights ,, om Hedges, Eagan Stephan Jilk, Rosemount Gary Word,. South St. Paul FROM: Kevin D. el ,7 City Administrator SUBJECT: October Monthly Breakfast Meeting and Nomination of Metropolitan Council Representative This is an early pre -notice of our October 21 Mayor/ Manager's breakfast meeting. I am trying to arrange to have people from the Metropolitan Council present to discuss the results of the Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport Adequacy Study. Some of you may recently have received a letter from the Adequacy Committee offering to attend one of your Council meetings to discuss the issue. I wanted you to be aware that this will likely be our topic on October 21, so you may or may not want to have them out to your individual cities. I have invited our Met Council representative, Mary Martin, to join us. Mary has also told me that she will not be seeking reappointment to the Metropolitan Council when her term expires in January. I'm thinking that we will want to discuss this at our October 21 meeting as well, so that we can begin to get organized to promote a candidate of our choice. A second purpose for my early memo is so that you can begin thinking about any one in your community that might be a viable candidate. From our experience last time I would say that only Democrats have a very good chance of getting the Governor's appointment. This early memo is being sent to city administrators only. Mendota Heights will be following up with the regular formal meeting announcement about one week prior to October 21. In the meantime, you may want to mention the meeting and appointment for Mary's replacement to your mayor and/or council members. KDF:madlr alb MEMORANDUM TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 RE: COMMUNITY CENTER UPDATE II By way of these periodic memorandums, I have attempted to keep you abreast of the progress being made on the community center and its planning. This is the second such memorandum. DESIGN CHARETTE #2 The second design workshop with Hastings & Chivetta on September 22, 23, went very well, despite the fact that we were not able to accomplish all that we had set out to do. For example, that section of the architectural program dealing with energy conservation, heat reclaim, and maintenance was not reviewed, as prepared by the Focus team. The program statements dealing with general spaces and administrative/office areas was covered in sufficient detail; as were other program spaces previously covered but in the first charette. Staff will be doing a final review of the energy maintenance systems package before sending them off to the architects for their incorporation into the architectural program. The first concept plan for the building was developed and although it meets many of the program criteria previously established, there remain several issues that must be resolved. Perhaps this is why they call it the first concept plan and not a final concept plan. It may be that the program will have to be re -planned to delete certain spaces or ideal situations abandoned due to unresolvable conflicts. At this time, it is too early in the review process to abandon these ideal situations and relationships while reworking the concept plan to accomplish these objectives. Some success was achieved in reducing square foot needs by "stacking" and combining functions. This is one of the tasks that staff and architect gave serious thought to. Unfortunately, the square footage for many of the given facilities are absolute requirements and can not be reduced. However, by combining and stacking there has been an effort to consolidate and save on square foot costs. For example, the space requirements for the ice arena are a given, but team locker rooms can be housed beneath the seating sections - thus reducing some square foot costs. Another example is stacking the gymnastics area over the locker rooms for the swimming pool. Stacking may 1 ail stacked over slightly smaller areas. This causes the smaller areas to actually increase in size to meet the structural wall components, etc. Staff will again be reviewing the first concept plan, as will the individual focus teams. The Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission will be making its comments at the October 6th meeting. A workshop session to review the concept plan with the Council is suggested. It is our expectation that a new cost calculation will be done on this first concept plan, using gross costs per square foot. After comments are received by the architect, staff, Commission, Council and the Citizens Reaction Committee. (See timeline) On October 27, the architect will begin to break out costs by divisions. That is, cost estimating will be broken down into units such as site work, grading, utilities, etc. It is during this critical period in which hard-line decisions will need to be made regarding the construction/development budget. The architects have also been asked to consider how a concept plan could be "phased", if necessary. As future concept plans are revised and developed, they will give this consideration and it will become more of a focus in their work. SITE PLAN The site plan was revised, incorporating changes from the Police Department, Engineering and Parks & Recreation Department. This plan is to be reviewed by Dakota County, Gary Erickson, of the Physical Development Division, to try to obtain their consensus of the shared roadway between the City Municipal Center and the Library. This meeting is tentatively scheduled for the week of October 3rd. Revisions to the plan also created an additional twenty (20) parking stalls. Originally, the program requirement was between 300 and 350 stalls for parking. The site plan also proposes to close off the current access on Pilot Knob Road. The County Engineering Department has been strongly urging this to happen; the Police Department feels that this can be accomplished as long as the access onto Wescott Road is maintained at its current location and the proposed traffic signals at Wescott and Pilot Knob Road can be adapted to allow for police emergencies. STATE OF MINNESOTA - SWIMMING POOL REGULATIONS Your director recently meet with the senior engineer, Milt Bellin, for the Minnesota Health Department, on swimming pools to review state regulations and the recreation concept vision for Eagan. Regrettably, the Minnesota rules are 1971 vintage, and recognition of advances in technologies and pool designs are not recognized by this code. It appears as if we will be expending a great deal of effort with the state in design review and in seeking approval for the Eagan pool. I've asked our architect to seek out a qualified and recognized leader in pool regulation/health and sanitation of water field to provide assistance should this become necessary. 2 COMMUNITY CENTER TIMELINE A tentative timeline has been developed and is continuing to be enlarged upon, covering the next several months or pre -bond referendum. On October 6th, the Council will be asked to appoint a reaction committee, with their first meeting scheduled for October 13th. That meeting would involve background information on how the City reached this stage in the plan. The second meeting of the reaction committee would be on Thursday, October 27th, which would include the architects, and a review of the concept plan(s) as well as a suggested revisions. A third meeting of the reaction committee would be on Tuesday, November 22nd, at which time the architect should have a cost estimate for the project. Staff is strongly recommending that a City Council and Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission workshop session be set for Tuesday, November 29th, with the primary objective to review the architectural designs, costs, and the action committee's recommendations. It will be at this time that final direction to the architects concerning the schematic plans should be made by the Council. By Tuesday, December 20th, the architects will be able to respond to the Council's direction from the November 29th workshop session and provide the revisions as requested, also final cost estimates for the construction phase. It would be at this time, and certainly no later than the first Council meeting in January, that the bond referendum date could be set - with a target date for the referendum between February 21st and March 14, 1988. As staff enlarges upon the timeline over the course of the next several weeks, a copy will be provided to the City Council. Respectfully submitted, Ken Vraa Director of Parks & Recreation KV/bls 3 a�3 COMMUNITY CENTER TIME LINE 9/20/88 Thurs., Oct. 6, 1988 Council appoint Reaction Committee Thurs., Oct. 13 First meeting of Reaction Committee - Background information or..How did we get to this stage? Thurs., Oct. 27 Meeting with Architects/Reaction Committee - Refinement of Program Thurs., Nov. 3 Review by Advisory Commission Tues., Nov. 22 Review of architectural design/cost estimate by Reaction Committee Tues., Nov. 29 City Council /Commission meeting: Workshop Session -Review architectural design, cost and Committee's comments. - Provide final direction to architects Thurs., Dec. 8 Reaction Committee - Review and make recommendation to City Council: Bond costs/total costs for project. Funding. Tues., Dec. 20 City Council to review proposal and recommendation from Committee. Set up referendum. Thurs., Jan. 12 Reaction Committee to react/discuss Council action. Target Date for Referendum: February 21 to March 14, 1988 THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL OF THE TWI\ CITIES MSP AIRPORT ADEQUACY STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY September 1988 Prepared By: Ate. APOGEE RESEARCH Thompson-Hickling Introduction MSP Today EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 2 Forecasts and Uncertainty 3 Base Case 8 Alternatives 8 Development Strategies 8 Benefit -Cost Analysis 12 Costs of Development 12 Benefits of Development 14 Evaluation Measures 14 Results 18 Economic Impacts 22 Noise 22 Finance 25 Conclusions 25 Introduction Aviation has long been the fastest growing mode of transportation. This growth has created economic and social benefits for the nation as a whole as well as for virtually every region. It also creates problems. Some of these problems are more difficult to solve than others: reducing the negative impacts from aircraft noise and frequent overflights, for example. Others, such as how to cope with growing demand for air travel, are conceptually easier to solve -- simply add more runways! -- but face substantial political, planning, engineering, and financial obstacles. For decades, the U.S. airport system was blessed with excess capacity in most major cities. This enabled the system to absorb steady growth year after year and was, in turn, a key factor in encouraging such growth. Aviation experts have been warning for some time that this period of easily available capacity was about to end. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) estimates that enplanements will nearly double by the turn of the century. Most 1 importantly, while the rapid rate of industry growth may slow somewhat due to reduced competition brought on by recent mergers and the searchfor higher profits, the upward trend seems unlikely to change. The consequence is clear: current airport capacity problems will only be exacerbated. This problem is national in scope. The FAA predicts that by 1996, more than two dozen major airports -- including Minneapolis -St. Paul International (MSP) -- will face capacity problems. The public is increasingly aware of these problems. Airport capacity problems receives front page attention in the national press and, for the first time since the early 1970s, new airports have been approved by voters in two major cities -- Austin and Denver -- and should open their doors during the 1990s. MSP Today MSP is generally recognized as an efficiently run commercial airport. Whether measured in terms of total enplanements or annual operations, it also ranks as one of the busier airports in the nation. Primarily as a result of its emergence as a hub, growth of air traffic at MSP has outpaced national trends. Nationally, for example, enplanements rose by 28 percent between 1980 and 1985. Over that same period at MSP, enplanements grew by 66 percent -- more than twice the national average. Financial trends suggest a strong and stable financial presence. While coping with strong growth in traffic, the finances of MSP have remained strong and even improved somewhat. Even though delays are somewhat larger now than in years past, many other airports face much more serious capacity and delay problems than does MSP. Given this, why is there any need to even think about adding capacity today? First, the long lead time required to plan complex infrastructure investments and the need to develop a political consensus before implementing major public investments means that the region must focus on the level of service that will be provided ten years, twenty years, or even further in the future. In addition, the uncertainty surrounding the speed with which any complex public decision can be made, adds even more lead time. Second, because cities and regions compete for jobs and economic growth, the ability to find effective solutions to airport capacity problems creates special opportunities for communities with better foresight -- and the ability to act on this vision. Third, public works play a key role in defining a region's social and economic character and the quality of life that it offers its residents. Because of this role and because of an airport's natural longevity, decisions should be made with a time 2 horizon that measures in decades. Forecasts and Uncertainty A key first step in determining the adequacy of any infrastructure system is to forecast the expected level of demand. The MSP Adequacy Study explicitly recognizes the uncertainties that are part of any forecast by using a family of techniques called risk assessment. These methods have been used to assess long-range capital investments by public agencies and private firms alike. By measuring the risks of each of the key factors that might influence a major investment decision and incorporating those risks into the analysis, the resultant forecast does not offer a single "take it or leave it" answer. Rather, information can be presented that actually reflects the uncertainties involved -- and how they might influence a forecast. By expressing results in terms of the probability of being able to meet a given level of demand, the public can make a much more informed decision regarding how much capacity should be added and how soon. More than forty specific variables have been incorporated into the economic risk assessment model, including descriptions of the metropolitan region (future population, jobs), of the airline industry (size of aircraft, average fares, degree of hubbing at MSP etc.), alternative capacity additions at MSP (new runways) and future improvements to air traffic control rules (independent parallel operations during poor weather being the most important). As a result, the risk assessment does not result in a single "best guess" estimate of future traffic, but rather shows the probability that traffic will reach or exceed a given level of traffic. It thus offers a less simplistic but more realistic assessment of the future. From a policy point of view, it permits specific consideration of the quality of service that the community wishes to provide. For example, is an airport that is only large enough to offer a fifty percent chance of meeting future demand adequate? Or is an eighty percent target more appropriate? Tradeoffs among the level of service, the cost to provide that service, and the benefits from greater assurance involve complex calculations as well as considerable value judgments. The forecasts show a very high probability of strong continued growth in aviation demand for the Metropolitan Region. This is not surprising given the continued economic growth in the region. There is a more than two-thirds chance that enplanements will increase by 50 percent or more within ten years (1998), increasing to 12 million from roughly 8 million today (Table 1). Twenty years from now, there is better than a one-third chance that enplanements will have doubled (exceeding 16 million each year) and an 84 3 a�8 percent chance that they will have doubled within thirty years. TABLE 1 Likelihood of 50 Percent Increase in Enplanements Within: Five Years 10 % Ten Years 69 % Fifteen Years 86 % Twenty Years 93 % Thirty Years 97 % Likelihood of 100 Percent Increase in Enplanements Within: Five Years 0 % Ten Years 1 % Fifteen Years 9 % Twenty Years 34 % Thirty Years 84 % The traffic forecasts used in this study have been linked closely to those developed as part of the MSP Master Plan. Both the MAC Master Plan and the Metropolitan Council study are based on the same econometric equations. Both sets of estimates, however, are less than the recent hub forecasts prepared by the FAA. The attached figure compares these three sets of estimates for future enplanements and for future operations at MSP. The grey band covers an area with roughly a two-thirds probability of including the actual future enplanement level. The third Figure shows the probability that the level of enplanements will exceed certain levels for each of the forecast years. For example, while the most likely estimate of traffic in 2008 is some 15.3 million enplanements, there is a 30 percent chance that traffic will be some 10 percent higher. 4 ?°'\ FOPECAS'I C J" (`.2 r Y "1 C` 2 n2 C.2 -� --4 (suomi ) S1 J I1'1�\V Id\J i C2 Met Council OPERATIONS (Thousands) X16 (1�IN1\?:iL S�03Nfl 1r� z I1� L SN 0ILIJV21110 Probability that MSP Domestic Enplanements will Exceed Indicated Level 100 90 80 70 60 oS 50 0 a. 40 30 20 10 8.8 9.6 10.4 11.2 12 12.8 13.6 14.4 15.2 16 16.8 17.6 18.4 Millions of Enplanements ■ 1993 + 1998 0 2003 A 2008 7 2018 �g� Development Options Base Case As with any complex, long-term public issue, the Twin Cities Region faces a series of choices. The benchmark for evaluating these alternatives is called the Base Case. This is not a do- nothing alternative, but rather represents a serious policy choice in its own right. Specifically, the base case calls for continued improvement to the existing airport, taking advantage of technological improvements as they arrive. However, no major physical additions are made beyond the planned extension of runway 4-22. By deferring the tough planning and political decisions to some future date, such an option has some obvious advantages. Preliminary results from the MAC Master Plan indicated that the major capacity constraint at MSP was on the airside -- that is while terminal additions and improved ground access would be needed, these changes could be met within normal planning efforts and likely financial resources. Within the foreseeable future, the lack of new runway capacity would mean significant increases in delays or force airlines to shift traffic to other airports or to less convenient travel times. Alternatives More than ten separate layouts for MSP were examined during the study, as well as a "generic" new airport. This examination was limited in two ways. First, no extensions were made beyond the airport's "natural" borders (basically, inside the Ring Road but excluding the National Cemetery). Second, consideration of a possible new airport was abstracted from any particular site. Based on this detailed review, it was decided to focus on three significant capacity additions. o A new North-South runway "parallel" to Cedar Avenue; o A new "far" parallel runway, some 2000 feet to the Northeast of 11L -29R; and o A possible new airport. Development Strategies These physical options were then combined into six alternative strategies, including estimates of likely timing requirements. The following sketch maps show the two development strategies for the current MSP site. 8 a�� MSP International "Strategy B" n NORTH ,•T MSP International "Strategy A" , NORTH ry 1000 ft. I 1 MSP International "Strategy B" n NORTH Base Case Strategy A Strategy B Development Strategies Continue MSP with existing runway system and implement current capital improvement including the 4-22 runway extension (the base case program is assumed in all subsequent strategies), Enhance MSP by building a new North-South Runway, operational in 1997; Enhance MSP to its maximum potential (within the ringroad highway system) by building a new North-South Runway, operational in 1997 and by building a new Far Parallel Runway, operational in 2008. Strategy C Enhance MSP short-term and land bank for a new replacement airport long-term. Strategy C1 Enhance MSP by building a North-South Runway, operational in 1997; secure a land bank for a potential new airport, land under control by 1990 or 1991 if possible and by 1996-1997 at latest; and build and open a new airport in 2008 if justified by contingency planning process. Strategy C2 Enhance MSP by building a new North-South Runway, operational in 1997; secure a land bank for a potential new airport, land under control by 1990 or 1991 if possible and by 1996-1997 at latest; and build and open a new airport in 2015 if justified by contingency planning process. Strategy D Use demand management techniques to alter the schedule of the air carriers and regional commuters to maximize the capacity of MSP; Strategy E Site and build a new airport, open it by 1999. Under the base case set of assumptions, demand for service though MSP quickly outstrips the capacity of the system -- even with significant air traffic control improvements included in the calculations. For example, by the year 2008, the Base Case offers only a five percent chance of being adequate to meet expected demand -- that is, a ninety five percent chance of falling short of expected demand (See Figure). Strategy A, however, would improve this probability to about 20 percent, while Strategy B offers a more than 80 percent assurance of meeting demand in the year 2008. 10 ��5 Strategy B probably represents the maximum feasible development of the current site. This option requires taking part of Fort Snelling Park and would mean that the Air Force and Air National Guard operations would have to move to another airport, perhaps outside the metropolitan region. Further, if current MinnDOT rules for safety zones at the end of new runways were followed, parts of the South Minneapolis neighborhood would have to be purchased. Strategy D is a non -capital intensive approach that involves changes in the schedule of flights. While such an approach is very attractive because of its low direct cost, it involves several problems. First, can the schedule changes be enforced short of imposing local government regulation of air carrier service? Second, at what point do schedule changes begin to divert traffic away from MSP? This last point is crucial in determining how extensive are the changes that can be made. Since the "easiest" flights to change involve smaller aircraft that serve regional traffic, this strategy runs the risk of damaging the economic links between the Twin Cities and the surrounding region -- linkages that have been strengthening in recent years. More drastic schedule changes would be required if capacity is well below expected demand, but this is clearly undesirable from the point of view of the Metropolitan Region. Benefit -Cost Analysis A family of economic tools grouped under the term of benefit cost analyses are well-suited to evaluating the relative attractiveness of alternative investments. These tools require a comparison of the direct costs and benefits attributed to each option. Costs of Development The direct costs of each strategy includes the capital costs to construct the runways, terminals, and ground access needed as well as the costs to purchase the land required for siting these facilities (See Table). While not discussed in detail in this executive summary, there is also the potential need to add additional safety zones at the end of the existing runways. The current runways at MSP are "grandfathered" from this requirement. The costs --both financial and social -- to purchase this land are substantial and they have been included in the table partly to show greater comparability between the costs of a new airport (which would include such safety zones) and costs at the current site. All costs and benefits have been converted into constant 1988 dollars. Airport operating costs are the second major cost for each strategy. Other non -economic costs -- most importantly noise impacts -- are discussed below. 12 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS (MILLIONS OF 1988 DOLLARS) (i) DIRECT DEVELOPMENT COSTS COST CATEGORY STRATEGY A STRATEGY 8 STRATEGY C1 STRATEGY C2 PROPERTY ACQUISITION & PREP.: NATIONAL GUARD N/A 205.5 (1) (1) AIR FORCE N/A 142.5 (1) (1) WEST -SIDE RESIDENTIAL 40 40 40 40 OTHER N/A 37.5 (1) (1) TOTAL 40 425.5 460.6 (2) 420.6 (2) ADD'L ZONES (NEW RUNWAYS) CLEAR ZONE 0 75 (3) (3) SAFETY ZONE A (MINNDOT) 169.1 255.5 169.1 (3) 169.1 (3) SAFETY ZONE 8 (MINNDOT) 88.8 171.9 88.8 (3) 88.8 (3) HOV LANES AIRFIELD DEVELOPMENT TERMINAL FACILITIES 0 27.7 N/A N/A 34.4 63.4 260.7 (4) 260.7 (4) 192 192 737.4 (5) 737.4 (5) SUBTOTAL 524.3 1211.0 (ii) INDIRECT AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS 1716.6 1716.6 COST CATEGORY STRATEGY A STRATEGY B STRATEGY C1 STRATEGY C2 ADD'L ZONES (EXISTING RUNWAYS) CLEAR ZONE (FAA) 60 60 60 60 SAFETY ZONE A (MINNDOT) 286.6 286.6 286.6 286.6 SAFETY ZONE B (MINNDOT) 539.1 539.1 539.1 539.1 SUBTOTAL 885.7 885.7 885.7 885.7 TOTAL 1410 2096.7 2602.3 2602.3 NOTES: (1) ANTICIPATED COSTS ARE NOT ESTIMATED. (2) INCLUDES NEW AIRPORT PROPERTY ACOUSITION (S48.9) AND SITE PREPARATION ($371.7), & STRATEGY A ($40). (3) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW AIRPORT SAFETY ZONES AND CLEAR ZONES INCLUDED UNDER LAND ACQUISITION. (4) FOR NEW AIRPORT,GENERAL AVIATION (S3.5) AND SUPPORT FACILITIES ($92.5), AND STRATEGY A ($34.4). (5) FOR NEW AIRPORT, GROUND TRANSPORTATION ($194.4) AND FEDERAL FACILITIES ($31), AND STRATEGY A (S192). Benefits of Development The transportation benefits from adding capacity all derive from reduced delays. These benefits are of two types: o savings to airlines from reduced fuel use and lower aircraft and crew costs; and o savings to travelers from reduced waiting time for delayed aircraft. In the analysis presented below, estimates are made using total transportation benefits and then using only airline benefits. Focusing on aircraft benefits alone is clearly the more conservative approach and is done in part because of uncertainty in assigning a value to travel time savings, Estimates of delay under each strategy use a detailed airport simulation model -- called ADSIM -- that was developed by the FAA for use in their airport capacity studies. The estimates of total aircraft hours of travel delay are shown in the attached figure and table. A key conclusion is that without significant additions to capacity (as shown by the successive implementation of Strategies A, B and C) travel delays at MSP. quickly escalate to intolerable levels. Evaluation Measures The economic evaluation measures used in this study can be divided into two groups: those concerned with the overall worth of the investment and those that focus on the proper timing of the investment. Each set of measures tells a different story (the attached Table summarizes how each is calculated). In terms of ranking the different strategies, net present value (the discounted value of benefits minus the discounted value of total costs) is the best single measure. Rate of return measures and benefit cost ratios are useful as setting minimum hurdles that must be exceeded to make projects worthwhile -- typically, a rate for return in excess of ten percent year and a benefit -cost ratio of one or greater are required to nominate a project for consideration. The rate of return measure also offers a comparison with the type of criteria often examined in private business. The first year benefit is a good measure of project timing. If the benefits in the first year of operation are more than ten percent (a typical hurdle rate for public projects) of the total construction costs, than the project can "pay for itself" from year one and is well-timed. Moreover, if the first year benefit rate is substantially more than the hurdle rate, this often indicates that the project is overdue. 14 TOTAL DELAY PER YEAR (1988 - 2020) m 0 N 0 O N 01 0) r`) 01 01 co I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 rn tf) d' r7 N 01 CO N LO to f r') N O O O O O O O O O O (Guoi11iw) (s2InoH 1_JvHo?iiv) , vi a a9D d STRATEGY B CURR. APRT CO YEAR 1988 TOT DELAY (HRS) AVG DELAY (MIN) 1998 TOT DELAY (HRS) AVG DELAY (MIN) TOTAL AIRCRAFT DELAY AND AVERAGE DELAY CURRENT STRATEGY STRATEGY STRATEGY STRATEGY STRATEGY AIRPORT * A B Cl C2 E 75,577 75,577 75,577 75,577 75,577 75,577 14.10 14.10 14.10 14.10 14.10 14.10 216,858 61,591 61591 61,591 61,591 216,858 29.72 8.44 8.44 8.44 8.44 29.72 2008 TOT DELAY (HRS) 439,731 107,420 93,875 107,420 107,420 21,987 AVG DELAY (MIN) 50.41 12.32 10.76 12.32 12.32 2.32 2018 TOT DELAY (HRS) 1,251,415 547,500 378,983 62,571 62,571 62,571 AVG DELAY (MIN) 109.96 48.11 33.30 5.50 5.50 5.50 * Includes Current Capital Improvement Program. 2No\ �6 KEY MEASURES OF COST -BENEFIT MEASURES OF WORTH Net Present Value (NPV) Rate of Return Benefit -Cost Ratio MEASURES OF TIMING First -Year Benefit Pay -Back Period DEFINITION Present-day value of benefits minus present day value of costs. The discount rate at which NVP=0 Present value of benefits divided by present value of costs. Benefits in the first year after construction divided by construction costs (including interest paid during construction period), expressed as a percent. Number of years until capital re-couped through the flow of benefis. 4,2(711,3 INTERPRETATION NPV greater than zero means project is worthwhile. Projects are ranked according to NPV. Rate of return should exceed pre-set hurdle rate (10%) to qualify for consideration. A ratio of greater than one means project is worthwhile. A ratio equal to or in excess of the hurdle rate (10%) means project is well timed. A ratio below hurdle rate means project is premature. A short pay -back period means less risk. Results The results of the cost -benefit analysis are summarized in the attached table and two figures. The table compares the each of the major development options in terms of net present value, rate of return and first year benefits both with total benefits and with aircraft benefits alone. In terms of net present value, all the options perform well, with Strategy C1 (a North South Runway followed by a new airport in 2008) showing the highest value when total benefits are used. All strategies show rates of return in the mid-40s -- another indication of worthwhile investments. Based on total benefits, the ratio of first year benefits is well in excess of ten percent for each option, indicating that these options could be implemented even sooner. Based on airline benefits alone, however, the ratio of first year benefits indicate that Strategies B and C1 should be delayed. That is, it may be more difficult to use airline fees as the primary or sole source to fund these strategies. What are the risks of failure? The two figures show the probability of achieving different levels of net present values. In all cases, there is virtually no chance that the net present value of these investments (whether based on total benefits or just airline benefits) will fall to zero. Both charts indicate the greatest assurance with Strategy A, adding just a North-South runway. This is not surprising,since this is the least cost investment option considered. 18 ANALYSIS c 0 m L 0•-• )-r+^ 0e. ° +� CV In L CO LL C In 0 C U1 CO 0 0 L -� -- 0_ II — +� E 0 OmON00 UJ r 0 ON N rcr - N • Cr) 0N00 N mr-U1N mmmmm N SCUUW 01 r+ 0 C L (+ 03 03 +) +) C i1] DJ N 0 LLQ 2 V CO TJ C 31 L 0 C U N 0 0 L O J L S 0. 0 E 0 44 V T 01 0 ID L 1M 0CT1(0(1N 1.0(6i�U1 NC'li\JiJ 1n '.0 m m 010)m01m r1N SCUUW 71 C 0 L 0 0 L O 3 0 C L 0 r+ c L 3 L 1] c 0 E 0 L U C N 0 0 CS 0 IC auea T o 0 0 0 k l ffige ofd o 0 0 0 co 0) co a.) u W 0) cri °3M C 0 0) GO co i to Q. cv0 cd 9 0 0 6? f /� 0 0 13 ,c 7 0 ... cp C1m CCI � ..ra 2 Ara 0 .41 CP 0 0 0 fsu 43 0 0 0 0 Economic Impacts The potential regional economic losses from holding capacity below expected demand are quite large. The airport currently contributes well above $2 billion a year to the region, an impact that could increase to about $3.5 billion over the next two decades. However, by the year 2008, the severe capacity constraints found under the Base Case imply regional losses of $1 billion or more -- a thirty percent loss (see Figure, below). Yet even the high end of the range of potential impacts understates the true potential of additional capacity since an airport with "excess" capacity can act as a "growth pole." The key role that airports play in attracting new business or encouraging existing businesses to expand, has played a large part in the motivation behind the new Dallas Airport in the early 1970s and the current move to build a new airport in Denver. Likewise, an airport brings new jobs. One that is capacity constrained, on the other hand, will limit growth below its potential. As demonstrated in Figure 2, for example, the change in service implied by increases in delays can only result in lost opportunities for growth. Here, the greater delays and diverted flights under the Base Case results in thousands fewer jobs for the region. In terms of economic impact, Strategy Cl appears to stand out because of its strong commitment to increasing capacity at a fast but practical pace. This is one way to assure strong access to national and world markets. The economic impact of different airport developments depends on what baseline is used. For example, the analysis presented here focuses on comparisons with what would happen under the Base Case. this Base Case assumption itself is a moving target however. Thus, even without significant capacity improvements at MSP, airport activity would still increase regional income and add new jobs. However, while the regional economy would not shrink if significant capacity additions were not made, future growth would be much more limited (see the bottom line in attached figures). Noise The above discussion has focussed on measures of airport impacts that are relatively easy to measure -- savings in aircraft operating costs, changes in travel delays, job changes, etc. Many of the impacts of airport development are harder to measure and require personal judgments to evaluate. 22 RANGE OF POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS AT MSP INTERNATIONAL d Forecast CO O N Cl _ o C\2 O CA Cn co O I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CA O CO CO .7t' N O CO O d' N O d' CO CO CI C`D C'') C\2 C\2 C\t C\2 C\i (suoiiiia $) co U C a O 24 11cP 4 2 CO C-1 Ct d II 0 r tzpCt v CO cn ct Ct CCI CO CP a> uesnous.> asp i Noise impacts stand out as the most significant environmental effect of airport. Our analysis of noise impacts found a significant relationship between level of noise stress and flight frequency as well as noise energy (LdN). This finding implies that even with the rapid introduction of quieter Stage 3 aircraft, the area surrounding the current airport should not expect to see any reduction in noise stress and is likely to see an increase. The increase in noise stress is, or course largest under those options that involve adding to the capacity at the current site -- all but Strategy E (build a new airport as quickly as possible). Finance In addition to the many complex planning and political questions that are part of adding airport capacity, the Twin Cities must also consider how to pay for the improvements. Two questions arise: First, is the airport financially positioned to undertake a significant new capacity expansion? Second, what do the development alternatives imply for the availability of future financing? The first answer is clear. The financial performance of the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport has been strong relative to that of similar airports. Since 1980, for example, the operating ratio (operating costs as a percent of operating revenues) has consistently out -ranked that of other airports while also displaying a trend of continued improvement (falling from 85 percent in 1980 to 76 percent in 1987). In addition, debt obligations of the Metropolitan Airports Authority (MAC) hold the highest bond rating possible (AAA). The answer to the second question is not as simple, but encouraging nonetheless. The cost -benefit analysis presented above found significant net regional benefits from every development strategy. For example, the airlines alone stand to realize enough savings from aircraft operations (due to crew and fuel savings) under either Strategy A, B, C, or E to justify the additional expense. The most costly options involve a new airport. In this regard, the MSP Reuse Panel identified alternative uses for the current site that could generate adequate funds to finance a large portion (perhaps even all) of a new airport. Conclusions The economic analysis does not point to a single strategy as the clear "winner" -- Strategy C1 does have the highest net present value for total benefits, while Strategy A has the highest net 25 ►, present value for aircraft costs. However, the analysis does indicate the strong need to do something, and do something large in scale. Without significant additions to MSP's capacity -- beyond that in the Base Case -- the economic costs to the Metropolitan Region will continue to escalate both in terms of increased travel delays and in terms of job and income losses relative to what could be achieved with increased capacity. Because of the political and planning uncertainties that surround any given option, a strategy to pursue more than a single option would appear to be desirable. Strategies C1 and C2 represent such a "dual" option. Thus, for example, if it appeared that construction of a North-South runway was infeasible, the region would not have ruled out the possibility of a new airport. If these choices are pursued, it would appear to be wise to incorporate a set of criteria that could be used to evaluate the need for any mid -course corrections. Finally, until a definitive decision has been reached on the region's preferred long-range airport plan, land banking for a new airport stands out as a low-cost, low-risk action. If land banking is delayed until the mid-1990s (or later) , however, the region runs the real risk of missing the chance of finding suitable land relatively close to the economic centers of the Twin Cities. Thus, lack of action now might make it much more difficult to implement a new airport later. 26 2oG \ MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT HOHENSTEIN SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 AIRPORT ADEQUACY AND CORRIDOR ISSUES This memo will serve to bring you up to date on two issues regarding the airport as they pertain to City policy. They are the Metropolitan Council Airport Adequacy Study due for action before the study committee on October 13, 1988 and recent developments in the Eagan -Mendota Heights corridor discussion. Met Council Adequacy Study The Study has been underway for approximately fifteen months. The City is currently represented on the study panel by Councilmember Gustafson with Councilmember Egan as alternate. Staff has also monitored the study's progress. At present, the study panel is preparing to act on a recommendation regarding the adequacy of the current airport and future facilities expansion issues that pertain to the group's findings. That action is anticipated on October 13. Staff expects the panel to recommend an alternative which combines enhancement of the current airport in the short term, with land - banking for a potential replacement airport in twenty to thirty years. Attached you will find an update dated August 23, 1988 which summarizes the study to date. On the third page you will note a series of runway configurations. Under the anticipated recommendation, "Enhanced A" would add a north -south runway parallel to Cedar Avenue while land banking would occur for a potential new airport. The runway would operate only from or to the south as its northerly end would conflict with the parallels. At an appropriate decision point, the region would decide whether to build on the land -banked site or build the third parallel shown in "Ultimate A". Were it to be built, the north -south runway would create increased impacts in the southwest part of Eagan at a distance of roughly four miles from its business end. Were the third parallel built, the only way such a configuration could be flown would be to depart on the centerline of the middle runway with safety separations fanning from both of the other runways. Peak hour traffic from 11R would then turn directly over the Highview and Timberline areas tracking at least toward the intersection of Lexington and Yankee Doodle, if not farther west. Two salient factors should be considered. By the time a third parallel were added, most aircraft would be Stage III quiet technology aircraft. However, it would be necessary to expand the current three peaks to roughly nine, including some late night and early morning peaks to accomodate the anticipated demand. Therefore the frequency of noise events, although less severe than at present, may create a higher level of stress in certain residential areas. While the above scenario is viewed as a compromise among noise and capacity interests, there is already growing sentiment that the addition of any runways, with or without land -banking, will be politically impossible. In addition, the only way interests in other parts of the metro area will support potential relocation is if there exists a possibility that it will move to a different region. Northern suburbs in particular are only interested in the potential location and have little interest in either the capacity or noise issues. Also attached, you will find the study's cost -benefit analysis which indicates a substantial loss in regional economic opportunity if the current airport is not replaced. The analysis considers only capital costs of construction and incremental operation and maintenance costs as compared to passenger time savings from reduced delays and savings of aircraft operations and maintenance. As such it omits substantial costs of new roads, lost time for travelers driving farther to a new airport, dislocation costs for businesses differentially affected by its relocation and noise impacts on homes at the current location and any future one, if adequate property is not controlled. As such, it falls dramatically short of a true analysis of all regional impacts. A final issue pertains to land use compatibility. While the study focuses on capacity, one factor mitigating toward relocation and one of the necessary aspects of any potential location is compatible land use. A quick thumbnail of the corridor, river valley and airport indicates that our area has roughly one third of the area anticipated for the new airport (6000 acres compared to 17,500). To the extent that we still have noise problems, the acreage under consideration is probably inadequate to contain all intrusive noise impacts. This issue also presents an opportunity for the City in the area of noise compatibility. As it will affect regional noise policy for the next five to twenty years, the study is probably a good venue for reinforcement of corridor land use policies. Because of the potential for on-site enhancements, it is also important to insert land use language in the study which protects us in the long run, to the extent possible. Staff offers the following for your consideration: 1. That operations southeast of the airport be focused in a manner consistant with the current Metropolitan Council Noise Policy Contours as long as a two parallel runway configuration exists and that any suggested policy changes which would require traffic south of the extended 11R centerline be subjected to extremely rigid environmental scrutiny. 2. That operations from a potential north -south runway be 303 assigned headings which will not concentrate traffic over any one community and utilize procedures to optimize the use of noise abatement features such as the Minnesota River Valley. 3. That, should a third parallel runway be necessary, the noisiest aircraft then extant (Stage II at a minimum) be confined to the middle runway (11C) on departures, such that potential fanning operations over Eagan and Mendota Heights be limited to quiet technology aircraft (Stage III or quieter) only. I would strongly suggest that Met Council staff, specifically John Kari be invited to address the Council at its earliest opportunity and that the Airport Relations Committee, Economic Development Commission, Chamber of Commerce and Northwest Airlines be considered for participation in such a briefing. As a result of the Adequacy Panel's intention to vote on the October 13, it may be appropriate for the Council to consider the following options for direction to Councilmember Gustafson: 1. To abstain, but offer comment following the briefing by Met Council Staff. 2. To attempt to schedule a briefing prior to the October 13 and make a policy determination at that point (this will be very difficult due to the demand for Mr. Kari's time). 3. To support the current location, but oppose on-site improvements (this may be out of the main stream and limit the effectiveness of assertions concerning land - use). 4. To consider other alternatives as outlined by the study. Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor Update The corridor issue was again visited by MASAC at its September 27, 1988 meeting. MASAC's report is attached together with the position statement prepared by staff which includes a series of contour maps illustrating the need to focus traffic north of centerline focusing on the Met Council Noisemap Contours. You will note that staff was to the point about Mendota Heights' effort to place residential land -use in known noise impact areas and then using it as a reason to relocate noise impacts. MASAC was open to our argument and took Mendota Heights to task for their land use decisions. Met Council staff also gave verbal indication that they are supportive of Eagan's position. Staff will follow up on these indications of support. MASAC Chair Rockenstein wants the group to review the background and issues for additional questions at the October MASAC meeting. He then wishes to engage the two cities in one more effort to resolve this issue after the Mendota Heights election in November. With or without a joint decision, MASAC will make 30� recommendation to MAC at its November/December meeting with input from the Met Council. If you have any questions about either of these issues please let me know. inistrative Assistant ISP ADEQUACY STUDY UPDATE August 23, 1988 T ADEQUACY STUDY: Overview The 1987 legislature directed the Metropolitan Council to make a determination of the long-term adequacy of Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport to meet the aviation needs of the Metropolitan Area. A 35 -member MSP Airport Adequacy Task Force is studying projected demand and capacity, environmental issues and economic impact in order to recommend whether the airport is adequate, should be expanded or replaced by a new airport. The Task Force is made up of representatives from the airline industry, state and regional agencies; business, local governments and the general public. It is expected to make its recommendations to the Council in late September or early October of this year. The Council is required to report to the legislature at the end of this year. The Metropolitan Council sets policy for the shape of the region's airport system in the seven -county metropolitan area, including determining the need for a new major airport and the general area where a new airport would be built. The Metropolitan Airports Commission conducts detailed airport Waster planning, and owns and operates MSP and six other airports that are part of the public regional system. FC°ECASTS: Demand Stronm The forecasts show a very high probability of continued strong growth in aviation demand for the Metropolitan Area. Likelihood of Total Passengers Increasing 50% 100% W'ithin...Five Years 10 0 Ten Years 69 1 Fifteen Years 86 9 Twenty Years 93 34 Thirty Years 97 84 A rigorous forecasting process was used to examine some 20 key variables. Several factors appear particularly important in determining future traffic: regional employment, aircraft prices, the amount of connecting traffic (hubbing activity), the size of aircraft, and growth in regional commuter carriers. LEVEL OF SE=VICE. Capacity Improvements are Needed to Ensure an 80 Percent Chance of Meeting Demand, a High Level of Service for the Region. Aircraft operations are key to assessing adequacy. Currently at MS?, average peak hour capacity during good flying weather is 103 operations per hour. To handle the forecast operations at the 80 percent standard: Five Years Ten Years 'Fifteen Years Twenty Years Thirty Years 119 operations 132 operations 148 operations 158 operations 210 operations CAPACITY 0?TIONS: o Add Runways o Technological Advances o Demand Management A. Add Runways Runway Configuration Options Option Description Average Hourly Capacity (VFR) Base Case Extend Runway 4-22 103 Add Taxiway improvements Enhanced A New North-South Runway 135 Enhanced B New North-South Runway 155 "Close" parallel Ultimate A New North-South Runway 182 "Far" parallel Likelihood of Meeting Designed Peak Hour Level of Service (Percent) Year OPTION 1998 Base Case 2 Enhanced A 18 Enhanced B 73 Ultimate A 92 2008 1 18 64 2018 4 9 25 87 40 . __ V ..-.,. --,..k. . . k.' --..,... 1 000 ft. , •I'rz.... .., .. "Enhanced B" n NORTH • .1. .., c, (1, , ._._ - - . 1 . --......_.. ...r n • ,, . mit) ft. ' rc, MSP International -Ultimate A'' 6,1 NORTH .-...,:// -.. . ,.. --.••_ . _ _.. , ---` , 1 E. 'Technological Advances Overall increase in capacity in the 10 to 15 percent range can be expected by the late 19905 (assumed in average hourly capacity numbers above); important for safety and efficiency but not a capacity solution. C. Demand Management Forecasts assume Metropolitan Airports Commission policy of moving almost all corporate and general aviation activity to Reliever Airports. Shifting some scheduled air carrier and regional commuter traffic to off-peak times is under study and results will be available in September. AIRPORT FINANCE. Bondinc is Not a Constraint if Plans Well Conceived In the midst of the present uncertainty over the direction of airport development, one source of stability is that of finance. As the market for airport securities has consistently demonstrated, if a project is economically worthwhile, the financial resources needed will be forthcoming. The mix of financial instruments and mechanisms, however, cannot be expected to remain the same. A shift away from general obligation security for airport bonds to revenue backing only may reduce the bond rating but the airport will continue to draw premium -grade credit standing. NS? REUSE: Life After NS? Possible An intial examination of the reuse potential of MS? if a replacement airport is developed showed strong economic development potential for the 3000 acre site. The availability of such a large site offers the opportunity to do something unique and to attract something that is not already in the Region. ENVIRONMENTAL CAPACITY: Noise is an Issue of Noise Enersv and Frecuencv of Over Fli,chts The noise problem associated with NSP may be harder to solve then previously hoped. The airline fleet will, over the next 15 years, become predominately stage III as the noisier stage II aircraft are replaced. However, as the volume of traffic increase, the noise stress related to frequency of overflights could increase the noise impacts of the airport. NEW AIRPORT DESIGN CONCEPT: The Rezion Should Have Only a Single Major Airport The Metropolitan Area can only support one major air carrier airport. If a new airport is to be built, MSP should be closed. A new airport would require 14,000-i7,500 acres of land and conservatively cost *1.2 billion for the airport related development costs (runways, terminal facilities, control tower and land). The preliminary cost estimates do not include costs of private investment nor transportation access. DECISION OPTIONS: "Make MS? Work" ""h -i'.4 New Ai ---ort" "Hedge Ycur Bet" A. "Make MS? Work" 1. Existing Runway System - Adequate as it is 2. Enhanced A - Build a new north/south runway 3. Ultimate A - Build a new north/south runway and a far parallel (29R - 11L) B. "Build New Airpart" 1. Move to a new site as soon as possible, limit investments at MSP. A variation of building an entire new airport involves keeping MSP as the terminal for the new airport, with a rapid transit connection to shuttle passengers between the landing strip and the terminal. Operational feasibility needs to be determined. C. "Hedge Your Bets" 1. Select a site and put it in a landbank for a new airport for the long- term future. This approach would involve improving MSP for the short- term. If airline travel does not grow as fast as predicted, the development of a site would be delayed until needed. If the forecasts were to come true, and/or if MSP couldn't be expanded, then the region could move ahead quickly to build a new airport. DECISION ASSESSMENT: Seotenber-October 1988 A. Air Transportation Cost/Benefit Analysis B. Economic Impact o Jobs o Regional Income C. Environmental and Safety D. Finance JM3056.PHTRN1@5 3i� ; g ?— SS—L —6 : NOL Je:do i e t xo:eX:,:$ P,:u THE METROPOLITAN COLNCIL OF THE TWIN CITIES MSP AIRPORT ADEQUACY STUDY TRANSPORATION BENEFITS AND COSTS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Prepared By: Aa\._ APOGEE RESEARCH Thompson—Hickling CH2M HILL Enviroscience BASE CASE STRATEGY A: STRATEGY B: STRATEGY C: STRATEGY Cl: STRATEGY C2: STRATEGY D: STRATEGY E: ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES • Current Capital Plan --4-22 Extension • North-South Runway, 1997 • North-South Runway, 1997 • Far Parallel Runway, 2008 • North-South Runway, 1997 • Land Banking 1996-1997 N&W Airport, 2008 • North-South Runway, 1997 • Land Banking, 2003-2004 • NEEW Airport, 2015 • Peak Spreading • New Airport Only, 1999 MEASURING TRANSPORATION BENEFITS AND COSTS (5 KEY MEASURES OF COST -BENEFIT MEASURES OF WORTH Net Present Value (NPV) Rate of Return Benefit -Cost Ratio MEASURES OF TIMING First -Year Benefit Pay -Back Period DEFL?\TI'ION Present-day value of benefits minus present day value of costs. The discount rate at which NVP = 0 Present value of benefits divided by present value of costs. Benefits in the first year after construction divided by construction costs (including interest paid during construction period), expressed as a percent. Number of years until capital re-couped through the flow of benefis. INTERPRETATION NPV greater than zero means project is worthwhile. Projects are ranked according to NPV. Rate of return should exceed pre-set hurdle rate (10%) to qualify for consideration. A ratio of greater than one means project is worthwhile. A ratio equal to or in excess of the hurdle rate (10%) means project is well timed. A ratio below hurdle rate means project is premature. A short pay -back period means less risk. CATEGORIES OF TRANSPORTATION COSTS AND BENEFITS COSTS • Captial costs • Incremental operating and maintenance costs BENEFITS • Passenger time savings due to reduced delay • Aircraft savings in 0 & M due to Reduced delay KEY ASSUMPTIONS USED IN COST -BENEFIT ANALYSIS • Discount rate is 10 percent in real terms (8 1/4 percent cost of capital plus an allowance for risk) • Airline operating costs in 1988 were $1,125 per hour. • Real oil price will decline by 2 percent per annum through 1989; by 1 percent per annum through 1991; and will increase by�1 percent per annum thereafter. • Real airline labor costs will remain constant over the period 1988 - 2020. • Passenger time savings are valued at $35.00 per hour. • The probability range for the dollar value of time is skewed to one-third the expected value ($11.66 per hour) to reflect in-flight productivity. 5\q cl 2 3 cc cc s r O Q,` c ' r (/) r r Q C-" r rn Y .,--.4 r 4 . .--.,r V) �' (1) ✓ O Q O O U! -Q e% in, V O Q O t;),o 00 r e5/3 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS (MILLIONS OF 1988 DOLLARS) (i) DIRECT DEVELOPMENT COSTS COST CATEGORY STRATEGY A STRATEGY B STRATEGY C1 STRATEGY C2 PROPERTY ACQUISITION S PREP.: NATIONAL GUARD N/A 205.5 (1) (1) AIR FORCE N/A 142.5 (1) (1) WEST -SIDE RESIDENTIAL 40 40 (1) (1) OTHER N/A 37.5 (1) (1) TOTAL 40 425.5 420.6 (2) 420.6 (2) ADD'L ZONES (NEW RUNWAYS) CLEAR ZONE 0 75 (3) (3) SAFETY ZONE A (MINNDOT) 169.1 255.5 (3) (3) SAFETY ZONE B (MINNDOT) 88.8 171.9 (3) (3) HOV LANES AIRFIELD DEVELOPMENT TERMINAL FACILITIES 0 27.7 N/A N/A 34.4 63.4 226.3 (4) 226.3 (4) 192 192 545.4 (5) 545.4 (5) SUBTOTAL 524.3 1211.0 (ii) INDIRECT AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS 1192.3 1192.3 COST CATEGORY STRATEGY A STRATEGY B STRATEGY C1 STRATEGY C2 ADD'L ZONES (EXISTING RUNWAYS) CLEAR ZONE (FAA) 60 60 60 60 SAFETY ZONE A (MINNDOT) 286.6 286.6 286.6 286.6 SAFETY ZONE B (MINNDOT) 539.1 539.1 539.1 539.1 SUBTOTAL 885.7 885.7 885.7 885.7 TOTAL 1410 2096.7 2078 2078 NOTES: (1) ANTICIPATED COSTS ARE NOT ESTIMATED. (2) INCLUDES PROPERTY ACOUSITION (S48.9) AND SITE PREPARATION (S371.7). (3) SAFETY ZONES AND CLEAR ZONES INCLUDED UNDER LAND ACQUISITION. (4) GENERAL AVIATION (S3.5) AND SUPPORT FACILITIES (S92.5) INCLUDED IN AIRFIELD DEVELOPMENT COST. (5) GROUND TRANSPORTATION ($194.4) AND FEDERAL FACILITIES (S31) INCLUDED IN TERMINAL FACILITIES COST. TOTAL AIRCRAFT DELAY AND AVERAGE DELAY CURRENT STRATEGY STRATEGY STRATEGY STRATEGY AIRPORT * A B CI C2 YEAR 1988 TOT DELAY (HRS) 75,577 75,577 75,577 75,577 75,577 AVG DELAY (MIN) 14.10 14.10 14.10 14.10 14.10 1998 TOT DELAY (HRS) 216,858 61,591 61591 61,591 61,591 AVG DELAY (MIN) 29.72 8.44 8.44 8.44 8.44 2008 TOT DELAY (HRS) 439,731 107,420 93,875 21,987 107,420 AVG DELAY (MIN) 50.41 12.32 10.76 2.52 12.32 2018 TOT DELAY (HRS) 1,251,415 547,500 378,983 62.571 62,571 AVG DELAY (M:IN) 109.96 48.11 33.30 5.50 5.50 * Includes Current Capital Improvement Program. PERCENTAGE OF FLIGHTS DELAYED BY LENGTH OF DELAY LENGTH OF GATE DELAY HOLD (MINUTES) (%) TAXI TAXI OUT IN (�io) (%) TOTAL 0 93.7% 7.9% 16.3% 18.4% 1 - 14 3.8% 79.9% 80.9% 72.8% 15 - 29 1.5% 10.2% 2.2% 7.3% 30 - 59 0.7% 1.7% 0.5% 1.3% 60 + 0.3% 0.3% 0.1% 0.2% TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % OF DELAY 9.6% 64.0% 26.3% 100.0% .r SOURCE: Airport Capacity Enhancement Plan, DOT, 1988 (Figures are for 1986) nDg -r oZt w w 0 >— /- 0 0 (1988 - 2020) 11111111 I I 1 1 1 1 1 Nt- r N 01 CO N .D In 4" r) N O O O o O o O o (suog11W) (s n0H 1 v:io div) ,&Y130 O N 0 0 N STRATEGY C1 a STRATEGY B O STRATEGY A CURR. APRT AVERAGE DELAY (1988 -- 2020) 0 N 1 i 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o rn co t- t.o U) 't V) N (S3111 NI NO11%2:3dO 2:13d )V13a 0 co 0 0 c0 rn 0 STRATEGY B STRATEGY A • w w V w (1988 -- 2020) [ L i n t r 1 o0 0 0 N 0 N STRATEGY C2 STRATEGY Cl ( 1 i T 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 Q lD • N N CO (ID "3- N CO cD N N N N — 0 0 (spuosnoy1) (SN0111ILN S) SONIAVS 21NI! • N 0 0 STRATEGY B 7 STRATEGY A AIRCRAFT O&M SAVINGS PER YEAR O 0 N cn 0p aD 1- 4 4 ( 1 Rtt r') O N 111111111-1114111 r7 — 0) 01 N LO tf) 'ct' t7 N •— 0) CO N LO tt) t+- r') N 0 O O O O O O O O O (sput sno41) (SNO1111VI S) SONIAVS NPO c7.9v u STRATEGY l STRATEGY C2 STRATEGY B 7 STRATEGY A RETURN ON INVESTMENT OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES -- NET PRESENT VALUE, 1988-2020 (in Millions of Dollars) DIRECT COSTS DIRECT COSTS . SAFETY ZONES All Aircraft All Aircraft Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits STRATEGY A 3,229 956 2,708 431 STRATEGY B 3,332 861 2,808 337 STRATEGY Cl 3,705 811 3,185 2S7 STRATEGY C2 3.527 931 3,008 407 1. The discount rate assumed is 8 1/4% plus 1 3/4% allowance for risk, for a total of 10%. 7--)'1)3c) RETURN ON INVESTMENT OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES -- RATE OF RETURN, 1988-2020 (in Percent) DIRECT COSTS DIRECT COSTS 8:. SAFETY ZONES All Aircraft All Aircraft Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits STRATEGY A 47% 26% 26% 14% STRATEGY B 46% 23% 25% 13% STRATEGY Cl 44% 21% 25% 12% STRATEGY C2 47% 25% 26% 13% RETURN ON INVESTMENT OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES -- RATIO OF BENEFITS TO COST, 1988-2020 DIRECT COSTS DIRECT COSTS & SAFETY ZONES All Aircraft All Aircraft Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits ;TRATEGY A 9.3:1 3.5:1 4.0:1 1.5:1 STRATEGY B 6.5:1 2.4:1 3.5:1 1.3:1 ;TRATEGY Cl 5.1:1 1.9:1 3.2:1 1.2:1 ;TRATEGY C2 6.8:1 2.5:1 3.7:1' 1.4:1 AFFORDABILITY OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES -- NET PRESENT VALUE RELATIVE TO CAPITAL INPUT, 1988-2020 DIRECT COSTS DIRECT COSTS & SAFETY ZONES All Aircraft All Aircraft Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits STRATEGY A 8.3:1 2.5:1 3.0:1 0.5:1 STRATEGY B 5.5:1 1.4:1 2.5:1 0.3:1 STRATEGY Cl 4.1:1 0.9:1 2.2:1 0.2:1 STRATEGY C2 5.8:1 1.5:1 2.7:1' 0.4:1 TIMING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES DIRECT COSTS DIRECT COSTS g SAFETY ZONES All Aircraft All Aircraft Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits FYB PB (%) (years) FYB PB (%) (years) FYB PB FYB PB (%) (years) (%) (years) STRATEGY A 75 1.2 26 3.5 27 3.5 9.6 7.5 STRATEGY B 1 14.3 STRATEGY C1` 19.0 3.5 4.9 5.5 3.5 6.8 6.5 STRATEGY C3 80.2 1.2 62.94 3.0 1. Figures reflect the incremental return of the far parallel runway only. 2. Figures reflect the incremental return of the new airport only. 3. As footnote 2. 4. The FYB for new airport is 10% when new airport opens 2009. 2009 is thus the optimum year. IMPACT OF EARLY OBSCOLESCENCE -- RETURN ON INVESTMENT: NORTH SOUTH RUNWAY - 1997-2008 (in Millions of Dollars) DIRECT COSTS l DIRECT COSTS & SAFETY ZONES All Aircraft All Aircraft Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits NET PRESENT VALUE ($) -' 1,685 372 1,184 (129) 1-1IZST-YEAR,, BENEI Ii (%)' 75 26 27 9.6 PAY -BACK (YEARS) 4 1.2 3.5 3.5 7.5 1. Includes no addition of wider safety zones to existing runways. 2. Includes addition of safety zones to existing runways. 3. Discount rate is 10 percent. 4. Includes interest costs incurred during construction period. DEPEAKING MILD DEPEAKING is done for absolute peak hours only (the hour within each peak that contains the single most flights -- all other hours within the peak remain unchanged). In this form of depeaking, operations in these hours are distributed uniformly throughout the sixty minutes, eliminating any bunching or peaking within this time, yet no operation gets moved out of the hour for which it was originally scheduled. In our work for Minneapolis, this involved redistributing traffic within the hours of 8:00, 13:00, and 17:00. For example, in 1998 during the 17:00 peak, flights get moved by an average of 5.12 minutes from their originally scheduled time, with a standard deviation of 3.63 minutes. SHARP DEPEAKING extends this smoothing to the entire peak period but does not force any flights outside of the peak period. In this case, hourly operations are made identical for all hours within the peak period. For example, in the case of the peak hours 7:00, 8:00, and 9:00, with hourly operations of 75, 96, and 84, respectively, hourly operations can be shifted out of the hour for which they were originally scheduled if necessary. Flights get moved by an average of 7.43 minutes from their originally scheduled time, with a standard deviation of 4.01 minutes. ALTERNATIVE DEPEAKING SCENARIOS Depeaking Scenarios Mild Depealdng Sharp Depeaking Average Schedule 95% Statistical Change Range (Minutes) (Minutes) 5.12 7.43 1. There is a 95% chance that a given flight will be re -scheduled by 12.2 minutes either earlier or later than originally scheduled. 2. There is a 95% chance that given flight will be re -scheduled by 22 rninutes either earlier or later than originally scheduled. ±14.62 SCHEDULE SUMMARY OF TOTE' ANNLAL DELAYS AND AVER.G£ DAILY D=£AYS CSR&E\T AIRPORT 1988 2008 TOTAL (HOURS) gt£R2GE (MINS.) NORMAE 75578 14.1 MILD DEPEAEING 72416 13.5 SHARP DEPEAKING ,x,vw 10.9 TOTAL AVERAGE (HOURS) (MINS.) 439731 4)1643 50.5 4@.6 50.4 SUMMARY OF ANNUAL DELAYS BY CATEGORY OF DELAY CURRENT AIRPORT 2i et e12 22 kt rt :•2 et et et et et W - c- r. rr m r) Cb a) — r) r o •-, 0 G . t-. C N CO to 0 N t- 0) CO N C CO va 0 r) uJ r) to rt CD H ▪ �- • to 0 a) 0 a) r- r) to r- < V) CO CO r• C) to r- N a) to .r O a) [a: n to ' to 01 O) to •-+ r) n — tD -+ v) CO d ^i O) 0) - .-t r- N O r .-r to r7 r7 •-•I er ( ) N - co r) CV .-r N et r2 e2 i4 et et s2 et a2 et et et (.. a N c) a) O N N r- 0 r- to a) 0 • (--, W a) N 0 0 O) 0 0 N 0 tO 0 }2 0 r) U) to •r .4 F I.2 • 0 Is - 0 r` r- N 0 O) rn 0 0 < to 0 r7 0 N O O N a) F 0.: 0 ti C: c CO r- 0 •-.( r7 O O CO CO CT) 0) to U) tt•, CO r - h O N r) N r) rJ N SCHEDULE t0 RUNWAY DELAYS TAXIWAY DELAYS AIR DELAYS MILD DEPEAKINC RUNWAY DELAYS 3�0 AIR DELAYS SHARP DEPEAKINC TAXIWAY DELAYS OTHER DELAYS COMPARISON OF NET PRESENT VALUE FOR STRATEGY A UNDER NORMAL AND DEPEAKED AIRLINE SCHEDULE 1988-2020 (in Millions of Dollars) STRATEGY A: NORMAL SCHEDULE STRATEGY A: SHARPLY DEPEAKED SCHEDULE DIRECT COSTS DIRECT COSTS ick SAI-ETY ZONES All Aircraft All Aircraft Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits 3,229 956 2,708 431 3,073 899 2,551 375 0) 0 N 0 co 0) = 0 <0 U 0 10)0 tis 0) 6 ts- (Y) CY) co T 1 I 1 IIo T O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O o�C ua J %!J!qEoJd 0 0 Net Present STRATEGY E: NEW AIRPORT STRATEGY COST BENEFIT RESULTS FOR STRATEGY E All Benefits Aircraft Benefits Present Value of Benefits 4,708 1,758 Present Value of Costs 1,425 1,425 Net Present Value 3,283 335 NPV to Present Value of Costs Ratio 2.3:1 0.2:1 Benefits to Costs Ratio 3.2:1 1.2:1 Internal Rate of Return 24% 12% •r. r—.Immo ▪ • _1 r rin ssr.TToa ;o suorTIT I 3 3 M CZ (spuesnota) O Base Case Summary of Findings: Aircraft Dcicy Implications ($ Millions) for Total Impacts YEAR Uncons:rained OpT:ON Forccest, Total SC A 6 Cl C2 1988 1,200 1,200 1,203 1,200 1,200 1,200 1998 1,339 1,293 1,353 1,353 1,353 1,353 2008 1,411 1,291 1,425 1,425 1,482 1,425 2018 1,.80 1,295 1,360 1,495 1,623 1,554 Summary of findings: Aircraft Delay implications for No. of Jobs YEAR Unconstrained OPTION Fcrccest, Jobs EC A B C1 C2 1983 29,436 29,436 29,436 29,436 29,436 29,436 1998 34,179 32,626 34,521 34,521 34,521 34,521 2008 36,557 32,616 36,923 36,923 38,385 36,923 2018 36,985 32,601 34,762 37,355 40,683 38,834 cG Clo 0.) 0 (f) E 0 (.) LU 7c-6 0 a) cc .11••••••••••••••••• ••••••••1. (suoTto a) 7 2 ((((±)))) Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC) Chairman: Walter Rockenstein, II Past Chairs Jan Del Calzo, 1979-1982 Stanley W. Olson, 1969-1979 Technical Advisor: Steven J. Vecchi September 27, 1988 MEMORANDUM 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 (612) 726-9411 TO: Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council FROM: Mendota Heights/Eagan Corridor Operations Committee SUBJECT: Mendota Heights/Eagan Corridor At the June 28, 1988 MASAC meeting, it was recommended that the corridor issue be returned to the Operations Committee for further additional review. After meetings in July and September, the committee submits the attached information based on the following charges: 1. Population Density Data - population in contour within next 5 to 8 years, divided into categories 2. Explanation and Review - 28 degree cone 3. Simultaneous, Non -Simultaneous Departures - average number of hours, weekday and weekend 4. Explanation and Review - 32 ILS, St. Paul Downtown Airport and interference 5. Definition, Operational Penalties - 4 mile "straight-out" on 11L, no variance of 15 degree cone (only 100 degrees on 11L) 6. EA, EIS: New Southern Boundary 7. Landing Impact on Eagan, L10 contour - (29 L,R arrivals) 8. No Departure Turns until "at Runway end" on 11L Miscellaneous Items: 1. Exemption Stage III aircraft frau corridor procedures/restrictions 2. Definition of FAA role during committee meetings 3. Eagan's request for Met Council policy noise contours to be considered in MASAC'S decision process 1. POPULATICV DENSITY DATA In the initial corridor discussion during the fall of 1987, the cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights were working with Ldn noise contours (Ldn75, Ldn70 and Ldn65) provided by HNTB to assess the population affected by alternatives 2, 3 and 4. The cities, however, felt that it would be helpful to have L10 noise contours (L1065) generated for alternatives 2, 3 and 4 in an effort to more completely assess population impact. The following is population data provided by the cities corresponding to the Ldn75, Ldn65 and L1065 noise contours. (It should be noted that the City of Eagan also included population data corresponding to the Met Council policy contours hoping that MASAC would take them into consideration.) EAGAN-MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORRIDOR NOISE CONTOUR HOUSEHOLD COUNTS EAGAN Residential In Place Alternate Ldn 70 Ldn 65 L10 65 Alt 3 Single Family 89 374 Multi Family Rental 161 Owner Occupied 19 Total 89 554 Alt 2 Single Family Multi Family Rental Owner Occupied Total Alt 4 Single Family Multi Family Rental Owner Occupied Total Arrival 64 64 70 70 405 322 725 539 322 861 Single Family 219 Multi Family Rental Owner Occupied 38 Total 257 37 EAGAN-MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORRIDOR NOISE CONTOUR HOUSEHOLD COUNTS EAGAN Comprehensive Guide Residential Net Potential Relocations and Additions Alternate Ldn 70 Ldn 65 L10 65 Alt 3 Single Family 10 244* Multi Family Rental 161 Owner Occupied 19 Total 10 404 Alt 2 Single Family Multi Family Rental Owner Occupied Total Alt 4 Single Family Multi Family Rental Owner Occupied Total 16 16 55 55 275* 322 575 409* 322 711 * Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan does not provide for any new residential subdivisions within the noise contours. An estimated 20 lots have been indicated in each category for potential in -fill. Administrative Offices August 31, 1988 CITY OF MFNDOTA HEIGHTS Mr. Steve Vecchi Metropolitan Sound Abatement Council 6040 - 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 Dear Steve: Enclosed is the data from the City of Mendota Heights concerning the number of residential units within the different noise metric contours. The first four sheets concern the Ldn 70 and 65 contours, as well as the L10 contour; there are no homes in the Ldn 75 contour so it has not been included. The data is shown in a matrix of flight alternative by metric. For each place in the matrix, we have shown the total number of residences, and broken them down between single family and multi -family, and further subdivided the multi -family into rental and owner occupied. I believe this is as requested by the MASAC when they considered this issue in June. Using the consistent matrix format, the first four sheets show: 1. Residences in place as of August of this year. 2. Residences likely to be relocated at some time in the reasonably foreseeable future. 3. Residences that are planned to be added over the next few years (based on the City's existing comprehensive land use plan). 4. Net anticipated in the future after taking the homes currently in place, subtracting those to be relocated, and adding those planned. The fifth and final sheet shows the number of residences located in each of the Metropolitan Council's policy contours. Jon Hohenstein of Eagan had requested that this information be provided as well. The data presented are for the City of Mendota Heights only. However, the Operations Committee and MASAC will want to be cognizant of the fact that the cities of Mendota, Sunfish Lake and Inver Grove Heights also have residential r2)s 750 South Plaza Drive • Mendota 1 -heights. Minnesota 55120 • 452-1850 Mr. Steve Vecchi August 31, 1988 Page Two areas within the L10 contour and the Metropolitan Council Policy Contour No. 4. If you have any questions about the data prior to our meeting on September 9, please give me a call. Sincerely evin D. Frazell City Administrator KDF:madlr enclosure cc: Mayor & City Council Bernie Friel, MASAC representative Jon Hohenstein FLIGHT ALTERNATIVE RESIDENCES IN PLACE - AUGUST, 1988 METRIC Ldn70 3 Total 2 single family 2 multi -family 0 rental 0 owner occupied 0 2 Total single family multi -family rental owner occupied 4 Total single family multi -family rental owner occupied Ldn 65 L10 274 49 225 225 0 2 194 2 44 O 150 O 150 O 0 2 117 2 42 0 75 O 75 O 0 1083 858 225 225 0 889 560 664 225 225 0 335 225 225 0 FLIGHT ALTERNATIVE RESIDENCES LIKELY TO BE RELOCATED Ldn 70 METRIC Ldn 65 L10 3 Total 0 14 single family 14 multi -family 0 rental 0 owner occupied 0 2 Total 0 34 single family 14 multi -family 0 rental 0 owner occupied 0 4 Total 0 9 single family 9 multi -family 0 rental 0 owner occupied 0 14 14 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 14 14 0 0 0 FLIGHT ALTERNATIVE 3 Total single family multi -family rental owner occupied PLANNED TO BE ADDED METRIC Ldn 70 0 Ldn 65 L10 0 2 Total 0 0 single family multi -family rental owner occupied 4 Total 0 0 single family multi -family rental owner occupied 996 894 628 310 686 106 580 208 686 88 106 580 540 0 540 FLIGHT ALTERNATIVE NET ANTICIPATED IN THE FUTURE METRIC Ldn 70 Ldn 65 L10 3 Total 2 260 single family 2 35 multi -family 0 225 rental 0 225 owner occupied 0 0 2 Total 2 single family 2 multi -family 0 rental 0 owner occupied 0 4 Total 2 single family 2 multi -family 0 rental 0 owner occupied 0 180 106 30 150 150 0 33 75 75 0 2065 1154 911 1769 331 580 858 911 331 580 1174 409 765 225 540 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL POLICY CONTOURS Net Policy Contour Residences in Likely to Planned to Anticipated Zone Place Be Relocated Be Added In Future 2 Total 4 2 single family 4 2 multi -family 0 0 rental 0 0 owner occupied 0 0 3 Total 191 11 single family 41 11 multi -family 150 0 rental 150 0 owner occupied 0 0 4 Total 253 single family 178 multi -family 75 rental 75 owner occupied 0 0 S 0 0 740 200 540 0 540 2 2 0 0 0 180 30 150 150 0 993 378 615 75 540 EAGAN-MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORRIDOR METROPOLITAN COUNCIL POLICY CONTOUR HOUSEHOLD COUNTS EAGAN Net Policy Contour Residences in Comp Guided Planned to Anticipated Zone Place Comm/Ind Be Added In Future 3 Single Family 68 68 0 0 Multi Family 0 0 0 0 Rental 0 0 0 0 Owner Occupied 0 0 0 0 Total 68 68 0 0 4 Single Family 350 81 201 470 Multi Family 98 0 0 98 Rental 60 0 0 60 Owner Occupied 38 0 0 38 Total 448 81 201 568 , 1,24 2. 28 DECREE CONE DEFINITION The FAA ATCT informed the Operations Committee that they have always acknowledged Runway 11R extended centerline (118 degrees) to be the southern boundary of the corridor. They also stated that, while they have never acknowledged a northern boundary to the corridor, they have used the 090 degree heading off Runway 11L as an "operations boundary" in an effort of avoiding St. Paul Downtown Airport airspace. The 28 degree cone originates frau the difference between the 118 degree (11R) and 090 degree (11L) reference points. The FAA Tower stated that the 28 degree cone is only utilized about 1 to 2 percent of the time, when a high number of aircraft types with differing performance specifications are scheduled to depart within the same relative time period. A 15 degree cone is used during all other remaining time. 3 '7 4. 32 ILS REVIEW The FAA ATCT informed the Operations Committee that the only time a conflict occurs with the Runway 32 ILS frau St. Paul Holman Field and the Corridor is when the following conditions exist: 1. Runway 32 arrivals (STP) are occuring with simultaneous Runway 11L,R departures (MSP) and 2. Weather is less than 1000' and 3 miles visibility. When these conditions exist, which is approximately 5 to 10 percent of the time during a year, the tower is unable to assign departing aircraft on 11L headings frau 118 degrees to 090 degrees because of the lack of airspace separation from Runway 32 inbounds. To remedy the conflict, the FAA ATCT has established a procedure to hold all Runway 32 inbounds until they could be sequenced between Runway 11L,R departures. The other options are to "single stream" 11L,R departures and 32 arrivals causing delays for both airports, or NDB approaches to St. Paul on Runway 30. 5. "4 -MILE STRAIGHT OUT" RULE ON 11L DEPART RES The FAA ATCT informed the Operations Committee that the primary reason for the success of the current "3 -mile turn" rule for 11L departures is the existence of a reference point on FAA radar screens. The 3 -mile marking acts as a point of reference that aids controllers to insure compliance while departing aircraft on 11L. In addition to the lack of a 4 -mile marking on the radar screen, the FAA stated that the additional spacing requirements necessary for separation on a 4 -mile turn would create many operational problems, particularly during departure rushes. It was concluded that it would not be feasible to initiate a 4 -mile straight out rule for departures on 11L. 6. EA, RTS : NEW SOUTHERN BOUNDARY Alternative 4 proposed by the City of Mendota Heights would require a 5 degree southward shift of the current southern boundary of the corridor (11R extended centerline). The FAA ATCT informed the Operations Committee that according to their guidelines any new change of procedure below 3000' would require an Environmental Assessment document. Thus, alternative 4 would require an Environmental Assessment. Whether or not any positions of the environmental assessment document would require an Environmental Impact Statement would depend on issues contained within. The FAA ATCT concluded that a shift of 5 degrees to the south on 11R departures would shift the Ldn65 noise contour and impact more Eagan residences making it a long and tedious process. Time frame of the EA,EIS is approximately 18 months. 3�0 8. DEPARTURE TURNS "AT RUNWAY END" The FAA informed the Operations Committee that it would not be feasible for air traffic controllers to hold the issuing of a turn for 11L departures until runway end. The possibility of a southward drift when N/NE winds are present could violate the 15 degree separation criteria required for a simultaneous 11R departure. Therefore, the Committee concluded that it would be more effective to increase the pilots sensitivity when departing on Runways 11L/R if MAC would install signs indicating that the assigned heading should not be initiated until runway end. 9. MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS 1. One measure of the 27 point noise abatement program concerned the exemption of Stage III aircraft from noise abatement procedures and corridor restrictions. Since there has been no action by the MAC on this issue, the committee believes the measure should be reassessed. The City of Eagan would like to go on record in opposition to the Stage III exemptions. 2. Bruce Wagoner, FAA ATCT, stated that the tower would like to go on record defining their role in the Operations Committee. He said that he would be the chief representative and spokesman for the tower at the meetings and his purpose would be to "tell whether or not the noise abatement ideas were feasible." He further commented that they would try to give the committee and MASAC indication of changes in an idea to meet FAA approval. 3. The City of Eagan requested that MASAC take into consideration the Met Council policy noise contours in addition to the Ldn75, Ldn65 and L1065 contours when assessing population data differences between the Cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights. d1 c‘; rsr"'ricin 3830 PLOT KNOB ROAD, P 0 BOX 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE ( 512) 454-8100 September 23, 1988 WALTER ROCKENSTEIN METROPOLITAN AIRCRAFT SOUND ABATEMENT COUNCIL 6040 -28TH AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55450 RE: MENDOTA HEIGHTS/EAGAN CORRIDOR STUDY Dear Rocky: VIC E' _L::ON T-OtAS EG N C.AVID K SCN PAMELA '.'oCF:EA THEODC7:E',j%-CHER MOWS HECGES EUGENE Vi-`! o' E�EEKE This brief correspondence will outline the key points of the corridor study as it has been conducted to date. 1. Study Purpose - The corridor study originally arose from a joint request by the Cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights to engage the MAC and Met Council in a consideration of how current operations relate to regional and local land use compatibility policy. As such, it was to be an effort to rationally integrate operational changes with in-place restrictions, not to rationalize or systematize a broader area of operations. 2. Study Parameters - The essential point of the study was to identify an equitable focus for a standard 15 degree area representing the separation necessary for simultaneous departures. Because an occassional operation goes beyond the 15 degree area, Mendota Heights has suggested that the study instead consider a 28 degree area. The FAA indicates that noisy aircraft deviate from the 15 degree area very infrequently (approximately 1 - 2% of departures) to accomodate successive departures from the same runway. Because this anomolous situation occurs so infrequently, an equitable focus for the 15 degree area continues to be a resonable study parameter. 3. Means of Comparison - In the course of the study, various metrics and comparisons have been suggested. The Operations Committee has considered Ldn's, L10's and track locations. It has compared housing units within these various contours. In point of fact, the Met Council policy contours represent the basis from which all such comparisons should proceed. Through the Noise Map Project, the MAC and Met Council addressed the issue of long term land use compatibility and instituted regional land use controls. The only thing that has changed in the interim is that the FAA must use diverging safety separations on a regular basis. The only issue should be how one centers this 15 degree area of THE LONE OAK TREE.. THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY operations over the Noise Map's expected areas of impact. A comparison of the relevant contours reveals: 1) The Met Council contours indicate that the anticipated area of noise impact lies north of the extended runway centerlines, the middle of the area being approximately 11 degrees north of centerline. 2) A comparison of peak hour departure L10's shows that Alternative #2 coincides most closely with the policy contours and, if all operations were peak hour departures, it would define the appropriate area of operations. 3) Ldn contours which represent all operations (arrival, departure and off-peak), however, illustrate that even Alternative #2 results in a disproportionate level of impact south of the Policy Contours. 4) The Mendota Heights recommendation (Alternative #4) extends even farther and more inequitably from the policy contours. 4. Conclusion - The foregoing demonstrates that the only equitable focus for traffic under current operations is in an area slightly north of the extended centerline of Runway 11R and extending to the 15 degree safety separation for Runway 11L. This would be a compromise between Alternatives #2 and #3. Such a compromise was offered by the Eagan City Council and it remains the fairest solution today. The City of Mendota Heights would prefer not to consider the Regional Land Use Policy Contours because it has tended to encourage new development of residential land uses within the policy contours, in known noise impact areas and intends to continue to do so in the future. As a result, Mendota Heights would prefer to count noise impacted residences, including large numbers of apartments and homes added since the policy contours have been in force. On the other hand, Eagan has pursued a philosophy of promoting commercial land use throughout the policy contour area. If Mendota Heights wishes to pursue such a residential philosophy, it must accept its consequences and not use its growing number of homes as a reason to dramatically -change the noise compatibility policy focus of the region. The relationship between these issues and regional policy imply that the Metropolitan Council should be an active participant in this decision. The original request for the study asked that the Council be an integral part of the decision process. The Met Council, MAC and cities worked together to form the policy contours. All parties should participate in any current discussion of operations and land use. The best indication of the fundamental fairness of the proposed compromise is that Eagan would recommend it even if the two cities were one. The compromise takes into account the land use planning the region has already done. It does not diminish capacity, but it does limit the circumstances under which abuses of the corridor procedures occur. I would be happy to respond to any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely yours, Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator t ,.)il'� l t .al/�•- 1 I J 1 ! T y r 1 VI ..-,.. 0 T U4 o i w U u cr . .. i N1 r. t.. +. • r ••.. _. • __.-t+. ► J ti --,-4,11, f - • ' _,-...-._, Ver-.• -. -r.-..._-.=-_,.:1", • ti ti s 0 w Ltt J O w O q - - ; �•�q .. r.4= -7:;r‘: ---z--1-2: 454 N..e I•'••;�.,�„ • t ��.�"-. • =--.-'.. • ."4,... I 1 1 : ''N.Vg:F—'....L, ss + O _ _are•j .� - 1 • 1 yfi n.a r-.1.,..-(-11-"4-4lr, 1".-'-^^:--z.--.! ,T•", -.---.7.\-7---1r- S _-.-_-_•,;.-•,-.-!-,.4:-;-'5. 1 .--7--------71 • • •.' • • _ • 7 . i � _ X. ' ."' 1' Ti '-i___„,_.:-2.2..)0'11 't...": j�(_ ' '� , + j R-'''' � �!� ! �-ft-T 1i LLI' riy :�» .� ^wt.r Y..►+_S["�� - r t':- • J1 • ?-7-71-P 1;:Jil II (,) 1.H„ • yr. .9' '--,'---'.,j,- 4 `•-•,,,,,,, j •C1 MENDOTA HEIGHTS TERI' NOISE Z,01' NO E Z n A 112:1:4, • TrO/ EAGAN tS? T POP .1 2 75 LJH '.31) Lia CON704, Pot., ,5,01.10 E Pa mENDOTA HEIGHTS Po. 6,565 \ L., 5 Tf T "OSP • • t. 111 WEST SAINT PAUL WO POP 18,902 cutc.taro �t SUNF IS H WO PO ,11704. INVER C hEIG, 1970 PCP Gov CA, o.L. NOISE ZO SE ZONE 4 T‘peft. Ci ksZT"'" .tseor• 0 I' EAGAN 1977 POP ,9P6 \I trivER MINUTES OF REGU%4R MEETING OF THE EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN.. MINNESOTA : E#T:5 7BER 1:94 1988 A regular meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on Monday, September 19, 1988, at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Vic Ellison and Councilmembers Wachter, Egan, Gustafson, and McCrea. Also present were City Administrator Tom Hedges, City Engineer Tom Colbert, Assistant City Planner Jim Sturm and Assistant City Attorney Michael Dougherty. .AGENDA Wachter moved, McCrea seco.nd.ed.,. the motion to approve the agenaa as presented. All voted :n:tAVOK- MINUTES September 6, 1988. Mayor Ellison requested the following changes to the minutes: Page 4, paragraph 6, cor..r:e0t typographical error from "logo" to "local". Page 14, paragraph 3, :Cp:r:reat ."Perry" to "Per". Page 19, last paragraph, third fltence, should read "He statea that if the Council approved the prior pian, the developer wouia have the ball in its court." Page 32, second paragraph, should read "Councilmember Wachter stated that the McKey Addition was also in the middle of an area that the comprehensive guide plate .showe.d..4A Light Industrial." Page 33, paragraph 5.,. thir4..sentence, should read "Mr. Gustafson stated that ownership requires 6,000 square feet." Page 35, paragraph 5.,, " ::&O p;.ri;." should be changed to "8:00 p.m." The vote should read ^ :u$ta t :o:rt;. Ellison and Egan voted in favor; McCrea was opposed. Councilmember Wachter did not vote." Councilmember Egan requested the following changes: Page 20, paragraph 2, "•g:t3an .shoula be changed to "Eagan's". Page 21, paragraph 8 should rear: "Mayor Ellison questioned what would happen beyond the 120 -day limit. City Attorney Jim Sheldon stated the preliminary pL.; t would be approved without further action and that the Council must. .act. an the: preliminary plat or it wouia be Page 2/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 approved. However, since the previous motion for approval has failed, that would serve as a denial." McCrea moved, Wachter sd•cO•n iedj the motion to approve the minutes for the September:. .6, 1988, regular meeting as amended. All voted in favor. BOND SALE FOR $13,400,000.00 G.O. AND $1,850,000.00 FIRE FACILITIES BONDS City Administrator Tom Hedges states that at the August 16, 1988, City Council meeti:nc, authorization was given to set a bona sale for G.O. public improvements and for Fire Stations 4 ana 5 on September 19, 1988. As a. part of that action, a bona credit rating was authorized from Stanaar.a and Poor's and Moody's. He informed the Council that Councilmember Z:gai:, I1te:ctor of Finance VanOverbeke ana himself appeared before Standard and Poor's ana Moody's ana has been notified that the A+ rating of Standard and Poor's would continue and the previous A rating of Moody's had been upgraded to an Al status. Both rating agencies were highly complimentary of the City of Eagan and it appeared that when the amount of outstanding debt of the public improvements/special assessnme:nt projects is reduced, proportionate to assessed val.ua:t.ir 0:, the credit rating would more than likely be increased trot its :present status. He further stated that the bond sale was held on Monday, September 19, 1988, at 12:00 noon. Dave MacGillivray, Springsted;. •pr.esented to the Council the bid summaries. He recapped the New York trip, and highlighted the strong points of Eagan's financial situation. He also reviewed the bid results and the property tax levy schedule with the Council. Councilmember Egan questioned if the rating has increased on the last trip. City Administrat.o:t Tom Hedges stated it had either increased the last time o:r' the time )fore. Mr. Egan statea he felt these were outstanding rce::tilts. Mayor Ellison questioned the indebtedness in measure of safety. He asked if the City was on the good end. Mr. MacGillivray stated the Al rating was in recognition of good debt position. Councklmemb:e:r .McC .ea questioned if the term on the $13,400,000.00 was tie: sa:e4 tir., McGillivray stated that both end in the year 2004. Mayor Ellison questioned if two actions were necessary. City Administrator Tom Hedges stated two actons were required. McCrea moved, Egan sedoli.ded, :1.0 motion to approve the resolution for accepting the lowest it from Norwest Investment Services, Incorporated for $13,400,00.0.00 general obligation and public improvement bonds+ All voted in: •favor. • Page 3/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 McCrea moved, Egan .seconded, the motion to approve a resolution for accepting the lowest bid from Norwest Investment Services, Incorporated in the amours:t of $1.,.059:,:D:00.00 general obligation fire facilities bonds. All voted: in favot.: RETIREMENT NOOCE — CHIEF OF POLICE JAY BERTHE City Administrator Tom Hedges informed the Council he has received a letter from Chief of Police Berthe announcing his plans to retire, effective January 20, 1989, from the City of Eagan. He further stated that for •ail practical purposes, Chief Berthe is a charter member of Eagan's first ;police department curing his tenure as an officer, sergeant, .assistant chief and most recently Eagan's Chief of Police. Mayor Ellison express:sed• :kiss:pz:eiation to Chief Berthe for his 20+ years of service. He stated E.&agan had seen much change since Chief Berthe began working for the City of Eagan. Chief Berthe thanked the police staff and statea they were a great group. He further thanked all department heads, the City Council, past and present, the citiz:ens and the business people of the City of Eagan. Wachter moved, Egan. seconded, the motion to accept, with reluctance, the retirement notification of Jay Berthe as an employee of the City of Eagan to be efe:et.?:Ve January 20, 1989, and authorize the City Administrator to begin the :Selection process for a Chief of Police. All voted in favor. CONSIDER PETITION FOR STOP SIGN — BEAVER DAM ROAD AT BEAR PATH TRAIL Public Works Director Tom Colbert informed the Council a petition had been received.:t:eg.uesting::the installation of stop signs on Beaver Dam Road at its i i:tersettibh: with Bear Path Trail. He stated that because the .tOtaliaf:ion of stop signs at this intersection as petitioned does not meet the warrants in accordance with the manual on Unifo:bra. Traf.f:a:c Control Devices, he was forwarding the request directly to toe Ci.t .Co.s cil for review ana action. He stated the following reas.c:rts: :tin* -44& 41d not recommend approval of the petition: 1. There of Beaver Dam 2. There the west side is insufficient cross traffic to warrant the stopping Road. presently exigt:s a five—foot concrete sidewalk along of Beaver D:a: Road for pedestrian movement. 3. The entrance to th.e park property is located opposite Shale Lane on Beaver Dam Road as:d .$unC1,.i.f.t. Azad on Bear Path Trail approximately two blocks eas:t: d .lie Utersection in question. Page 4/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 4. The installation of ".s..ow children at play" signs has been reserved for locations a4la:eerit to Specific areas where congregations of children are anticipated. 5. With the existence: of cross guards and portable stop signs on school buses, it is not appropriate to install stop signs at every school bus stop. 6. A frequently used pedestrian crosswalk, appropriate crosswalk striping and advance signings co.ula be installed. Cynthia A. Davis and Don 4.. Scheneman, petitioners, stated they were requesting the signs: because there are a number of small children in the neighborhood.axi they .a.re continuing to see increased traffic flow through Bear at: r; .ii., They further stated that Meadowland Park was just across the road ana that the new Cub ana Target aaded to the traffic and that the intersection slopes aownward and people tend to speed. Mayor Ellison asked Mr. Colbert to review the criteria. Mr. Colbert stated that traffic flow :ign0 should not be usea tor speea control. He further stated that it signs were put in at all bus stops, there would be a .prolzferat.ion of stop signs. Mayor Ellison stated that the City could increase: the police surveillance in the area. Tim Camron diagrammea to the Cou_n dil where his dwelling was located. He further explained how chilaren access the park. Mayor Ellison questioned how many car trips there were in the area per day. Mr. Colbert stated he was unsure. Councilmember Wachter stated he felt the Council should have that information before making a decision. Eileen Peterson stated tha:t.:many semi -trailer trucks were using the road and that the road was becoming a raceway. Councilmember Egan stated that a speed study could: be obtained to see if the intersection was unsafe a:iia t?:hh.er it: was appropriate to control the area. Chief Berthe stated the police- department would conduct a speed study. Councilmember Wachter questioned if the increase of traffic and speed was due to the Rahn Road closing. The public stated they felt the children crossing to the park was the main reason tor their concern. Wachter moved, Egan 00. heed, : # e motion to continue the matter of installation of stop signs on Beavet Dam Road at Bear Path Trail to obtain a speed study regarding the Number of daily trips and the speed levels in the area. .All voted in :favor. Page 5/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 Councilmember Gustayson questioned at what level the Council would approve the installation of the signs. He asked what was the criteria. Mr. Wachter state: : the :C 44tell would obtain a recommendation from the police department. Councilmember McCrea stated she recalled that :there were no bike trails or sidewalks on the east side of the road:. Mr. Hedges statea she was correct. McCrea stated she felt a stop sign was a small price to pay for children's safety. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Public Works Director Tom.Colbert statea that on September 6, 1988, the City Council aeceptecf the resignation of Doug Wilcox as a committee member representativo: to the Water Quality Management Committee and appointed a cte-si.gna.ted. alternate, Richard Starr, to replace Mr. Wilcox as the .t:tal.-comm .ttee member citizen representative. He stated the Council then appointed Mr. Karl Heine as the alternate citizen representative to the committee. He informed the Council that Mr. Starr will be unable to attend future committee meetings due to a time conflict. The committee reviewed the situation and determined that there were no othex times better suited for the majority of the members. Thereforef the to Mr. Starr's inability to attend future committee meetin.gs., it was his recommendation that Mr. Starr's position as full ci:tiz.e.n' representative be replaced by a new member. He suggested this could be •accomplished by either an elevation of Mr. Heine, who. was:recently appointed as the alternate, and then filling his position ti7U11::t4e of the two remaining applicants. McCrea moved, Gustafson seconded, the motion to elevate Karl Heine to the position of full citizen representative to the Water Quality Management Committee. All voted in favor. The Council then voted: f:Ar th.e:Alternate citizen representative to the committee. City Aditin s•t.rat:ox Tom Hedges informed the Council that Barb Agne had receitied the:.majority or the votes and would be a designated alternate on the Water Quality Management Committee. DESIGNATION OF REDUCED $•CBOOL :ZQNF. $PEED LIMIT — WESCOTT ROAD AT WOODLANDS ELEMENTARY Public Works Director Tom Colbert informed the Council that a petition had been received requesting consideration of reducing the speed limit on Wescott Road in front of the Woodlands Elementary School. He stated that curreAt •st to statute provides the authority to the local jurisdiction td.:redude :Speed limits on roaaways directly adjacent to school property "when ch l.ciren are present". He further stated that the Public Works and Parks Departments were jointly performing a study pertaining to the venter maintenance of sidewalks and trailways adjacent tG? :•ehQQ�.:Sf. -as-Stell as the entire community and would be presenting a.:report: td .1r3 0. Council for consideration in Page 6/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 the near future. He recommended to the Council that only the reduced school zone speed limit i.s.sue- be aa4ressed at that time with additional sidewalk/trail Way: coinstr.ue:tion and/or maintenance policies to be addressed subject to completion of the staff's report. Councilmember Wachter questioned if it should continue to Lexington. Mr. Colbert stated it was a half mile from Lexington. Councilmember Egan questioned the purpose of the road cut across from the school. Mr. Colbert stated it was tor future development. Wachter moved, Gustafson seconded, the motion to approve a reduced school zone speed limit: :on Wescott Roaa adjacent to Woodlands Elementary. All voted in. favor. Public Works DirectQ.r Olbert .stated the City could request MnDOT to co a speed study to. eXten:o.to. Lexington. CONSENT AGENDA A. Personnel Items - Seasonal Park Maintenance Worker. Two of the five seasonal paz.k: t: Intenance workers who were approved for hire by the Coun:d:il :at: the September 6, 1988, City Council meeting notified aro. :City that they had decided not to accept the City's offer of a seasonal. maintenance position. The Superintendent of Parks nee:deti: War.kers to begin before the September 19, 1988, Council meeting and hatd:.jttte:rviewed acceptable candidates who were able to begin work immediately. Therefore, the City Administrator exercised the previous authorization given to him by the City Council wherein he could approve the hiring of seasonal or temporary workers only in cases where the seasonal workers were needed to begin working before the next Council meeting. The persons so approved as seasonal park maintenance workers for the fall season were Jamie Noyes and Steve: B::eher... No Action was required on this item. B. Plumbers' Licenses.. It was recommended to. aft .ovt. th. following plumbers' licenses: AAA - Ace Plumbing; Bowler ebmpfiy;:.i:dhn Murdock and Son; and Don Weld Plumbing. C. License. Liquor. New Manager/Lafonda De Acebo. It was recommended to .414tov:e . liquor license application tor a new manager at Lafonda De A.eebo 12eSf:a:iaiant in the name or Joseph Harker. Page 7/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 D. Vacate Sanitary Sewer Easement, Receive Petition/Oraer Public Hearing (Stoney Pointe). It was recommended tb receive the petition to vacate a portion of an existing sanitary sewer easement within the Stoney Pointe Addition and schedule a formal public hearing to be held on October 18, 1988. E. Receive Bias, Award Contract (Well No. 12). It was recommended t:o receive the bid for Contract 88-31 (Well No. 12) , award the contract to :K:Eys Well Drilling, Inc., in the amount of $121,425.00 and authorize the Mayor ana City Clerk to execute all related documents. F. Contract 88-30, l4P47,v-e..?i .::Award Contract (South Oaks - Streets and Utilities) . It was recommended to receive the bias for Contract 88-30 (South Oaks - Streets and Utilities), award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder ana authorize the Mayor ana City Clerk to execute all related documents. G. Contract 88-34. AFpe-P1a:ns/Authorize Advertisement for Bids (Alden Pond, Fox Ridges .-, Streets and Utilities) . It was recommended to apprdvthe plans for Contract 88-34 (Alden Pond, Fox Ridge - Streets ait :U-tilities) and authorize the advertisement for a bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m. on Friday, October 14, 1988. H. Final Acceptance, Miscellaneous Projects. It was recommended t? :ap.pt.ove tb::.final acceptance of miscellaneous privately iOs.tal1:ed :improvements for perpetual maintenance: 83 -E, O, Q; $4-I, K, ,.:U, W, ; 85-A, M; 86-G, I, O, P, V, FF; and 87-T,JJ. I. Contract 88-37, r.tiV•e•,.: ,y3 /j uthorize Advertisement for Bids (Cutter's Ridge and General]ectro-: Utilities) . It was recommended to approve the plans for Contract 88-37 (Cutter's Ridge and General Electric Supply Company - Utilities) and authorize the advertisement fox bid openings to be held at 11:00 a.m. on Friday, October 14, 1988-.; J. Final Plat. Stratf. rd Oaks A4 tion. Public Works Directc:r Tom Colbert;. Updated the Council witn further information on tij0.14r•dbl•em•s •t :ifl1 the improvement. He states • Page 8/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 it was too late to acquire a right-of-way before the final plat approval. He further stated. the u.t.y easement would neea to be revised. It was recommended :t.o approve the final plat for the Stratford Oaks Addition and authorize the mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. K. Final Plat Approval. Berry Riaae Audition. It was recommended to approve the final plat for the Berry Ridge Addition and authorize t#e Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. L. Vacation. Drainage/Utility Basement - Lot 8, Hilltop of Eagan. • It was recommended to approve the vacation of drainage and utility easements over Lot 8, Hilltop of Eagan and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. M. Contract 87-40. Final Ply ieentj/Acceptance (Gopher Eagan Industrial Park 2nd Addition,-..ShrOts and Utilities) . It was recommended to .approve the fifth and final payment for Contract 87-40 (Gopher Eagan.1ndu:s.t.rial Park 2nd Adaition - Streets and Utilities) to Austin P. Keller .C1:Mstruction Company, Inc., in the amount of $7,317.39 ana accept the project for perpetual City maintenance. N. Contract 87-19, Final Payment/Acceptance (Windtree 8th Addition - Streets and Utilities). It was recommended t.a .appt:ove• tae fifth and final payment for Contract 87-19 (Winatree :8:th Ai clx: fon - Streets and Utilities) to Austin P. Keller Construction Company, Inc., in the amount of $13,905.88 and accept th.e..projeGt for perpetual City maintenance. 0. Contract 85-18.1pp ; ike..-Chan g , Order No. 1 (UPS - Streets ana Utilities) . It was recommended to approve Change Order No. 1 to Contract 85-18 (UPS 1st Addition - Streets and Utilities) and authorize the execution by the Mayor and City C1.erk. P. Cancel Project and:.; ending A::pessments (Brittany 10th Addition - Trunk Watermain;.. Councilmember Gustafzon questioned if the entire project were to be cancelled. Public WorKg T1.44 -0t0.1!0.10 Colbert stated yes. Page 9/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 It was recommended ta• approve the cancellation of Project 513 (Brittany 10th Addition - Trunk Watermain) and remove all pending assessments of record. Q. Project 449, Cance:1 Project/Pending Assessments (Country Club Market - Driveway Extens#Qh) . It was recommended to approve the cancellation of Project 449 (Country Club Market - Driveway Extension) and remove the relatea pending assessments. Egan moved, Wachter:seconded, the motion to approve the foregoing consent agenda .4:tems :and authorize their implementation. All voted in favor. FIR.agEHJAVAOTMENT.UPDATE Chief Southorn commended Police Chief Berthe tor his service to the Fire Department. Chief Southorn informed the Council that the Burnsville American Legion Post had donated $500 to both. the police ana fire departments and that an official presentation :s,r•Ould be held at the American Legion Post on September 2.Q::, 1 8. VACATION/PARTIAL. i2ZGWT-OF-WAY/MENDOTA WAGON ROAD Mayor Ellison opened the first•.ptilic hearing of the evening regarding the vacation of partial right-of-way tor Menaota Wagon Road. Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that on August 16, 1988, the City Council received a petition from the Riverview Development Company requesting the vacation of a partial right-of-way known as Mendota Wagon Rodd::I:b:cat:e.d: i the northeast corner of the intersection of Lone Oak .#load an•d• railroad overpass. He further stated the City had received aetter from a representative of the Northern States Power Company expressing concerns about the impact of this vacation on their e:tlissta.n.g:-over.he.ad power distribution lines located within this right-Yah:-41,.?.ay.;. I3e• :_urther stated the conaition could be placed on the execution of the resolution vacating this public right-of-way that either a public utility easement be retained for the existing overheaa power line or that a formal document be drafted conveying those easement rights for that existing tacility. Lloyd Stern, Attorney tar 1 i ptView Development, informea the Council that they will wo•r k with NSP :o keep the easement. Wachter moved, Egan.$econded, the :motion to close the public hearing and approve the v, cation ot a..partial right-of-way for Mendota Wagon Road and atutho: 'i - tb:e:•K&yor and City Clerk to execute Page 10/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 all related documents, siject to NSP's easement rights being protected. All voted in favor. VACATION/PARTIAL 1IGfT-OF-WAY/-PORTION OF CEDARVALE DRIVE McCrea moved, Wachter seconded, the motion to close the public hearing and take no action regarding the vacation of public right-of-way for a portion of Ceaarvale Drive. All votea in favor. PRETTYMAN HEIGHTS/STREETS Egan moved, McCrea £condep., the motion to continue the public hearing for Project 543 :(.rettytan Heights - Streets) to October 6, 1988. All voted in favor.. FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING/PRO1: Cr54:90.,. 517, 500, 461, 516, 485, 494, 491, 498, 499, 473, AND 506 Mayor Ellison opened the public hearings regarding the final assessments. Public Works Director Tom Colbert informed the Council that 12 projects had their final assessment. tails prepared with the public hearing scheduled for Sept-emm:be.t 19-, 1988. He stated that 1,255 parcels were assessea a total of $7,551,586.41, with City trunk Punas financing $485,326.94. He :.urt1ier stated that all assessments were levied in accordance with City .po i.ei.e.s and/or the methoas defined in the feasibility report presented at the Projects' respective public hearings. All notices for the final assessment Hearings were sent to all affected property owners informing them of their proposed final assessment obligations. All notices were publishea in the legal newspaper as required by state statute. PROJECT 496, BRITTANY 10:TJ1:, TRUNK STORM SEWER Gustafson moved, McCrea secb-nded, the motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for Project 496, Brittany 10th Addition - T:runk Storm Sewer and authorized the certification to the County O.V.f-01ect,ion. All voted in favor. PROJECT 517, SAINT FRANCIS WOODS 6TH ADDITION, STREETS AND UTILITIES Mr. Gieffer, developer of Saint Francis Woods, informed the Council he had concerns because the project was not yet completed. He stated that if the project w. Oa ..leaned up, he wanted deauctions to allow him to do the job.: 'Be stated. the ground would also need repair. Public Works Directar*Tom Colbert•statea the City has a contract with a performance bond to ..g.uar.antee performance of the work. Page 11/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 Councilmember Wachter stated he felt Mr. Gieffer had a legitimate concern and that caution shQ.uLd.be taken in the matter. Egan moved, Wachter seconded, the motion to close the public hearing and approve the anal assessment roll for Project 517, Saint Francis Woods 6th Addition, Streets and Utilities, and authorize the certification to the County tor collection. All voted in tavor. PROJECT 500, EAGAN ROYALE/BRIAR OAKS, TRUNK UTILITIES McCrea moved, Wachter secon.dea, the motion to close the public hearing and approve the ;t.inal assessment roll for Project 500, Eagan Royale/Briar Oaks, Trunk Utilities, and authorize the certitication to the County for collection. Ail voted in favor. PROJECT 461, YANKEE DOW= 8004. i -"3:5:E TO LEXINGTON AVENUE, STREETS Public Works Director Tom Colbert introduced the project to the Council and informed them the matter had been continued from the September 6, 1988, Council meeting. He further stated the developer's concerns had been resolved and that the City had received a written objection from O'Neil. Martin Colon (Federal.:Land Company) presented a written protest to the Council and stated -he felt there were substantial differences. Nels Nelson, Barr Engineering., Vir.e.sented the Council with a prepared report. He stated he felt son sbikte frontage had been assessed twice and he questioned the assessment methods. He felt the assessments should be lower. Mayor Ellison asked if the standard assessment policy had been used. Mr. Colbert stated the standard assessment policy had been used. Councilmember Egan stated. to City has policies which are to be used for County funding and quc$tionGd if these policies had been used. Mr. Colbert stated the poIicies had been used. McCrea moved, Gustafon segonded, the motion to continue Project 461, Yankee Doodle Road, -3:5:: t:O :irelcjngton Avenue - Streets, for two weeks. Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated he felt two weeks was not enough time and recommended 30 or 60 days. He further stated that in either case, the City would. pot make the certification deadline. Councilmember McCrea .withdrew her motion. McCrea moved, Gustafson seconded,. the motion to close the public hearing and continue the final assessit .nt roll for Project 461, Yankee Doodle Road, I -35E: to•:L.e. ington :Avenue - Streets, for 60 days Page 12/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 to provide further analy:e.i.s and notification to the O'Neil property. All voted in favor. Councilmember McCrea. va.iced.:h.er :ooncern regarding consistent implementation of the poLi:cy. She stated the City must be consistent. PROJECT 516, GOPHER EAGAN 2ND ADDITION, STREETS AND UTILITIES McCrea moved, Gustafson seconded, the motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for Project 516, Gopher Eagan 2nd Addition - Streeeets and Utilities, and authorize the certitication to the Coun:y for •collection. All voted in favor. PROJECT 485, NORTHVIEW PARK ROAD, STREETS AND UTILITIES Wachter moved, Gustaf:sc n •seeazkc2•d:,. the motion to close the public hearing and approve tthe final assessment roll for Project 485, Northview Park Road, Streets and Utilities, and authorize the certification to the County for collection. All voted in favor. PROJECT 494, EAST WESCOTT ROADS., STREETS AND UTILITIES PROJECT 491, EAGAN HILLS FARM, STREETS AND UTILITIES Public Works Director Uril •C:olbert introduced both projects to the Council. He stated they would :be reviewed for technical errors. He further stated the City i; .ca .receivea three objections to Project 494. Mayor Ellison stated the -CQ:nn:ei.l would be dealing with both matters at one time. Mr. Keiffer questioned the benefits. Mr. Colbert stated that storm sewers do not have to directly abut property. Mr. Keiffer stated his property does not drain into the storm sewer. Mr. Colbert stated that the land could be raised or the owner could extend laterals to allow drainage .into the storm sewers. Homer Fox, Lot 1, Block 10, questioned if it was a partial assessment and asked if there would be another. Mr. Colbert stated he would not be assessed fo:r futum trunk area sewer. However, other lateral improvements may.:ca4ise •aeses,ments to his property. Councilmember Egan questio:ne:ci: if tb Vbx property was in a subdivision. Mr. Colbert stated his property was in the Hills of Stonebridge. Public Works Director Tom Colbert identified the objections for Project 491. Egan moved, McCrea se:cbnded, th:e- :motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessMent roll for Project 491, Eagan Hills Farms, Street and Utilities, except for Parcel 10-02400-010-78 (Hanson) in Section 24 -. which excel.tipn will be forwarded to the Page 13/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 Special Assessment Committee, and authorize the certification to the County for collection. All voted in favor. Egan moved, Wachter •seecirrae•d, th.e motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for Project 494, East Wescott Road, Streets art: :Utilities, except for Parcel Numbers 010-82, 020-82 and 020-78 in Section 14 - which exceptions will be forwarded to the Special Assessment Committee, and authorize the certification to the County for collection. All voted in favor. PROJECT 498, STAFFORD PLACE, STREETS AND UTILITIES Public Works Director Tom Tolbert introduced the project to the Council and recommended the roll be modified as an error had been discovered. McCrea moved, Wachter secbtided, the motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll subject to modification, for Project 498, Stafford Place, Streets and Utilities, and authorize the certification to the County for collection. All voted in favor. PROJECT 499, CHAPE,I,. iHXIL. BAPTIST CHURCH, STREET Public Works Direct:or Tom Colbert introduced the project to the Council. Mrs. Schinaeldecke•i .stated she had an agreement with the City that utilities would be b btip:Oilto the property. She objectea to the payment for the improvements. M ..:Colbert stated the developer would complete the project in two to three years and that the street improvements did not relate to the utilities. Egan moved, Gustafson seconded, the motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for Project 499, Chapel Hill Baptist Church, Stree.1 ,..and .aUt:horize the certification to the County for collection. All :voted. is:n :f:avor. PROJECT 473, PILOT KNOB ROAD, TRUNK STORM SEWER Public Works Direct !aro •ok:bez.t introduced the project to the Council and listed the dhj::e:ct :c r Councilmember McCrea questioned why the Tom Berger letter was dated in 1986. Mr. Colbert stated the public hearing was held in 1986. Bernard Fritz, 1280 peeiwooct, asked for an explanation of the procedure for assessments:; Mr. Colbe.tt. explained the procedure. McCrea moved, Wachter seconded, he motion to close the public hearing and approve the e441.41 a•s•sessm :nt roll for Project 473, Pilot Knob Road, Trunk Storm Sewer.., eicce:pt :?arcel Nos. 10-02200-012-86 Page 14/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 (Rooney), 10-02200-010-80 ana 10-02200-010-84 (Caponi), 10-02200-016-54 (Kohler) , 10.-0.2.2.00-O11.-85 (Bergin) , ana 10-02200-014-54 (Fritz) iii :SeG ate 24-, which exceptions will be forwarded to the Special Assessment Committee, and authorize the certification to the County for collection. All voted in favor. PROJECT 506, PARKCLIFF 2ND ADDITION, STORM SEWER Public Works Director Tom Colbert introduced the project to the Council and listed the objections. Vicky Benson stated the op:pbsed Mr. Winkler's objection to pay his share and that the r:e:eidents did not want to pay any portion of the assessment. Mr. Colbert briefly :00ta::b:e:d: the history of the problem. He stated there was a problem with the original storm sewer improvements. Councilmember Wachter questioned which lots were still undeveloped. John Koetz reminded the Council that Mr. Colbert had declared that the old system was inadequate...$e stated he felt the developer was the cause and that the .devel:o:pet must be responsible for the assessments. He questione:a to -what extent the City Attorney would pursue the developer. Mr. Colbert stated several m:e:etn.gs were held with the developer. He was unaware of a legal :e venue other than litigation ana further stated that litigation costs may exceed the assessment amount. Mayor Ellison asked the Assistant City Attorney it the City could assess Winkler's 1/3 cost to the seven lots in the subdivision still owned by Winkler. AsW st•ant ::ity* Attorney Mike Dougherty stated the City must assess basef: on the. benefit to the lots. He stated the City could not assess the .full .1/3 against the seven lots and that 1/3 must be recovered on a contractual basis. Penny Taylor, 4691 .Pa. :k2idge., s:tated that Mr. Winkler had been very uncooperative. She f.iuth•e•t ,stated that Mr. Winkler was building other units in Eagan. Rich Thorlow stated it was not an improvement but simply a repair of a deficiency. He compLa.jned about stanaing water in a pond on the lot and that Mr. Win:k3.e* h44.been uncooperative. He further stated that the City had gty.n a st:aip of approval to the old system. Robert Byersdorf, 4656 Park Ridge, stated there was an agreement between Winkler and the :pity. He further stated that he felt the owners were not responsi 1.e .g.n.d.s:ttb»fitted his objection. Page 15/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 Councilmember Egan questioned if the City could hold up other Winkler developments. Assistant City Attorney Mike Dougherty informed the Council it would be e-a:sier: is 1. V:e:rage future proposals than ones already existing. Councilmember Egan at.ated he felt there were two issues to be considered: (1) the liability for improper improvements ana (2) special assessments. He felt the City could not assess 1/3 to the seven lots. However, he felt the liability on the project itself wasn't relieved. He statea the City did approve the concept when it first cane in and so was somewhat responsible. He statea the reason for the neighborhood 1/3 was bet:ause the neighbors would benefit. He further stated he was surprised. there had been no agreement from Winkler yet. Councilmember McCrea .q.ue:sttioned of the meetings with Winkler were documented. She suggested postponing the matter for 30 days and asked for a rejection in writing by Winkler. Mr. Colbert stateahe had done that and that it was in the Council's hanaouts. Councilmember McCrea felt there should be legal research conauctea to discover a way to make Winkler pay his fair share. She asked if the utilities were privately installed.. MI. Colbert stated they were privately installed utilities... Mayor Ellison stated that one year ago the City has agreed that they would assume 1/3 because of their involvement and 1/3 to all parties was fair. He stated that. •.f: th.e City levies 2/3 on the neighborhood, Winkler would never pay... Be further stated that if the City assesses 1/3 to the neighbors and the City, and the City temporarily eats the developer's 1/3, the City may get the 1/3 back. He discussed different ways the City would have leverage over the developer. He felt a motion should be made at the meeting. Councilmember Egan ag.r:.044 with.#1.o Mayor. Councilmember Wachter stated he felt the time tO .hitt tthg: tevelopers was when the building permit was needed. He stated there must be some recourse. Mayor Ellison stated that the problem may be in allowing private developers to install the improvements. Egan moved, Ellison : e0b•ndedtr the- motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for Project 506, Parkcliff 2nd Addition, Storm Sewer, subject to the cost of the project being assessed 1/3 to the neighboring parcels, 1/3 to the City, and 1/3 to the City with the understanding that all options be examined to leverage paymen.t. t:oft: the developer. All voted in favor. DELINO NT WEED CUTTING BILLS City Administrator 70m Hedges stated that on August 16, 1988, the City Council schedu10. a: pub]. i• :eA:ring for September 19, 1988, Page 16/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 to receive input from affected property owners regarding the assessment of delinquent .ween •c.tat.tl.ng..bills. Councilmember McCrea questioned if the property owners had been notified. Mr. Heages stated they were notified. Councilmember Wachter asked why the City had th s problem. Mr. Hedges stated it was undeveloped lana. McCrea moved, Wachter seconded, the motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll tor delinquent weed cutting bills and authoriZ e the certification to the County for collection. All voted in .favor:. Councilmember Gustafson stated he felt commercial properties should be billed higher than: :tte going: rate. He felt the interest rate should be at 18% rather: DELINQUENT UTILITY BILLS City Administrator Tom Hedges informed the Council that on August 16, 1988, a public hearing was. :scheduled for September 19, 1988, to receive input from affe.ctea .property owners regarding the assessment of delinquent sewet •an.d: .water bills. Councilmember Gustafson .asked if there was the potential of financial hardship. Mr. Heage:s :tat.ed that he aoubtea that any of the parcels which would be assessed Vi©U1:4:be includes in a financial hardship. Egan moved, Gustafson seconded, the motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for delinquent utility bills and authorize the certification to the County for collection. All voted in favor. PROPOSED 1989 GENE- FUND OPERATING BUDGET City Administrator T.om Hedges stated the City Council had held three budget sessions to date tn: review his proposed 1989 general fund budget. He stated tie :bn i.get pr4Cess began in late May when department heads were asked to compile their individual aepartmental budgets for calendar 1989. The total departmental requests for 1989 exceeded $13 million. Mr. Hedges stated he reviewed the departmental requests and recommended an operating budget in excess of $11 million that included increased persanne1.4. a capital equipment revolving fund, a contingency and new0.e41.ue• Sources. At the budget workshop meetings, the City Council had reduced the proposed expenditures by eliminating approximate 6. positions, ::educing the amount of contingency ani separating, the solid waste abatement grant from the operating budget. Revenues: were adjus:td to reflect a more conservative projection f:w 1. :8 :, i� �c;. Hedges further stated the general fund budget under .coi :t;: •ri t.a•t oh by the City Council was for Page 17/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 $10,495,780.00. He felt the budget as proposed reflected a constant level of service for most of the departments. The excess growth in terms of street miles, p.o:pu .gtio:n: 4n4other factors that require additional personnel and:ua.:prert :-o-:maintain a constant delivery of services were considered in the proposed operating budget. He stated the City Council would reserve the right to further examine the budget and shift expenditure appropriations or revenue estimates as they saw fit prior to its final adoption later in the tali. The purpose of the public hearing was to allow any input from the public regarding the delivery of services within the community. The mill rate which was under consideration by the City Council and will be formally adopted at the U:etober 4, 1988, City Council meeting is 19.258 mills. The mill r :t.e repiresents a reduction of approximately .2 mills from the 1988 mill rate. Mr. Hedges stated thi:e: c ty :mu ep up w assessed valuation. He f ur:t er tstste4: thoughts other revenue sources. He informed the Council come in late November or early December, 1988. the public that there was a handout available information. ith the growth and the should be given to the final budget would Mr. Hedges informed to them for their No action was required on t14 matter. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN 'AMENDMENT/SOLDERHOLM ADDITION/EAGLE ENTERPRISES/PLANNED DEVELOpIENT AMENDMENT (RE -ZONING) City Administrator Tom Hedges Informed the Council that the Advisory Planning Commission first heft a public hearing at their Ma 26, 1988, meeting and recommended approval of the Comprehensive Guia Plan Amendment, re -zoning and preliminary plat for the Solderholm Addition as originally proposed. The item was considered by the City Council at their June 21, 1988, meeting and aue to concern over access at the county road intersection of Lexington and Diffley, the inconsistency with the Com:p>: hOnsi:tte:. :aide Plan aria a desire to review the retail study r:oi lts; . the item was continued until the July 19, 1988, City Council meeting. At the consent of the developer, the item was continued to further dates to allow the Dakota County Plat Commission an opportunity :..review the access locations being proposed for the Solaerha.iti: i v-01cPmeht. The Dakota County Plat Commission held a meeting on S'epteiinbeer 12, 1988. Assistant City Planner Jim Sturm updated the Council on the development and stated he has attended the Dakota County Plat Commission meeting on September •1.2; 1988, in an effort to resolve the access locations which were r:opo.$ed: for this development. After several hours of discussiats•, the rett.z:sed plan was approved by the Commission with emphasis that it requites a variance from the County spacing guidelines. Mr. Sturm stated that SEH supportea the revised plan and while its plan s;h:ows center A dians, the County had not made their determination of wh:tet ttt nOt they feel they are necessary. y e Page 18/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 Del Elias, devel ope.z..r stated -they could live with the current design which eliminates three a.c:ee$s::points and is replaced with one. He further stated shared .parking would be used and they may be able to improve an interior c r:culation plan. Councilmember Egan asked if the developer agreed with the County right -in, right -out. The developer stated he felt it was reasonable. Mayor Ellison questioned if the internal road would remain private. The developer stated it. would remain private. Mayor Ellison questioned if it would meet standard conditions. Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated the -Minimum width for City streets is 30 feet. The developer stated he had no problem with the 30 -foot minimum. Mayor Ellison q:ue•stioned. if the road would encroach on City property. Mr. Colbert stated it w•nui.ci. encroach but that reservoir needs had been modified and suggested keeping the options open. He felt the review should be subject to relocating the reservoir. Mayor Ellison questioned if the remaining reservoir would be centralizes. Mr. Colbert stated it would be centralized. Councilmember Wachter ques.ta.c t;e:d if the City needed the commercial land. Councilmember :M:cC:ea was concerned with the roads and questioned the distan.Ce to the :nearest roadway access. Mr. Colbert stated it was 600 teat. and :that it met requirements which is 610 feet. McCrea questioned if: there would be a median some day. Mr. Colbert stated probably but it gids :hats to say for sure. McCrea requested an explanation of the chut'ch layout. Mr. Colbert explained future development in the area. McCrea questioned if there would be future traffic problems. Mr. Colbert stated he felt there would be no future traffic problems. McCrea questioned if the project went ahead and a private road was 410 back and the median would go in, would there be a curb cut. Mr. Colbert stated they had not reached that level of detail at that pbtat; •mcC:r:ea questioned what the North Church would do. Mr. Stunt state i they were unsure at that time. Mayor Ellison asked .if a zi:.ght-in, right -out on Lexington would be acceptable. The devel::o:per stated he felt it would be more appropriate than on Diffley,. Councilmember Wachter stated he felt the matter was premature and that there were too many unanswered variables. He further stated the need had not been proven. Mayor Ellison felt the: Ott--ca:c.e tract was small for an R-4 zoning. He felt LB would .be better, :however, the City needed to protect its interest on the north siee. if the HUD property was not available. Councilmember Gusta€:s:ae ' e •tt that LB zoning was better than R-4 and stated that whether •th is tte t •wa•s•• premature was not a City Page 19/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 decision. He stated aeve1e:pers have the right to lose or make money. He felt the area of access was up in the air, however, that access was not a problem. He statea::he t:et they needed to cover the City's interest on the north property. Councilmember Egan :a:t:atea that the Comprehensive Guiae Plan showed the area as residential. He statea the parcel as proposed fractionalizes the site and that it was not compatible with the overall development. Councilmember McCrea stated her main concern was the traffic and that she was not comfortable wi.t the information received from the staff. She wanted to know the traffic situation at the current time, when the area would be signal iz:ed and the rating. Mayor Ellison state4:he ::dlt .he :SAW a denial. He statea the developer needed guidance ffcifti. the 'Council. He further stated the City access to the reservoir was a concern of his. Councilmember Egan stated the proposal did not show room for expansion in the retail study. He felt it should be lowered to mixed resiaential and it would eliminate the. access problems. He aia not see any justification tor a va ance. The developer stated he did not think residential was a gooa use for the property and that. Mixed use woula eliminate the traffic problems. He discussed other E0:114a concerns. He stated he left the Council last time with an agreement .Q:i1: the lana use ana wanted a decision. Councilmember Gustafson stated he felt the Council was wrong in judging the matter premature. He stated they must protect the water tower site but should not judge the economic viability. Egan moved, Wachter .se•conce.d:, the motion to deny (1) a Comprehensive Guide P1an.:Arirendrggnt, (2) Planned Development Amendment of R-4 to LB and (3) a preliminary plat containing three lots entitled Solderholm Addition, because of the following reasons: 1. The development vaS:.a:no:ti:tiz:tent with the current Comprehensive Guide Plan and there was no reason to deviate from the Plan; 2. The development would create an access problem on Diffley and Lexington; 3. Commercial develogMent was not. warranted in the area; 4. The development wo:uld intrude On the City water storage land. All voted in favor. • •• Page 20/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 Mayor Ellison stated -hp 41..sa.c reed with items number 1, 2 and 3 of the motion but agreed -With. 1 e ii: A:ciii1ber 4, and therefore, voted in favor. Councilmember Gustafson agreed with the Mayor. RE=TONING/SUNCREST ADDITION City Administrator Tom Hedges informed the Council a public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at a regular meeting held on July 26, 1988, to consiaer a re -zoning and preliminary plat entitled :Suncr.e.st Addition as requested by William Huttner. The APC recommended approval of the proposal. Mr. Hedges stated that at the August 16, 19.88, City Council meeting, the applications were consideted acrd referred back to City statf and the developer to consider alternatives t.Q.r the elimination of the stovepipe lots. The develd::e: 000 .s:tatt examined alternatives. The Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission recommended a cash dedication. Assistant City Planner Jim Sturm stated he had met with the Tri -Land staff and asked them to prepate two alternative plans: (1) with a shorter cul-de-sac that still: .rquired 9 stovepipe lots, but had shorter driveways, and .(.2:): :bne that extended the cul-de-sac to the east with all lots meeting. R-1 Code requirements. Tri -Land was asked to show existing tree .l.ocatibns in the driveway area, as well as the massing that exists i.n . e area. Mr. Sturm stated that if the or :c2inal plan or alternative number 1 was approved, more trees may be saved if careful driveway and individual house pad grading occurred. Alternative number 2 (meeting all Code requirements) adds three lots and destroys the majority of the tree stand. He stated the Public Works Department was concerned with having four driveways at the end of a cul-de-sac and questioned where snow storage would otor:, He .s:tAted that if either of the stovepipe proposals were .approved,. shared driveways or minimum separating between them :should :be: added as conditions to the plat. He requested direction from the Council as to which plan to pursue. Dave Doyle, Tri-Landt. : :e:eappe:d: Sturm' s presentation. Councilmember Egan questioned how many trees would be lost. Mr. Sturm said it would be hard to determine at the present time. Councilmember McCrea questioned if the original design would be more sound. Public Works Director C.ol.ert statea it would be for snow storage purposes. McCrea stated .:t *as a unique situation and stated it would be nice to have •tit house -set back in the wooas. She asked which plan the developer preferred. the developer stated he wantea to save the big trees. He wauld prefer the cul-de-sac plan over the original plan. McCrea stated Engstrom. also preferred that plan. Page 21/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 Councilmember Wachter questioned what happened to the northeast and southeast lots. The developer stated that the triangular piece would be an outlot. City Administrator TOM Hedges questioned if the property line should be extended. Mayo:.Ellison questioned a tax forfeiture. The developer stated it would be developed in the future expansion. Mayor Ellison questioned if it could be limited to two accesses. The developer stated it could be limited. Councilmember Gustafson questioned the need for the cul-de-sac with the four stovepipe lots. He suggested putting in one 20 -toot wide ariveway which would fan around the trees. Councilpember.ggan stated there could be a private maintenance problem. McCrea moved, Gustaf o.n seconded, the motion to approve the re -zoning of 10.53 A (agf.keu4ura:1).acres to an R-1 (single family) district (Suncrest Addition/Williain Huttner) . All voted in favor. McCrea moved, Egan seconded, the motion to approve alternate plan number 1 (14 lots) for a preliminary plat entitled Suncrest Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. These standard conditi:otke Qt plat approval as adopted by Council action on Septembe:t ,:, 19$7, shall be complied with: B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, C-1, C-2, 'E-3 , C-5, .10-1, E-1, F-1, and G-1. 2. The developer shall hots. t:. proximity of the Williams Brothers pipeline easement in the purchase agreement for each lot abutting it. 3. A variance for stovepipe lot widths shall be approved (lots 3, 4, 5, and 6, Block 2) . 4. Outlot A shall be z:00l:ud0..witbi The Woodlands 2nd Addition or the lot line between lots 4. and. 5. s I be extended to the eastern property line. 5. Lot 5, Block 1, .n.d Lots.:9, 10, ana 11, Block 2 shall be final platted as an outlet.;. 6. The developer is required to submit detail plans of the proposed retaining wall construction for staff review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit and/or final plat approval. 7. The developer is reel r.:r::a: to. proviae an 8 cfs storm sewer outlet to the northerly aaj:s:dent 'pr:o:perty. 8. The developer is required to 'e'xtend sanitary sewer service and water main service tt • the northerly: adjacent property. Page 22/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 9. The developer is: required to prepare and file for record, with the County Recorder, driveway easements and maintenance agreements covering Lots •3•,:4.,• 5., A110:6. Block 2, which agreements shall be approved by the taty Attorney. All voted in favor. APPOINTMENT/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION City Administrator TOM Hedges stated the resignations of Tom Ellingson, a member of the Econdmic Development Commission and David Hennes, an alternate mem:ber of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission, were recently accepted by the City Council. The City Council authorized him to advertise in the newspaper for the purpose of entertaining application$ to 1:x11 these vacancies. The City received two applications for the .EtOnomic Development Commission; Patrick Grinder 3529 Widgeon Way South; and Paul Krauss, 4652 Parkridge Court. Mr. Hedges stated that the City had received one application for the Advisory Parks and Recreation CQms .ssion from Theodore Billy who resides at 4338 Sequoia Drive.. The balloting was conducted and the votes counted. Mr. Hedges stated that IPa1,11 :Crauss had received the majority of the votes for the Economic Develapltent Commission position. McCrea moved, Gustafson seconded, the motion to appoint Theodore Billy to fill the unexpired term of David Hennes as a member of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission whose term expires in January, 1989, as the alternate to the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission. All voted in favot... VARIANCE/OAK :C.IFF POND ADDITION City Administrator J:cm Hedges informed the Council an application was submitted. :by B.r:tuttger Companies requesting a five-foot variance to the*-egii::red.3 -foot rear yard setback for Lots 1 through 6, Block 3, Oak Cliff Pond Addition. Rogo Olson (Bruttger Companies), developer, explained the types of units in the project to the Council. He did not know how the setback was missed and reque•s:ted as .five-foot variance. He stated one e: of the homes would fit on:ef' the t :ts and requested a variance on Lots 1 through 6 in Block. •:. Mayor Ellison questigned if the Lots were standard townhouse lots. Mr. Sturm stated ye -s-. Councilmgrnber McCrea questioned the density. Mr. Sturm explainbki"t3 e• •i e:D:e: ty to the Council. McCrea Page 23/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 stated she had no problem with the variance but questioned what the haraship was. Councilmember lagan stated he felt the plan could use a variance but questioned the,+fat. s0:tback. Mr. Sturm stated that they requested the 30 -foot requirement to prevent the shifting or units. Councilmember Gustafson stated the developer could develop within the setback, but'the buildings would not have the same value. He felt this was a hardship. He favored the variance but wanted a quality unit. Egan moved, McCrea seconded, the notion to approve an application by Bruttger :C:ompanies requesting a five-foot variance to the required 30 -foot reap pard setback for Lots 1 through 6, Block 3, Oak Cliff Pond Addition, :subject to the following conditions: 1. Additional landscaping $hall be provided for the rear yard to provide screening from to: 11-2 .ctl:siri-ct to the south. A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the planning staff for review and appr oval. 2. No other variances for these lots shall be applied for. All voted in favor. WAIVEit: QF PLA1/MARK CALVIN The Council was infornte:d an. application was presented by Mark Calvin requesting a Waiver of Plat: for. the purpose of allowing individual ownership for an existingtiplex described as Lot 7, Block 1, Oakwood Heights 2nd Addition. McCrea moved, Egan seconded, the motion to approve the Waiver of Plat for Mark Calvin, Lot 7, Block 1, Oakwood Heights 2nd Addition, for the purpose of allowing individual ownership. All voted in favor. WAIVER OF PLAT/ZACHMAN BROTHER:-CONSTRUCTION/LOT 1, BLOCK 1, CINNAMON RIDGE 6TH ADDITION The Council was informed a:41 application was received from Zachman Brothers Constru:dtj;on..cgti.pap r.r Inc., requesting a Waiver of Plat for Lot 1, Block 1, :: nhaman .2 44e 6th Addition to allow individual ownership of the duplex unit. Gustafson moved, McCrea seconded, the motion to approve a Waiver of Plat for Lot 1, Block 1, Cinnamon Ridge 6th Addition, (Zachman Brothers Construction Company:r .1:nG. # , for the purpose of allowing individual ownership. All .vOt:ed in•;avor. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/MARK M. WEIDENHAFT City Administrator 4in: •1•i_ 1N•gYs. Stated a public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning >Jammi:s:sion• t.:their last regular meeting Page 24/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 held on August 30, 1988, to consider an application from Mark M. Weidenhaft for a conditional tee. permit to operate a beauty salon in an R-1 district at 4345 RO4h 13:Qa :. ' 'h: • APC recommended approval to the City Council. Assistant City Planer Jim Sturm stated the home is located along the west side of Rahn Road just north of Shale Lane. He stated Code permits beauty salons in this zoning district through the conditional use permit process subject to conditions. Councilmember Wachter: questioned how many neighbors had been contacted regarding the Condit O)lal use permit. The developer stated he had contacted most of the netghbors. Councilmember Gustafson had questions concerning prop:o:sed condition number 2. Mr. Sturm stated the condition was right t.r..o . Gode,. Gustafson moved, McCrea secondees, the motion to approve the conditional use permit as applied for by Mark Weidenhaft for a beauty salon in an R-1 district at 4345 Rahn Road, subject to the following conditions: 1. Hours of operation shall be. ftOm 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. only. 2. The only employee ::hal be an occupant of the household. 3. The parking shall :bo:: $n7 .site and shall be limited to two customer automobiles. 4. There shall be no commercial signs advertising the business except for the type of sign that is allowed in R-1 districts. 5. There shall be no over-the-counter sales of merchandise. All voted in favor. CONDITIOtAL USE. PERMIT/HILLTOP PLAZA Assistant City Planner Jim:aturm stated a public hearing was held by the Advisory Plahiltng:.0omm. ;s:stop at their August 30, 1988, regular meeting to consider :a: •Ci hei . i:Csnal use permit to allow motor fuel sales in a neighborhood business district, a pylon sign and a 6 -foot pump island canopy variance for a free-standing PDQ facility, as requested by the T.F. James Company, in the Hilltop Plaza Addition. The APC recommended approval of the conditional use permit. There was no action required. 'by tii:: APC on variances; however, the APC shared a strong sentiment:. to 11:0t:.allow any gas pump island expansion in the future. Mr.Sturm further ext?1::ained the site plan to the City Council. Page 25/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 Richard Quanbeck of -'i'. F. James Company (developer) stated that fuel sales was a plan from the beginning or the project. He feels the plan is well thought out -Old W.i-IJ.mee€ the existing neeas of the neighborhood. He asked for r:o-tir. gas pumps. Councilmember Wachtef questioned the distance from the landscaping to the gas islands. He asked if there was room for the cars. Mr. Sturm statea there was a distance of 24 feet. Mr. Wachter questioned if there was lighting. The developer stated the lighting was on the underside of the canopy. Councilmember Gustafson questioned expansion. Mr:, Sturm stated the developer would come back before the Council. Councilmember Egan questioned if they were adding a second pylon sign. The developer stated h.e. was correct, that the current sign advertises Hilltop, whereas:.thee. $0e44 sign would advertise PDQ. Mr. Egan questioned if there was 24. -hour service. The developer stated that was correct. Mr. Egan asked for an explanation of the lighting proposal. The developer stated the lighting would be on the underside of the canopy and the buildings would have similar lighting. Mr. Egan asked if any specific lighting plan had been submitted. Mr. Sturm stated no. Mr. Egan stated it was .a •snsitive area and that the lighting should not be obtrusive; .l ayar Ellison stated it coula be carried as a condition. I4r4 - iirin ztated the correct woraing would be "no direct off-site spill.a:ge". Councilmember McCrea quest.i:•oon.ed. the exterior materials and berming. Mr. Sturm explained both tb. the Council. Mr. Wachter stated he did not understand the need for two signs. The developer stated the tenants rotate space on the present sign. He ' stated this was a separate lot. Mr. Egan stated he also did not see the necessity for two signs. Mayor Ellison stated he felt the design was far superior to the other Mans. -which just added pumps. Mr. Wachter suggested a ground: -siign4.4.:y Administrator Tom Hedges stated he could not think of a biighbo:r:hOod center which had two signs. He thought a ground sign might be a good compromise. Councilmember Gustafson stated that Bl:ac:khawk :Plaza has the right to more than one sign, so this separate peat. woOl.d .also be eligible. McCrea stated Blackhawk Plaza was Road:de: I3:c1sx:4e:00:; Egan moved, Wachter seconded, the motion to deny a request for a pylon sign by T. F. James Company in the Hilltop Plaza Addition. All voted in favor. The Council felt the ,60v6i6per :should decide on one location for one sign. McCrea moved, Gustaf:sbn seconded.; the motion to approve a conditional use permit t:h.:all.ow, an- a•utamotive service station with a Page 26/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 car wash on Lot 3, Block:.];; Hilltop Plaza Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. All signage shall .te. subject to the one-time sign fee of $2.50 per square foot. 2. No exterior sales displays or loudspeaker aavertising shall be permitted. 3. All trash shall be contained within the building. 4. The landscaping :Tong the entire length of the Pilot Knob road property line shall te installed with this development. 5. The development is z.e144.1%re i to proviae an aaditional catch basin for collection of .ge:hatet. storm water runoff and convey it to the existing storm sewer system. 6. The development is required to construct a sanitary sewer manhole in place of the proposed clean out. 7. The proposed 16 -foot wide vie -way driving aisle is required to be 18 feet wide. 8. This development. shall accept its additional assessment obligations as defined in t10 staff's report in accorcance with the final plat dimensions and the tats. ihn effect at the time of the conditional use permit. 9. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, ana sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current city standards ana approved by staff prior to conditional use permit approval. 10. This development strca1:1. be .r.esaonsible for the acquisition of all regulatory agency permits :1.n.:the time frame required by the affected agency. 11. The development .:s: requ•red to provide lighting which will protect the adjacent 12. Installation of a Coae approved ground sign must meet staff approval with regard to its lighting. 13. The developer shall be required to receive City Council approval prior to adding oz :e:xpanctisg the number of gasoline tanks or pumps. All voted in favor. Page 27/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 Councilmember Egan Stated the main purpose for the variance was for expansion. Councilmember Gustafson stated he did not see the need for the variance. Gustafson moved, Egan seconded, the motion to deny a 6 -foot pump island canopy variance f)Or• a free-standing PDQ facility, as requested by the T. F. James Company, in the Hilltop Plaza Addition. All voted in favor. The developer asked the Council if the canopy could meet the setback if they would object to the canopy. Mayor Ellison stated no. WAIVER OF PLAT/NATIONAL MINERALS CORPORATION Assistant City Planner Jim Sturm informed the Council a public hearing had been held by .04:q. Advi ty Planning Commission on August 30, 1988, at their regular it eting .t.o. consider an application by National Minerals Corporation/NSP tor a Waiver of Plat in order to split Lot 10, Block 2, Eagandale Industrial Park 3rd Addition and combine it with Lots 4, 5, and 6 to the immediate south. The purpose of the Waiver of Plat would be to allow for the construction of a 30,000 square foot storage building •t:o: be constructed in the tall. He stated National Minerals Corporat in., a fly ash distributor, is located on the lots. Curre.n:tl:y* :N.SP. has a transmission area on the northern portion of the $.:• - acre s:i bject lots. The newly created Parcel "B" containing 2.7 ares would have access from a drive along the east side of Lot 6. Fly a•sb.:Q:ul.d be transported to the concrete building by either the railroad split :along the south property line of Lot 10 or by semi -trucks. Fly ash is used as an ingredient in concrete and is a non-combustible material. He stated all Code requirements had been satisfied. City Administrator Tom Hedges suggested that if the Waiver were approved by the Council, a pn•dition.be added that the tanks be painted to match the exist:nq Councilmember Wachter questioned how the fly ash would be stored. He was concerned: ?t wouI0 blow around. Mr. Sturm stated he believes the railroad cats and/:ot semis are closed. Mr. Hedges stated staff would check on that Wachter moved, McCrea seconded, the motion to approve the Waiver of Plat for National Minerals Corporation/NSP on Lot 10, Block 2, Eagandale Industrial Park 3ra Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. The development i . required ti. fulfill the $23,135.00 assessment obligation identified for Lone Oak Road upgrade. • Page 28/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 2. The development i.ill be required to proviae a 1.0 acre toot ponding area prior to discharging its site -generated storm water into the existing 24 -inch stow t:.S:ei9e::. in 141>Ae Oak Road. 3. This development shall dedicate, guarantee its proportionate share of the additional drainage, ponding and utility alignment, depth and storage capacity of utilities and streets located beyond the outside of dedicated public right-of-way development. provide or financially acquisition costs of easements as required by the all required public boundaries of this plat or as necessary to service this 4. All public streetg and utilities necessary to provide service to this development shall be designed by a registered professional engineer in accordance w#11 City Codes and engineering standards and policies and approved by staff pii:sf t:o Waiver of Plat approval. 5. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion and sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current City standards and approved by staff prior to Waiver of Plat approval. 6. This development shall be .r:es:ponsible for the acquisition of all regulatory agency permits .:n :the time frame required by the affected agency. 7. The development is tqpired to construct the proposed parking area in accordance with City C040 r:eq.uirements. 8. The development is required tb. provide an internal storm sewer system which intercepts the site -generated run-off and conveys this site -generated run-off to the existing storm sewer system in Lone Oak Road. 9. The development will :be rgc44,.red to provide public access to the newly created Parcel 10. Any vehicle which transports fly ash will either be covered or wet so the fly ash wiU. not #flow about. All voted in favor. City Administrator Tom Hedges stated that the painting of the tanks to match the existing building should be encouraged. PRELIMINARY PLAT/RIDGE HAVEN ADDITION City Administrator Tom. Hedges sated the Advisory Planning Commission and the City Council had reviewed a preliminary plat proposal entitled Ridge :ki:aven Addition. as presented by Haven Enterprises early in the• ummer.. T :e .subdivision is adjacent to a plat that was approved enti:t1ed:' .2?i:etty tan Heights. At the direction Page 29/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 of the City Council, the -City staff was asked to coordinate meetings with the developers of Ri•c.g.e. H.xve.n Ares and Prettyman Heights and make efforts to agree on . 4ac CQ:nfig:uration for all parties concerned, including the City of Sagan. He stated that according to the Engineering Department, the City had not been able to reach agreement with both partes. The developer of Riage Haven Acres would like the City Council to readdress the preliminary plat. The public hearing for considering public improvements is scheculea for the October 6 meeting and it is customary that a preliminary plat be approved prior to the public hearing to consider public improvements for the proposed subdivis:i:on. Assistant City Planner Jim.:Sturm stated there is a desire to eliminate the double fronted lots. He stated the plat wants to stand on its own. Brian Olson (developer) stated it is the same plat that was presented to the Council in May. He informed the Council they are willing to pay their fair share of the assessments. Councilmember Egan stated he thought the City would hardball Prettyman to cooperate. City Enginef Tom Colbert stated that Prettyman had already received Vt.aiMinary plat approval and knew the cost but assumed it anyway:; He stated he did not know how to get Prettyman's cooperation. Mr. Hedges questioned Mr. Ramsey .of Haven Enterprises, Inc. regarding his letter to him dated September 12, 1988. He auestioned what the developer meant by agreeing to pay for the fair share of the proposed assessments concerning the extension of Sibley Hills Drive. Mr. Colbert reviewed the proposed assessment procedure. Mayor Ellison asked the developer if he felt comfortable with Mr. Colbert's description. -0t the Lai ..share. The developer stated yes. Marylou and Donald Horne stated they did not want to subdivide. Mr. Colbert said thy .slit •u .d:.r::terate their argument at the October public hearing.Tr: tgarrn• :clue:at:ioned if the feasibility report would show the road going to the north. Mr. Colbert stated yes. Mr. Egan questioned why Prettyman was holding so hard. Mr. Colbert stated he had pre -sold the cul-de-sac lots. Wachter moved, Gustafson. aec:g:ri:ded, the motion to approve the preliminary plat for Ridgy 14Wcien Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. These standard codditions of p. at approval as adopted by Council action on Septentler .15:.x. ;k9 -87't •$hall be complied with: Al, Bl, B2, B3, Cl, C2, C3, C5, # 4:;': t•. kl,.•.aMd G1. Page 30/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 2. All lots shall be::serviced and addressed from the internal street (cul-de-sacs) . 3. The existing homesite and well/septic system shall be removed or abandoned to City requirements. 4. The development is required to remove the existing well and septic system in accordance with Department of Health and Pollution Control Agency requirements. 5. Side lot line dr:a:inage swales are required to be defined on the grading plant. 6. An outlet to thepropos::d storm sewer system is required. 7. The developmentS t.e4u .r:e:et :to. extend its water main to the northerly property line for connection to the future easterly extended water main in Sibley Hills Drive. 8. The development is required to execute the appropriate "waiver of assessment" for future street assessments associated with the easterly extension of Sibley Hi.:s: Drive. All voted in favor. SUBDIVISION REGULATIOON ORDINANCE/AMENDMENT TO SECTION 13.30 City Administrator Tom Hedges sta:ted that at a May City Council meeting a subdivision regulation ordinance was given review. It was the decision of the City Council to send this proposed ordinance amendment to the Developers' Task Force for their review and consideration. Both the Developers' Task Force and Advisory Planning Commission had reviewed the proposed amendment and the document, in its final draft, was under0.Side.r.:t:ion by the City Council. He stated the changes had be:e:h:minor. .and -Would not affect the intent of a three-step process and: the ob:j•ectives that were desired by the City Council. Mayor Ellison reque:ted.. he examples of the changes. Mr. Sturm stated it was in the teraihoI15.6 there was nothing specific. Mr. Hedges stated there was a difference between the residential and the commercial development approach. Councilmember Wachter questionea if the Council could report back. Mayor Ellison stated the report could be brief. Councilmember McCrea questioned E-9 of the proposea ordinance. She asked if there:ra t.l.exibility. Wachter moved, Gustaf:bn seconded:, the motion to ratify the ordinance amendment amending Chapter 13 of the Eagan City Code by changing development stan4ards and sukfission requirements, subject to staff submitting a brief:• :$•?.utt .r• • the changes to the Council. All voted in favor. Page 31/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 UPDATE/COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN City Administrator Td4t fledges: stated the City Council and the Planning Commission had ?cmpleted an update of the Comprehensive Guide Plan, a process that began in December of 1985 and was completed when an amendment was adopted January 27, 1987, by the Advisory Planning Commission. The amendment was submitted to the Metropolitan Council for their review. The item was reviewed by the Advisory Planning Commission at their August 30, 1988, meeting, however, no action was required. Councilmember Gustat•$on stated there was an area of concern regarding the RB zoning of the .wtleford property on the east side of 35E. He questioned if the .ra..ifying of the Comprehensive Guide Plan would preclude the City cbartg n9: tt e :RBq zoning. Councilmember McCrea stated she felt the motion had exdiuded RB zoning. Mayor Ellison stated he was optimistic that the property would be down -zoned as he had recently met with the owners. Egan moved, McCrea seconded, the motion to approve the adoption of the 1987 Comprehensive Guide Plan.:U.j date Amendment considering the revised commercial planned deve3:Qpm:ent text and the incorporation of seven processed comprehensive wide plan amendments and the land use plan map. All voted in favor. VINCE RENNEDY/WA.IVER OF PLAT City Administrator Tom Hedges stated that the Kennedys, Vincent and son Dave, purchased an adjacent lot to Vince Kennedy predicated on an assessment search that revealed an assessment levy of $156.00 with no pending assessments. A Waiver of Plat was requested for the parcel allowing son Dave to occupy the home and Vince to hold the remainder of the property.. When the WO.ver of Plat was given consideration, assessments *ere! proposed for trunk storm sewer and a previous Lone Oak Road ir.nfovemeht. Mr. Kennedy is objecting to the assessments. Mr. Hedges explained the objections Mr. Kennedy had in his September 14, 1988, letter tt the City. Councilmember Wachtel elated: it• would be hard for the City to swallow the assessments. Mayor Ellison questioned if these assessments were something that someone else in the City would not pay. Mr. Colbert stated no. Councilmember Egan stated he felt it was an appropriate time to assess. McCrea moved, Wachter' .e0:tdnde:e4 the motion to deny the request for waiving the assessments. as propoe:d for Lot 5, Zender Acres (Kennedy) . All voted in favor. Page 32/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 RAHN ROAD TRAIL/SOUTH OF DIFFLEY City Administrator Torn Hedkes Stated that the City trail plan identifies a trail on thy. .east side of Rahn Road from Diffley to the Highline Trail. The Parks. and Recreation Commission asked that the bituminous trail be installed at this time. He stated the City has approximately 70 feet ot right-of-way from the centerline of Rahn Road with one exception. That exception was the proposed Eagle Nest development north of Shale Lane; however, with the recent platting of the Sons Addition, the City now had the additional road right-of-way. The cost of a half mile 0 trail is projected at $8.00 per lineal root, and therefore, the instaUation would be approximately $20,800.00. He stated the bond fund provided for trails construction and could be used for this. tx:a .l..s.e.gment. Mayor Ellison stated he felt the matter should be scheduled for a public hearing. Councilmember McCrea concurred. Egan moved, Gustafson seconded, the motion to continue the matter regarding the installation- of a. bituminous trail on Rahn Road south of Diffley to Shale Lane to a.l1ow for the scheduling of a public hearing at the October :0* X 88y, City Council meeting. All voted in favor. SPECIAL :CITY .COUNCIL WORKSHOP City Administrator Tom Hedges stated the next Council meeting would be held October 6, 1988. He further stated that at the last City Council workshop there was consideration to hold a special City Council meeting on Monday, September 26, 1988. He stated that there were no urgent matters and that it was not necessary to meet on that date. Councilmember Gustafson stated he was opposed to the meeting. Mayor Ellison stated that .peerhhaps. it . ou1d be conducted at the end ot the next regular meeting.. :vuncil#nem.be.r McCrea stated she felt the meeting could be held in: the fall. SENIOR HOUSING Assistant City P1anher 3'ii Sit:Urm updated the Council on the locations, (1) Federal Land piece; and (2) the Hoffman piece. Councilmember McCrea questioned how much HUD money was available. Mr. Hedges stated there was $300,000.00 among Eagan and two other cities. He further stated that Eagan also has its own fund available for senior housing. Councilmembet 4urstfson recommended putting out a notice to compete for the 1.dwest bid:.. Page 33/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 my pp giwAN AUDITOR City Administrator Tom Hedges recommended to the Council that the City remain with the firm of Deloitte, Haskins and Sells for one more year as the City's additor. Wachter moved, Egan seconded, the motion to approve the firm of Deloitte, Haskins & Sells as the City's auditor to review all financial transactions for the calendar year 1988. All voted in favor. :BRITThNY ADDITION The Council was info•me:cd the cl:o.i:ng company did not give the assessment money to the C.:unty::. :c:re :ire, the assessments continue. The Council will be kept posted on this matter. GUN CLUB WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION City Engineer Tom Colbert informe.q the Board that he had received a resignation from Catherine: 1unk from the Gun Club Watershed Management Organizatit:n;. Egan moved, McCrea seconded, the motion to accept the resignation of Catherine F'un:k:fbr the Gun Club Watershed Management Organization and staff was authbt:i:2 d to solicit a replacement. All voted in favor. CARRIAGE HILLS GOLF COURSE Pursuant to memo from City Attorney Jim Sheldon, it was agreed that the owners will pursue .private nuisance actions regarding the errant golf balls. PRfaECT 564 Egan moved, Gustafsgn• seconded, the motion to receive the feasibility report for Pr:ojtect .S:.4:44d order a public hearing. All voted in favor. LEXINGTON POINTE City Engineer Tom Colbert. informed the Council that some grading had been done without approVa ViTich. violated other aspects of the development. He stated he..treat it wwa. .a flagrant violation and suggested issuing a formal. •citation. -The Council concurred. 1 Lt r Page 34/CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 19, 1988 BILLS Wachter moved, Egan tetdhded., the motion to approve the check list dated September 19, 1.988, in the amount of $992,428.59. All voted in favor. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion duly made by Gustafson, seconded by Wachter, the meeting was adjourned at .12:30 a.m. All voted in favor. CITY OF EAGAN By: Eugene VanOverbeke Its: City Clerk
