The URL can be used to link to this page

02/04/1992 - City Council Regular I • AGENDA •EGUIR MEETING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING FEBRUARY 4, 1992 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (BLUE) II. 6:35 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES (BLUE) III. 6:45 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS (BLUE) IV. 6:55 - CONSENT AGENDA (PINK) :G. t;?� Z A. PERSONNEL ITEMS P• 3 B. RESOLUTION/Application for Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premises Permit, Eagan Lions Club P' at Cedarvale Lanes C. RESOLUTION/Application for Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premises Permit, Eagan Lions Club C2• at Valley Lounge ID. RESOLUTION/Application for Exemption from Lawful Gambling License, American Legion V Post 594 . 9 E. RATIFICATION, Appointment of Erin Ipsen to the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources r Commission S)}� AGREEMENT, Joint Powers Ze with Report (Cedar Recycling Industrial roPark Funding- Overlay & ` 2(�`�G PROJECT 622, Authors Reconstruction) (o H. PROJECT 623, Authorize Feasibility Report (Johnny Cake Ridge Road - Overlay) V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS (SALMON) l A. PROJECT 592, Notice of Reassessment, Paul & Nancie Brooks (Wilmus Addition - Lift P' Station & Storm Sewer) VI. OLD BUSINESS (ORCHID) pp ,/ Appointment Ratification /'7i A. Design Review Committee, App Y �'y'f B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, Nitti Disposal,Block 1, Sibley TerminaluIndust Industrial Park Located West Industrial) District on Lot �" of Highway 13, North of Yankee Doodle Road.in the SE 1/4 of Sec 8 ,c----7_, ,toc, 4 � ,_- _ . .,.,..,.__Consisting of One,11C. PRELIMINARY PLAT, E-Z -, =• - Approximately .74 Acre GB (General Business) t ofated at the Northwest Intersection of Diffley Road and Nicols Ro lVI D. EXTENSION, Preliminary Plat for 19tryker Addition, Located along Beau De Rue Drive and V, Rahn Road in the NE 1/4 of Sec VII. NEW BUSINESS (TAN) n. 1114110‹A. RECOMMENDATION/Airport Relations Commission Regarding Minnesota Public Lobby Lawsuit B. REVIEW Preliminary Plans, Diffley Road Reconstruction 1� C. WAIVER OF PLAT, Scherer Brothers Financial, for a Duplex Lot Split for Lot 6, Block 6, Vienna Woods, Located in the NE 1/4 of Sec 31 c 'O�D. SPECIAL PERMIT, Robert Engstrom Companies, to Allow Two Emporary Advertising Signs in Excess of 7' , Lots 1 & 12, Block 1, Knob Hill Professional Park, Located in the SE of Sec 21 k AI e. 10(11E. REQUEST, Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition/James Development Co, to Change a Condition of Plat Approval to Add 20 Additional Lots, Located East of Dodd Road, South of Diffley Road in the NE 1/4 of Sec 25 P, Ilk F. REZONING, Weston Hills Addition/Lyman Development, of Approximately 64 Acres from an R-1 (Single Family) District and a Preliminary Plat Consisting of 132 Lots Located East of Highway 3, South of Cliff Road in the East 1/2 of Section 36 G. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, City of Eagan, to the City Code, Chapter 11 (Zoning) Regarding ?" (00 �" ( Flood Plain Regulations 1 VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS (GOLD) IX. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA (GREEN) X. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda) XI. ADJOURNMENT • MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS • FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JANUARY 30, 1992 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR FEBRUARY 4, 1992 CITY COUNCIL MEETING :N O `ACEND'.:"AITROV After approval is given to the February 4, 1992 City Council agenda, the January 21, 1992 regular City Council minutes, the January 14, 1992, December 17, 1991 and November 26, 1991 Special City Council meeting minutes, the following items are in order for consideration: :DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS There are no Department Head Business items at this time. • • Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting There are eight (8) 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. Resignation/Job Share Clerical Technician III/Maintenance Facility -- The City has received a letter of resignation from Cheryl Kempe, half of the job share clerical tech III position at the Maintenance Facility. Ms. Kempe's family is moving out of the area. Staff has reviewed the necessity for this position and has come to the conclusion that it is definitely needed. Therefore, it is the recommendation of City Administrator Hedges, Director of Public Works Colbert, Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa and all the • maintenance superintendents that advertisement for the position be placed and the position filled. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept the resignation of Cheryl Kempe and to authorize filling the position. Item 2. Police Dispatcher/Job Share -- The approved City general fund budget for 1992 authorized more hours for dispatchers in order to more efficiently cover the dispatch center. After studying the situation, it is the recommendation of City Administrator Hedges, Chief of Police Geagan and Administrative Lieutenant Swanson that an extra person be hired as a dispatcher to work the additional hours in a"job share"position rather than adding hours to an existing dispatcher's schedule. The City has several job share positions and has found them to be extremely advantageous to the City in terms of scheduling and filling work shifts. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve adding another person as a part-time dispatcher (job share)to work the additional hours in dispatch as allocated by the 1992 budget. Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1992 City Council Meeting GAMBLING PERMIT/LIONS CLUB/CEDARVALE LANES B. Resolution/Application for Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premises Permit,Eagan Lions Club at Cedarvale Lanes--An application has been received of the Eagan Lions Club for continuation of its pull-tab gambling project at Cedarvale Lanes, a copy of the application is enclosed without page number for your review. A copy of the resolution relative to this matter is enclosed on page M for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve a resolution permitting the Eagan Lions Club to conduct pull-tab gambling at Cedarvale Lanes. • • RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN GAMBLING PERMIT FOR EAGAN LIONS CLUB ON CEDARVALE BOWL PREMISES WHEREAS, The Eagan Lions Club has applied for a gambling premise permit to conduct a pull tab operation at Cedarvale Bowl, 3883 Beau d'Rue Drive, and WHEREAS, The Eagan Police Department has reviewed the application and has not identified any reason to deny; and WHEREAS, this is a renewal of an existing premise permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby approves the Eagan Lions Club application to conduct a pull tab operation at Cedarvale Bowl, 3883 Beau d'Rue Drive. Motion made by: CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Seconded by: BY: Those in Favor: ATTEST: Those Against: Dated: CERTIFICATION I, E.J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution as duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 4th day of February, 1992. E.J. vanOverbeke,City Clerk S Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1992 City Council Meeting • GAMBLING PERMIT/LIONS CLUB/VALLEY LOUNGE C. Resolution/Application for Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premises Permit,Eagan Lions Club at Valley Lounge—An application has been received of the Eagan Lions Club for continuation of its pull-tab gambling project at Valley Lounge, a copy of the application is enclosed without page number for your review. A copy of the resolution relative to this matter is enclosed on page C.• for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve a resolution permitting the Eagan Lions Club to conduct pull-tab gambling at Valley Lounge. • ...S- RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN GAMBLING PERMIT FOR EAGAN LIONS CLUB ON VALLEY LOUNGE PREMISES WHEREAS, The Eagan Lions Club has applied for a gambling premise permit to conduct a pull tab operation at Valley Lounge, 3385 Sibley Memorial Highway, and WHEREAS, The Eagan Police Department has reviewed the application and has not identified any reason to deny; and WHEREAS, this is a renewal of an existing premise permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby approves the Eagan Lions Club application to conduct a pull tab operation at Valley Lounge, 3385 Sibley Memorial Highway. Motion made by: CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Seconded by: BY: Those in Favor: ATTEST: Those Against: Dated: CERTIFICATION I, E.J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution as duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 4th day of February, 1992. E.J. VanOverbeke,City Clerk (CP • Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1992 City Council Meeting • EXEMPTION FROM GAMBLING LICENSE/AMERICAN LEGION POST 594 D. Resolution/Application for Exemption from Lawful Gambling License,American Legion Post 594--An application has been received of American Legion Post 594 for an exemption from the State gambling license requirement for a raffle to be conducted by their organization. Enclosed without page number is a copy of the application. Also enclosed on page $ is a copy of the resolution covering this action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve a resolution exempting American Legion Post 594 from the lawful gambling license requirements for the raffle activity as defined above. S S I RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN EXEMPTION FROM GAMBLING LICENSE FOR AMERICAN LEGION POST 594 WHEREAS, The American Legion Post 594 has applied for an exemption from lawful gambling, and WHEREAS, American Legion Post 594 wants to conduct a raffle drawing at a private residence located at 1979 North Timberwolf Trail in Eagan, and WHEREAS, The Eagan Police Department has reviewed the application and has not identified any reason to deny; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby approves the AmeriCan Legion Post 594 application for exemption from Gambling License and the raffle drawing at 1979 North Timberwolf Trail, Eagan. Motion made by: CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL • Seconded by: BY: Those in Favor: ATTEST: Those Against: Dated: CERTIFICATION I, E.J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution as duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 4th day of February, 1992. E.J. VanOverbeke,City Clerk . . Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting RATIFICATION/ERIN IPSEN/APRNRC. E. Ratification,Appointment of Erin Ipsen to the Advisory Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources Commission--Prior to the organizational business at the January 21, 1992 City Council meeting,an Advisory Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources Committee member had resigned. The filling of the remainder of this vacant term was inadvertently overlooked in the meeting business. Therefore, it is now necessary to make an appointment to fill the • remainder of that term. The day after the City Council meeting a fax ballot was distributed to the Mayor and City Councilmembers and the results of that ballot were the unanimous appointment of Erin Ipsen to the commission. It is necessary at this time to ratify that appointment. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To ratify the appointment of Erin Ipsen to the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission for a term which will end December 31, 1993. 111/ • 1110 9 Agenda Information Memo • February 4, 1992 City Council Meeting 1992 DAKOTA COUNTY RECYCLING/JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT F. Agreement, Joint Powers with Dakota County for 1992 Recycling Program Funding-- Enclosed on pages,L through is a memorandum from Recycling Coordinator Hageman covering the 1992 Joint Powers Agreement for Dakota County Recycling Program funding. This agreement covers the City's 1992 landfill abatement funding application previously approved by the City Council in September, 1991. The agreement was inadvertently placed in the signature file prior to submission to the City Council for consideration. If approved, the executed copy will be forwarded to Dakota County for the remaining signatures. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the 1992 Dakota County Recycling Program Joint Powers Agreement as presented. S • MEMO TO: ASSISTANT TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR ROHENSTBIN FROM: RECYCLING COORDINATOR HAGEMAN DATE: JANUARY 27, 1992 SUBJECT: 1992 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT/DAEOTA COUNTY The Joint Powers Agreement for program funding with Dakota County is placed on the February 4, 1992 Council agenda. The enclosed JPA was inadvertently placed in the signature file prematurely and signed by Mayor Egan prior to Council action. This may need to be clarified as the document should be placed in the packet for the next meeting. There are a few changes to the agreement. These changes basically refer to the new funding levels and payment schedules. If the document is not approved it will not be processed any further. If the document is approved the appropriate date will be added and it will be forwarded as necessary. Recycling Coordinator . JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT • This Agreement is between Dakota County (hereinafter "County") and the City of Eagan (hereinafter "Municipality") , through their Board and Council, respectively. WHEREAS, on August 1, 1991, by Resolution No. 91-559, the Dakota County Board of Commissioners adopted its Community Abatement Funding Program Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the County Recycling Policies adopted in Resolution No. 88-650 and revised by Resolution No. 91-482 include a requirement that all cities and townships within the County participate in recycling activities; and WHEREAS, the County desires to provide a portion of the costs incurred by cities and townships to implement and operate local comprehensive landfill abatement programs; and WHEREAS, the Municipality has implemented and operates a local comprehensive landfill abatement program within its jurisdiction and desires to receive such County funding support as may be available; and WHEREAS, any local governmental unit may act together with any county under a joint powers agreement to accomplish landfill abatement pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 473.811, subd. 7; and • WHEREAS, the Dakota County Board, of Commissioners has allocated funds expected to be received from surcharge collections pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 115A.919. NOW, THEREFORE, the County and the Municipality agree to this Joint Powers Agreement pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 471.59 and 473 .811, subd. 7, as follows: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for cooperation between the County and the Municipality to implement and operate a local comprehensive landfill abatement program in accordance with the Municipality's Funding application attached and incorporated herein by reference. 2 . Term. This Agreement shall be in effect from January 1, 1992, and shall continue in effect until terminated in accordance with the provisions herein. This Agreement may be amended in accordance with paragraph 18, by the attachment and incorporation of subsequent years' approved funding applications. 3. Program. The Municipality shall implement and operate a local comprehensive landfill abatement program that substantially complies with the current program guidelines for Community Landfill Abatement Administration and Education as approved by Board Resolution No. 91- 0 559. The Municipality must demonstrate that a recycling program is: Page 1 of 7 • currently in operation in its municipal buildings; that the program is consistent with the approved Dakota County Solid Waste Master Plan; and that the Targeted Community Program outlined in the Dakota • County Recycling Implementation Strategy, as amended, is maintained. The Target Community Program for single family . dwellings includes at least bi-weekly recyclables collection using a recycling container. All multi-family dwellings must also have recycling containers available. Under both programs, newspapers, cans (food & beverage) 3 colors of glass, corrugated cardboard, and plastic containers with a neck must be collected for recycling and other such items as required by County Board resolution. The program must be designed to meet or exceed a 16% residential recycling rate. Not more than 25% of the recycled materials, by weight, can consist of yardwaste or Christmas trees. The Municipality shall implement the activities substantially as set forth in its Funding Application, attached as Exhibit 1 as approved by the County. The Dakota County Physical Development Director or his designee shall have the authority to approve modifications to the Municipality's program and funding as requested by the. Municipality, as long as the amount payable under this Agreement does not exceed the amount approved by the County Board and so long as the proposed modifications are consistent with the County's guidelines. 4. Payment Schedule and Annual Report. Upon receipt and approval of progress reports as prescribed by the County, the County will pay the Municipality the grant amount approved by the County Board in two (2) equal installments on the following dates: • 1. February 1, of the grant year 2 . August 1, of the grant year By January 30 of the year following the grant, the Municipality shall submit its Annual Report in the form prescribed by the County. The County shall evaluate the Municipality's performance pursuant to this Agreement. The following evaluation formula shall be utilized: o 16% of residential wastes recycled 75 pts. (4.69 points per 1% of waste abated) . Only 25% of tonnage used to calculate recycled wastes may be yardwaste. • Conducted promotional program as outlined 25 pts. in application and approved by the County. The amount payable in 1992 shall not exceed Thirty-six Thousand Nine Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($36,900.00) . The Dakota County Physical Development Director or his designee shall have the authority to approve modifications to the grant so long as the proposed modifications do not exceed this amount and are consistent with the County's guidelines and the Municipality's • request. Page 2 of 7 /3 5. Eligibility. Only those activities which are included within an approved Application for Funding shall be eligible for funding under • this Agreement. Activities included within the approved Application to the extent reimbursed by a source other than as provided for in this Agreement, are not eligible for reimbursement under this Agreement. Any revenues received by the Municipality from activities reimbursed pursuant to this Agreement shall be applied to the costs of such activities. 6. Documentation. To receive funding from the County pursuant to this Agreement, the Municipality shall: A. Reserve funding allocation for each calendar year by submitting to the County by October 1 of the year preceding the grant an application, budget and support documentation as required by the County. The application shall be available from the Dakota County Physical Development Division. The application shall be accompanied by a certified resolution or minutes from the governing body of the Municipality requesting the funding allocation and by documentation which describes the municipal office paper recycling program operated by the Municipality. B. Submit as part of the Annual Report documentation of costs actually incurred for activities included within the approved Funding Application and revenues received from sources other than the County in support of such activities by January 30 of the year following the date the costs were incurred. Documentation shall be 0 submitted in the format prescribed by the County. Documentation shall include an accounting of the number of tons of each recyclable material collected through all residential non-curbside recycling programs within the Municipality, and an accounting of the number of tons of recyclable material which has been marketed, together with a description of the methodology used for calculation. For composting programs, the documentation shall include either a report of the actual number of tons of yardwaste delivered to compost facilities or, if actual tons are not available, an estimate of the number of cubic yards of yardwaste delivered to composting facilities together with a methodology used for calculation_ The Municipality agrees to furnish the County with additional reports in the form and at the frequencies requested by the County for financial evaluation and program management purposes. 7. Failure to meet Goals. If the Municipality fails to achieve an evaluation score of at least 91 points, the Municipality will reimburse the County the following percentages of funds paid pursuant to Paragraph 4 based on the following evaluation scores: 0-50 points 50% 51-75 points 25% 76-90 points 10% 91-100 points 0% • Page 3 of 7 \4 _ If the Municipality receives funding pursuant to this Agreement in the year following the grant, such reimbursement shall be deducted from the next year's grant from the County to the Municipality. If the Municipality does not receive such funding in the following year, such reimbursement shall be made by July 1 of the year following the year for which the monies were granted. • Monies received under this Agreement or assets acquired with funds provided under this Agreement which are not used for or do not continue in use for a County-approved landfill abatement project shall be repaid or returned to the County. 8. Subsequent Payment Schedule and Annual Reports. The County will pay the Municipality subsequent grants according to such policies as may be adopted by the County for such years. The County agrees to adopt its policies by August 1 of the preceding year and to execute such amendments to this Agreement as are necessary to implement such policies. Progress reports and Annual Reports for subsequent years shall be submitted at the times and in the form prescribed herein, or as otherwise agreed. The Municipality understands that the County's allocation to the Municipality under this Agreement for subsequent years will be dependent upon availability to the County of surcharge collections pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 115A.919 and other sources available for landfill abatement activities. 9. Access to Records/Audits. A. The County shall have full access to all records relating to the performance of this Agreement. B. The Municipality agrees to maintain records relating to the terms of this Agreement, and shall retain all such documentation for three years following the last date in which payment was received from the County under the terms of this Agreement or following the termination of this Agreement, whichever is later. Such records shall be made available for audit or inspection at any time upon request of the County or its authorized representative. The Municipality agrees to provide access to the project site(s) , if any, at reasonable hours. The Municipality shall maintain records sufficient to show that all funds received under this Agreement were expended for Landfill Abatement Purposes in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 115A.919 and this Agreement. The Municipality agrees to provide any information that is not readily available within a reasonable period of time. All expenses incurred by the examining authority shall remain a cost of such authority. 10. Property Distribution. Assets acquired in whole or in part with funds provided under this Agreement shall be the property of the Municipality. If this Agreement is terminated pursuant to Paragraph 19 herein, assets acquired in whole or in part with funds provided Page 4 of 7 under this Agreement shall be the property of the Municipality so long as said assets are used by the Municipality for the purposes of landfill abatement. • 11. Acknowledgment of County Financial Assistance. The Municipality shall provide the following acknowledgment on all promotional materials, reports and publications relating to the activities described in its Funding Application. This activity, program, publication funded in part by the Dakota County Board of Commissioners' Solid Waste Enterprise Fund. 12. Hold Harmless. The Municipality and the. County agree to indemnify and hold each other harmless from any claims, demands, actions or causes of action arising out of any act or omission on the part of their respective commissioners, officers, agents, servants or employees associated with activities pursued under the terms of this Agreement. Each party to this Agreement shall be liable for its own acts and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party, its officers, employees and agents. Liability of the County or other Minnesota political subdivisions shall be governed by the provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 466 and other applicable laws. 0 13 . Assignment/Subcontracting. The Municipality shall be responsible for the performance of all subcontracts and shall ensure that all subcontractors perform fully the terms of the subcontract. Any agreement between the Municipality and any subcontractor shall obligate the subcontractor to comply with the terms of this Agreement. 14 . Compliance With Requirements of the Law. The Municipality agrees to comply with all federal, state, and local laws or ordinances, and all applicable rules, regulations, and standards established by any agency of such governmental units, which are now or hereafter promulgated insofar as they relate to the Municipality's activities under the provisions of this Agreement. 15. Equal Employment Opportunity. In all activities related to the terms of this Agreement, the Municipality agrees to comply with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and executive orders pertaining to unlawful discrimination on account of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability or age. 16. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed severable. If any part of this Agreement is rendered void, invalid, or unenforceable, such rendering shall not affect the validity and enforceability of the remainder of this Agreement unless the part or parts which are void, invalid or otherwise unenforceable • Page 5 of 7 1 ( substantially impair the value of the entire Agreement with respect to either party. The parties further agree, if reasonable, to substitute for the invalid provisions a valid provision that most closely approximates the economic effect and intent of the invalid . provision. 17. Entire Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral and written agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. 18. Amendments. Any amendments, alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing, duly signed by the parties. 19. Termination. The County or the Municipality may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving written notice to the County Administrator for the County and to the Chairperson of the official governing body of the Municipality, at least 60 days before the effective date of termination. The County and the Municipality also may terminate this Agreement by mutual written agreement. The Agreement will automatically terminate at the end of any current term if a funding application for the following year has not been submitted by the Municipality and approved by the County Board. 20. Effect of Termination. Termination of this Agreement shall not discharge any liability, responsibility or right of any party which arises from the performance of or failure to adequately perform the terms of this Agreement ' prior to the effective date of termination. Nor shall termination discharge any obligation which by its nature would survive after the date of termination, including by way of illustration only and not limitation, the obligation of the Municipality to reimburse the County for funds under paragraph 7. • • Page 6 of 7 1 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed. 0 Approved as to form: COUNTY OF DAKOTA By Assistant County Attorney/Date Donald R. Chapdelaine, Chair Board of Commissioners Approved as to execution: Date of Signature Assistant County Attorney/Date Attest Norma Marsh, Auditor Approved by Dakota County Date of Signature Board Resolution No. qj ` W, I Dakota County Attorney's Office Dakota County Judicial Center ITY OF ' AGAN 11 1560 West Highway 55 Hastings, MN 55033 ;' B iL.m Telephone: (612) 438-4438 / ignatu Attest _O RD , City Clerk Date of Sig ature • C/K-92-2 • Page 7 of 7 (2 Ei i .y Naar _city of cagan_ • THAWS EGAN 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD Maya EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122-1897 DAVID K.GUSTAFSON PHONE:(612)454-8100 PAPAA FAX (612)454-8363 TIM PAWLENTY September 27, 1991 THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Administrator EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE Mr.. Allen Moe City Clerk Acting Director Planning and Program Management • Dakota County 14955 Galaxie Ave. Apple Valley, Minnesota . 55124 Dear Mr. Moe: Enclosed, please bind the 1992 Landfill Abatement Funding Application from the City of Eagan. The application outlines waste abatement program activities, the program budget and work plan for 1992 . • During 1992 , the environmental challenges that face the City of Eagan and Dakota County are great. Working together, we will need to increase residential and most importantly commercial recycling activities in order to meet and exceed our abatement goals for 1992 and beyond. If you need any additional information regarding the enclosed application, please feel free to contact me or Eagan Recycling Coordinator, Kris Hageman, at 454-8100. . Sincerely, --4/Aew°6k4kA° Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator 0 THE LONE OAK WEE...THE SYM ENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer • ATTACHMENT 1 • 1992 LANDFILL ABATEMENT FUNDING APPLICATION City/Township: Eagan Date Submitted: 10/1/91 Address: 3830 Pilot Knob Rd. Program Period: 1/1/92 to Eagan, MN 55122 12/31/92 I. If this is a multi-community project, please list all participating communities and the lead community or agency for the project, and attach a copy of the Joint Powers Agreement. ip 1I. Please provide a brief overview of 1992 abatement activities; indicate whether these are a continuation of existing programs expansion of existing programs; or new programs: (If more space is needed use extra sheets. ) See Attached 1-1 . 1992 Landfill Abatement Funding Application II. Overview of 1992 abatement activities: Continued Programs- o Curbside collection for recyclables. Single family to four-unit household in addition to a number of townhome complexes are served by weekly, same day collection of recyclables and refuse. Residents are supplied two stackable containers for recyclable materials. To date, materials collected in the curbside program include; newspapers, glass food and beverage containers, tin and aluminum food and beverage containers, plastic bottles and corrugated cardboard. Additional items such as rigid plastics and magazines - will be added citywide in 1992 as identifiable markets become available. o Multi-family collection for recyclables. Recycling opportunities are available to all residents in multi-unit housing (5+ units) . Collection systems do vary between complexes. The most common system used is the use of 90 gallon containers organized adjacent to/or near trash enclosure areas. o Drop-off opportunities for aluminum cans and (LDPE) plastic i grocery and produce bags are available. The local Cub Food store has a collection system organized for plastic bags. A private vendor operates a aluminum can redemption machine on the premises. Rainbow Foods also has a plastic bag collection system organized. o Recycling in the Parks. Continued recycling of aluminum cans at municipal parks. The main focus for the program is the Northview Athletic Complex which over a summer will allow over 70,000 residents/visitors the opportunity to recycle. o Waste Reduction Activities at all municipal buildings continues to increase. Continued work on managing our wastes in the most environmentally sound manner. Work began August 1991. o Yard Waste. Anticipated continuation of the Dakota County/Eagan Yard Waste Compost Facility. C. Multi Family Recycling • 1. Total number of units served: 6,478 2 . Total number of buildings served: 253 3 . Frequency of collection/collection method(s) used (description) : Most operate with containers for recyclable materials adjacent to trash enclosure areas. Some buildings have separate container areas in parking garages or free spaces. Collected a minimum of once a week. 4 . Materials collected (Circle all that apply) newsprint mixed paper used oil food Cans everage can C glass plastics magazines -Mother orrugated cardboard 5. Expected abatement from multi family units: 400 tons D. Yard Waste Program • 1. Please provide a brief description of the community's • role in yard waste collection. - - Refuse haulers may collect separated yard wastes from residents. -- Back yard composting activity is on the rise. -- Anticipated continued operation of the Dakota County/Eagan yard waste facility. 2. Drop off: (Complete the following only if this is a community owned/operated yard waste collection site) Location: Hours: Fees: 3. Expected yard waste abatement in 1992. (curbside/dropoff) : 2.800 tons E. Describe any commercial/industrial recycling activities you will undertake in 1992 (this is not a required program) . -- Technical assistance as requested -- Distribution of white office paper recycling boxes as requested -- Distribution of waste reduction information as requested -- Continued work with County staff on commercial recycling/waste reduction activities • 1-3 • F. Describe program specific public education/promotional activities that will be undertaken in 1992. • See Attached residential: a minimum of one written communications must be sent to each household in 1992. institutional (schools) : a minimum of 4 presentations must be made in schools in 1992 . commercial/industrial G. Describe your in-house recycling/procurement program. Municipal Center: -- Collection of newspapers, magazines, white office paper, glass, • metal, plastic bottles and corrugated cardboard. Semi-comingled recyclables collected in single container -- Collection of recyclables also done at the Maintenance Facility and Fire Administration buildings -- Continued increase of supply & paper product purchase made with iv. Work Plan_ consumer materials. -- Waste reduction methods implemented Fall of 1991 continued -- Procurement Policy u}de book used. Developed Fall pf 1991 Dakota County will distribute any approved funding in two equal payments, provided communities meet specified development objectives. Please provide a work plan for 1992 and highlight the objectives to be met by the following dates: See Attached o June 15 o December 31 • 1 -4 a25 1992 Landfill Abatement Funding Application • F. Specific promotion/education activities. Residential A minimum of one citywide brochure will be distributed. The brochure will contain specific information regarding recycling program operations and waste management ideas. A variety of materials will be produced for use in the multi-family recycling program. These materials may range from "new resident" information cards, to door hangers to signs for container identification. The local newspapers will also be targeted to inform the public of program operations/changes. Monthly reminders and information will be placed in both local papers. Special events will also need promotion and program materials. Environmentally sound waste management booklets may be an item produced for such events as Earth Day or the Community Clean Up Day. The Eagan quarterly newsletter will have a four page "HERO Highlights" section dedicated to solid waste management topics. Annual participation in the Eagan Fourth of July Parade. Institutional- A minimum of four presentations will be made in schools during 1992 . Elementary schools will be targeted for presentations and participation in school sponsored events. Production of • presentation materials may be required. Commercial/Industrial- Distribution of "Desk-top" trays as requested (supply carried over from 1991) . Remaining guides for "Office Paper Recycling" will be distributed as part of any technical assistance offered. 1992 Landfill Abatement Funding Application • Program Work Plan 1992 Date Program Element 1/30/92 Community Annual Report Due 1-6/92 Continued Program Promotion- -monthly newspaper display ads. -multi-family promotion follow-up/ correspondence -2 citywide newsletter distributions -school presentations -one citywide brochure 4/92 Earth Day Celebration 5/92 4th Annual Community Clean Up Day 6/15/92 Payment #1 6-12/92 Continued Program Promotion- -monthly newspaper display ads. -multi-family promotion/correspondence • -2 citywide newsletter distributions -school presentations 7/1/92 Program Revision Due 7/4/92 Fourth of July Parade 12/31/92 Payment #2 • • Agenda Information Memo • February 4, 1992 City Council Meeting PROJ. 622/AUTHORIZE FEASIBILITY REPORT CEDAR INDUSTRIAL PARK G. Project 622, Authorize Feasibility Report (Cedar Industrial Park - Overlay and Reconstruction)--As identified in the Public Works Department Five Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the streets within the Cedar Industrial Park have reached a . point in their life where a structural overlay will both extend the useful life of these streets as well as increasing the load bearing capacity to the present day standards of 10 tons per axle. Staff is, therefore, requesting authorization to prepare a feasibility report to specifically review the costs associated with this reconstruction and overlay within this industrial park and the various methods of financing this type of improvement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To authorize the preparation of a feasibility report for Project 622 (Cedar Industrial Park-Overlay and Reconstruction). PROJECT 623/AUTHORIZE FEASIBILITY REPORT (JOHNNY CAKE RIDGE ROAD-OVERLAY) • H. Project 623, Authorize Feasibility Report (Johnny Cake Ridge Road - Overlay)-- Similar to Project 622, the 5 Year CIP has identified the segment of Johnny Cake Ridge Road from Cliff Road to Apple Valley as being in need of a structural overlay to prolong the useful life of this community collector street. Therefore, staff is requesting authorization to prepare a feasibility report to research the costs associated with this project and the various alternatives associated with financing the proposed improvement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To authorize the preparation of a feasibility report for Project 623 (Johnny Cake Ridge Road-Overlay). Agenda Information Memo • February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting REASSESSMENT HEARING/BROOKS/TRUNK STORM SEWER A. Project 592, Notice of Reassessment, Paul and Nancie Brooks (Wilmus Addition - Lift Station & Storm Sewer)--On September 16, 1991, the Eagan City Council adopted the final . assessment in Project 592,Wilmus Addition,for construction of a lift station and force main. As owners of parcel #10-03200-030-01, Paul and Nancie Brooks received an assessment notice. They object to the assessment and submitted a written objection. The case has been reviewed by the City Attorney's office. It is their recommendation that a reassessment hearing be held. Such a hearing was scheduled for the February 4, 1992 regular City Council meeting and the appropriate notices we published and sent to the Brooks. Enclosed for the Council's information on pages�X through 3N are a copy of a memo from Annette Margarit of the City Attorney's office, a map of the area in question, an affidavit of publication for notice of public hearing and a notice of hearing on the proposed reassessment. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a reassessment amount of $0 for Paul Brooks and Nancie Brooks for parcel #10-03200-030-01 for • improvement of trunk storm sewer in the Wilmus Addition, Project 592. • • JAN 30 '92 15:08 203 P02 301MORANDUM T0: Jim Sheldon FROM: Annette M. Margarit DATE: January 23, 1991 RE: Brooks v. City of Eagan Court File No. C8-91-8383 On September 16, 1991, the Eagan City Council adopted a final assessment in Project No. 592 in the area of the Willmus Addition. According to the feasibility report, the Project involved construction of a lift station and force main from Pond BP-6 to the existing trunk storm sewer in Thomas Lake Road. The costs were assessed using an area method at a rate of .056 per square foot for a single-family home. Paul Brooks and Nancie Brooks were the owners of Parcel No. 10-03200-030-01 at the time of assessment and were assessed $6,222.33. Mr. Brooks objected to the assessment at the City Council hearing on September 16, 1991 and submitted his written objection at that time. Mr. Brooks served his Notice of Assessment Appeal on the City Clerk on October 2, 1991 and paid his assessment on the same date. Mr. and Mrs. Brooks have since sold their property. This parcel has not been previously assessed for trunk area storm sewer and is not connected to City utilities. I have reviewed Mr. Brooks' objections, the file, the assessment roll, feasibiliy report and other City documents. I believe the nature of the Project, namely, construction of a trunk storm sewer and the considerable distance between the improvement and Mr. Brooks' parcel as indicated on the attached map will make it very difficult to substantiate an assessment of this size. Since the parcel is not connected to City utilities, connection fees are available pursuant to Chapter 3 of the Eagan City Code. The City can collect payment for the utility service to the parcel at the time of hook up. .I recommend to the City Council that they remove this assessment from the roll and seek connection fees if and when the parcel is connected to the City's system. AMM/wkt • 203 P03 .......I.T.P11... 33 '.92.,,, 1 :q09,..1- tf--l.1!=,.-,Z3=, , ,,,,, 1- • ,....4tt .... INiV. •, iji 'I JF,1:111 J.1110-11 .......'N. ,...... .• .1,.-7......: :-..,_.• ... . 1.15,,AfT 1.ee - It .,... I . ,'1:14 AI • ://`1' '' '''''.1k.s.• ' j4- ...'''.. ' I L 11614i31.4‘ •• 4'' 4.1,4 Li,paylifka.- i ovicow,X,,.... ••. ,'". . tc,c ' '"I 8 ." fat icitypitiq .)....„._ :...40 ..tt.i.,: ,.„1 .i,. -.:, . 211-.51, . . . 4.14(r‘nifc.41) .‘114 ,rc. i.;:. .i, 1:,,,„,-' Itmpulmv ••7' 04%4 lis" it ... 11_i Ili:An i no! IP it 1• N) ! - :r670,•„,r1, :isl, 4-4 ....r.,,,as, , • " • :.,- - fa A\ • ( %,..• AlWillifft '" ./.P la. ..,., 4 f• .d4i,N x .., .,:;. 7 1 . 920.0 V --,.... / -4 rp ,.• , ,[Ma] . Lt.: 8 ' ,..:.. \-[...'. • Irk' 4A ,a.e... 11 a a 1.1.. .. )1i ,. . f:bE 4". Milli 1,4.;.C Pt.11 i I.. I"I. R -IF'- '''. -7- e irA.,,-. : asTITF:C3r5iii3; ". I -:..476,1 e:'1`:* ‘--.- 1 v(, -__....tr,,,...- _ . • ,,,..... • „ , iii,v,„4,,,,..,if f :.- -: ... . \ ,‘ f .1 . ./. • -`1.' ial ,i,' i'jL'IN":#2'i, ggf ./ EIP.3 1 --ggc,41. - , ..• • rAti an* riE, k , 444,1 ,I.,,‘,• .^ .s.to I -I I'I 1 filpJ/1.t&ejelisuFfIrliii,ikt,r:TEH . -'7".." • H or1441 ' - 5-----t r/61-5° - . - TIS um, gai- ArAL PAA .."A ...-7 .s..t ,. -..... . .9 . .pi,„ - • , ail:Ai- BP 3 -I i 1 I 'V BP-4 EIP-251 74 --,•P. ' . . I' /'• " . --•1 ii--A, , , e ..,-- 7 ) . B _ • - . • .-..... ..., f 101 h.:1,85.1 . . 1 it.p 1-, ""... ---y geo:g ..,• A.,44, ••.L;. I. A-I I . :P141 I w ' 4 - ''s 1** ..,pfeto no ::,.. ....,i .-'._ .........4.4. .#4.-.%-5..- :;•-; ' cia- _: " mar.. * A.P-,-1q I rrntle/AWI -'' 11L;151- -e'i.' , AI . .7 i 11 8" 1:14Arr ,1 1.' '; 1#.4; 17" 1"11- 4:, 1.1 I"Ill PLI 1 mq. . I- . . ffi-.cPP43pitt.:1101.,-,,, -., 2.i -,, (fp.: i• ..x:„ vat 0 N. - :314 1 ' .14 411'. * ..'. .. r-ligi :of Iiit.41,,,S;e z. ::: s'pill '41 8408.47;-28:// ---°41C174--111.>..' 7-3 i4-•'... ' lliii.rf(11;11*‘:*1 0,5 I fil').; bf.c:p„'-• 11 1-Z/7Z7. , 5 ,- t ''''U 'OP ' 7 1 2 ; Ili " '7 .. _ 51: . v..v. • ni.v .,-,-0 1,1.,--. I a - , 11.1 ;*" r ri.(1L- .1F.,4.r. r_,147-'11*,`''' ,,,,i..- ' k,rk,,,-,- ./if.i, A R.1 F , , ..) '■0-2,11-..; ,it '..../4 7 ii•IV. -,-. 4 • Itt'•:..1.:- li IFIr ' ' Fi7 IP- r4 v..'4, ii, r ,, . )kii; iiiIR I ( 4 7'-41...' ,- . ' 7,,,. --* • f 6La':' .,4 I . is '01 Ai 14_Ai 1 e•clip. .• a lir DI , .0 Ldakjoti• , ''•'•ile'e --.1 .(Mdiree/PLI .1 ' • i-- --, „A - $5'NV IP' - I / Si'or • i' . Imili-__-• r,. :41111.ep; wfiltitr, ,i-N,k4,.';i: b p AP- --. ani 'cr k•' A ::•- ."c!• - : 'il 'se 143r), o"- mil 41 Hz,IN ,„,„..1- ges.3 .-qot`ii 47#„-It ‘, „..„_\,i div,Y." .K''f. y,•I-,!, , " • . 1 :„.,,,,,r,,,:,::14/.0,,./ f• , ,.• ,, likp„49. v.. . 1 LA CIZT ',it 4%16,2,Eitill.:1.0.91/k,• • 1.0Vil 1,-,%1',',/CAC .7 ,.,, .. 4'.',...t VFW I-8 .0,.•,-..,11 . :1 A; 4_` "1(44 .:-":1',S . 1 r ..,, ..iti; ... ,1,,:.t\-'_12.11" ) 1, ' 1).,,,,..• .0Y ..tiff4 ?a 0 ,,„ I i i,3,,,a1,,,e4,9,3:t. , A'p.:5••::L ,,,ii.,,,;jib*t7.-21L ,,,-, ...„.# ,4•4,44i_.v,1 ,,,,,,,, 0.,..., .T. .,„ . d 11 11 541f91 .2,, HIS ine-1--1,, 4/../.:;...2, .7-a- 1E, :t?- iiP..tattti.1.-_-J g ' MIN IE _.._7.iirad .. • '.15 -1* F.- . . _. -•• . 1 „7., wA 94__./' 6. ,_ ....-,S•-.:.N>17, 071:100 1'" I ! I.39, r,■ ..0 4 •,,, "t- "AT 0 ,;4,... ,,,i‘.. . -10.;011." .; 't i.' : •,.., *74 ql.' ‘.Y . .."-..iltggirqr. '..) 1.. \ cif icN Ill 1 t. " • I ig .-/'`; : i).yul4.0e . _ /0.,, 40 . ,''. ,:.: .,01.,,,,,kr.',r_4_,....,...in,!,.iv::,, ., 4:1,11.4%I._ . , t i:re•-1"...7. ,.,..i tki' -., pAzi7. -_ -.,• • '`'" •1..i I 107 .• .s - . 7-c...v, v..‘T\ il II II 1 'ail 4.kli Al i. .:' * -; A 1 w, 1. • 1 .8. ., g , ,,ss. s ef,0, 1),, kt I Ts...). pg? - '..i tif 4710, . i . • 37 s` -,:, • =:.-7i' ' '." ' , '1 illi-uu, .‘..• -:.. , orikl - .- ir ;- ,' .$1 0. tit.- tAg. ci;, ,,,. ..0 7 64_ nu . No,p 075,ca, .0.. it. -- • 4,5w"./4 ' 1 1 rif • ,11.0 $11$ 4 p ,7113y0P=.484 •'.- .)14°!' 4'•::' 6'''. ,.,...,1 1 sz6.0 ,.• . , N.. I 346 _,,, ; - %.0 "....., i.;, .11.116,-4,-S-__„, il :-1:t ;, ..t .I. Lp_45.. mairrr.#a3.1 i i •• Rai ; ft .- I'IA LI p,„t, - ,.,#,A Pi• ..q. _.,,,,,,„, .5.,,.••0 E'`''..2%, .•-.. _. OAkOT COUN Y PAR 114-4P2-3-spl:P4 m:f.0000000-at-faa: 74 ,41 . ••;•gill- .-: • A VI""-via :101,110_ .--4'-, -• S.924,A-n• 1 ( '' f211'tft_t '.!E • lig A'Aa 1. PM° :-_. .E.s.t.'4.i..T.:: .1 . 7L122,10 .: • .'.r., , -, 1,' :. • Oki . 51A)*)..1.4 P k) #, ) - . . , . VfOr `alf/Ftr Lou NT r..: Are$11 9118 rye. OA KU A. r0 '• , . f.ti9.n,..-} A : . • ,a; . ( • 0 ;(-)taff/''' _. ... :1 ,i.../. .b•■■‘‘... i , , _.n .,,...- _•• • ) BLP-I 917.0 „er . ap g . ._-• POP.0 LP-10 X) ...... , 958.I LP , ! a L. • ' PSI. • • ' 71 APPLE VI VALLEY '''"4 ' i' ; clai i , 31 6.1114.*■1464- FRANON • t 1 , Hutt"... ......••••"'• PARK P33,4 MINNESOTA • ZOOLOGICAL • • ) FIGURE No. 1.... GARDENS LEGEND \ --- . . ,......... . Ng...-. STORM 8LIVAIRA 8134991■0 ' grow StIWE99 bw•49,9 Sr ...-....- rroRu um OTATION( s5) . STORM SEWER L .. 1TORk urr$TA71044 tewcabb) . . 0 ". . . • ' STOW rot=MK .9 44.9.9 4-1I. MAP i .....„,,,,....., . . . .... . . JAN 30 '92 15:10 20.3 PO4 itW' tirrf •AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION • STATE OF MINNESOTA ) SS County of Dakota ) PUBLIC NOTICE ttorta a MASSCSSMCHT MAKean _21 i mama►ro.-t52 ...t IMPSOYDAINTs .41 an.Of SAGAN SAKOTA COUNTY.MMMSDOTA i NANCY I.GUSTAFSON,being duly swore,se oath says that she is an authorised egad end NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the sty of Ea an.Dakota County, � the publisher of the newspaper known as Dakota County Tribuaa.and lips full knowledge anon looated ate a�the d,�paf,. City On!Struary 4,190!at 7:0D p.m.to cer i of the facts which a etaisd below: . seder the proposed reassessment Of impI O5O re mitts relating to Imp,rovemeat Project lid' M O In the following dosct bed area: _'•°,.,11 PID ri(43200O00-Ot:Weal SSG B.of (A)111.newspaper has complied wide all of the requirements caviling gwlNieatioa as et legal tGT(.l ft.of N 510.5 ft.of N3 y of Seetitm; ss.Township!7,Range 2s emwapmper,OS provided by Minnesota Statute 331 A.02,331AA7 and other applicable Iowa,or amended. The tree proposed to be reasoned fa all: taseribod above,all as more fully' ticularly described is the reasae95- raemt roll on file with the City Clerk to his of-t" (II)TM printed which roll is open to public Inspection.' me total amount of the proposed reua®= mem is M Written p public oral objections will be'u considered at the 5e lice bearing.ke.inch;* No appeal may be li nu gned bys �prone lion,signed by the V filed with the City Clerk prior to the lsaer� •� log or pret<nled to tifa preet r g officer at they _,,,�,,,—,,,,,..r meeting,An owner may appeal 0 remereif. meat to district cart pursus5t to M.S.A.sac- which b ad ached was cut From the columns of said newspaper,'and was printed add published mica• tton 423.061 by Seining notice of she appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City of Eapuf' within thirty(SO)days atter the adapboo of• the reassessment and filing such notice with' aataaseira'weeks;it was the District Court of Dakota County within tad liffkateskOar 0)01 days after sorties Ypee the Mayer—, _qq Clerk, eK If�ft` ef, V awn Note a further liven that b.S to 4 to the published en Thwedey,the, day • tfiaacaotastatpka&xtieroe�i.tSataiSa.ui;: first ffYb Inc d er Ea has ordiimance pta/VIeaa aunt deferral This the Eagan City Canna may defer the pdq n molt Of Kacisi awumem against home-- 19 C7 g , and was thereafter Misled mod pailiab d on every Thursday to end fmcieseSag elesd property,which is owned and occupied, by a person ft,yearl of age or older or retired• by virtue of disability whoa the assesamend would create a hardsldp upon the propert&l• Thteadey.lMe day of •19 1 *weer. Apptttatlms for deferral meat bet mad°not later than ninety(50)days steer ut and pairmod below is a copy of the lower cam alphabet free A to Z both inclusive,which Is hereby assessment is adopted. riess er information obtained ndd it to the �' scion wwd as bang the she and kind of type used Mn the pompesitisn and publiantiau of the sena: aaseasrtcv!may beobtalaedlromfhe5peeiial 9� rill Assessment Division of the Public Korb. etrcdsFRh�ltlasapgrstavwxy: Department end soy questions should be directed to that Division, 2 .Dated;January 17,1902 � is/E.J.VenOvetbeke •' �• ail Clerk Ch of Eag:n •J`'ra F3Y: �. . ,__/ , .//I TRLR:3eaatory t Usher 1 r Stisertbad sod sworn to Was en*4(93rJ der of �.V.N )«-y,19ia.. r . Notary Public 4,..-. CAROL J.HAVERLAND- . •Iro,e d:CTARY Pl)ii tC•lAB:NESClA • t DAKOTA COUNTY tt i, W slam wag o JAN 30 '92 15:11 203 P05 • AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) Wendy K. Twomey, of the City of Sagan, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota, being duly sworn, says that on the 17th day of January, 1992, she served the annexed Notice of Reassessment Hearing Project No. 592 on the following person(s) in this action by mailing copies thereof enclosed in an envelope, postage prepaid and by depositing same in the post office al. Apyla Valley, Minnesota, dirootod to the following person(s) at the address(as) shown below. 1. Herbert Baker 1810 Cliff Road Eagan, MN 55122 2. Paul and Nancie Brooks 6600 Park Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Wendy K. amey • Subscribed and swor o before me this day of ( , 1992. Notary/Public / • to PHYL1fSJ.KLEIN DL 4.!! '. NOTARY pUBUC-MINNESOTA • DAKOTA COUNTY jl.. MyCommlashm txplron1Of2 /92 • • • JAN 30 '92 15:12 203 P06 NOTICE OF BEARING ON PROPOSED REASSESSMENT • Eagan, Minnesota, 1992 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that the Council will meet at 7:00 p.m. on February 4, 1992 at the Eagan Municipal Center to pass upon the proposed reassessment for the improvement of the trunk storm sewer in Wilimus Addition. The following is the area proposed to be reassessed: PID #10-03200-030-01; West 256 ft. of East 2078.1 ft. of N 510.5 ft. of NE : of Section 32, Township 27, Range 23 The amount to be reassessed against your particular lot, piece, or parcel of land is $0. The original assessment roll as adopted is on file for public inspection at the City Clerk's office. The total amount of the proposed reassessment is $0. Written or oral objections will be • considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of a reassessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the Clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The Council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of a proposed individual reassessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. If a reassessment is contested or there is an adjourned hearing, the following procedure will be followed: • 3> JAN 30 '92 15:12 203F07 • 1. The City will present its case first by calling witnesses who may testify by narrative or by examination, and by the introduction of exhibits. After each witness until neither side has further questions. 2. After the City has presented all its evidence, the objector may call witnesses or present such testimony as the objector desires. The same procedure for questioning of the City's witnesses will be followed with the objector's witnesses. 3. The objector may be represented by counsel. 4. Minnesota rules of evidence will not be strictly applied; however, they may be considered and argued to the Council as to the weight of the items of evidence or testimony presented to the Council. • 5. The entire proceedings will be tape-recorded. 6. At the close of presentation of evidence, the objector may make a final presentation to the Council based on the evidence and the law. No new evidence may be presented at this point. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429. 081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. E. J. VanOverbeke City Clerk - City of Eagan • 53 Agenda Information Memo • February 4, 1992 City Council Meeting �:: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE A. Design Review Committee, Appointment Ratification—At the January 21, 1992 City Council meeting, direction was given to contact the Architectural Review Committee and solicit names for appointment to the Design Review Committee which will analyze the ice arena/outdoor swimming pool project with the architects. The entire Architectural Review Committee, consisting of Al Menning, Jim Runkel, Frank Potocnik, George Kubik, John Gorman, City Councilmember McCrea and City Councilmember Pawlenty, has agreed to serve as members of the Design Review Committee. In addition to these individuals, Sandy Smiler, a resident who has considerable experience and insight in organizing swimming,has agreed to serve. The City Administrator's office has also attempted to contact two other individuals who may be interested in serving. One of these individuals was not able to give us a definitive answer; we are still attempting to contact the other one. If there is any positive interest shown,these names will be included in Additional Information on Monday. There are some other possibilities, such as a representative of the EAA, Chamber of Commerce and other organizations,which are still being pursued for potential appointments. If any member of the City Council knows of a resident or person who might appropriately represent the City Council on this Committee,please notify the City Administrator and that name will be included with Additional Information on Monday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To ratify appointments to the Design Review Committee as presented. • Le • •te -* , • ,3`( Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/NTITTI DISPOS /OUTDOOR STORAGE. B. Conditional Use Permit,Nitti Disposal, Inc.,to Allow Outdoor Storage in an LI (Light Industrial) District on Lot 8, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park Located West of Highway 13, North of Yankee Doodle Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 8—At its meeting of December 19, 1991, the Advisory Planning Commission met and considered an application for a conditional use permit by Nitti Disposal, Inc., for outside storage of recyclable materials. This item was scheduled for the January 7, 1992 City Council meeting and was continued at the request of the applicant until the February 4, 1992 City Council meeting. Subsequent to that continuance, the applicant has met with City staff to further discuss the conditions in the report. Subsequent to these meetings, the applicant is requesting another continuance until the February 18, 1992 City Council meeting. Enclosed on page,y,., is a copy of the request from Russell Schweihs of Nitti Disposal requesting the continuance. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a continuance of the subject application to the February 18, 1992 City Council meeting. • • spri %1 RUSSELL P.SCHWEIHS Chit Ex•cutive Moor January 30, 1992 City of Eagan Community Development Department Mr. Mike Ridley 3B30 Pilot Knob Rd. Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mr. Ridley: I request a continuance to the February 18, 1992 City Council meeting on the issue of our Conditional Use Permit Application. • Sincerely, 'L Russell Schweihs RS/jb • i 3291 Terminal Drive • Eagan, Minnesota 55121 • (612)451.1421 • Fax 452.9156 200.4 `.., / 3N1 'b I0 WIN T£=18 T£-T8-e6. -er Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting E-Z STOP/PRELIMINARY PLAT C. Preliminary Plat, E-Z Eatery Addition/Crown Coco, Inc., Consisting of One, Approximately .74 Acre GB (General Business) Zoned Lot Located at the Northwest Intersection of Diffley Road and Nicols Road in the SW 1/4 of Section 19—An application for preliminary plat for E-Z Stop of Eagan Addition was originally presented to the Advisory Planning Commission in May of 1991. At that time, the APC unanimously recommended approval. However,prior to the preliminary plat being scheduled on the City Council meeting, the applicant requested an indefinite continuance to pursue acquiring additional land to the north. The original preliminary plat was to include only remodelling of the existing building, however, a revised plat, the E-Z Eatery Addition, was brought before the APC in November and came before the City Council at its December 3, 1991 meeting. The item was continued to the December 17, 1991 regular City Council meeting, at which time it received approval. However, the applicant has now decided to go forward with the original remodelling proposal, the preliminary plat for E-Z Stop of Eagan Addition, and has requested to o before the ncil for preliminary plat action on this proposal. Attached on pages through " for the Council's information are a memo from City Planner Sturm, the original staff report from May of 1991 regarding this preliminary plat, and the minutes from • the Advisory Planning Commission meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a preliminary plat application for E-Z Stop of Eagan Addition, consisting of one .74 acre lot at the northwest intersection of Diffley and Nicols Road as presented. • 31 S MEMO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR DALE RUNKLE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: JIM STURM, CITY PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 30, 1992 SUBJECT: E-Z STOP OF EAGAN ADDITION In May, the application for the E-Z Stop of Eagan Addition, consisting of one .74-acre lot that contains the gas station at the northwest intersection of Diffley and Nicols Roads, was approved unanimously by the Advisory Planning Commission. Prior to proceeding to the City Council, the applicant requested an indefinite continuance to pursue acquiring additional land to the north. If acquisition occurred, the existing building was to be razed and a new art deco-style building would have been constructed. The original plat was to include only remodeling of the existing building. A revised plat in the E-Z Eatery Addition, incorporating all of the commercial-zoned land to the north, was approved by the APC in November and by the City Council in December. Since that time, the applicant decided to go forward with the original remodeling proposal and has requested to go to the Council for preliminary plat action. Attached are the original staff report and APC minutes. If you would like additional information on this item, please contact me. • City Planner Attachments JS/mg S 32 CITY OF EAGAN • SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT E-Z STOP OF EAGAN APPLICANT: CROWN COCO, INC. LOCATION: NW CORNER OF DIFFLEY & NICOLS ROADS (10.00900-011-53) EXISTING ZONING: GB (GENERAL BUSINESS) • DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1991 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 16, 1991 COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted requesting a Preliminary Plat of one lot on .74 acres of previously-zoned General Business land located in the northwest quadrant of Diffley Road and Nicols Road intersection. The Comprehensive Guide Plan designates this area General Business also. • EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing 1,440 sq. ft. building, a 1,250 sq. ft. canopy, and six pump islands. The site contains no landscaping and only a portion is hard surfaced and has curb and gutter. The site is bounded by vacant GB property to the north; Cedar School across Nicols to the east; an Amoco station across Diffley to the south; and Cedar Avenue right-of-way on the west. • COMMENTS: Due to the limited space at this site and the fact that it is bounded by right- of-way on three sides, staff believes Variances should be run with the plat to allow the drive isle on the south and west side a minimum setback of 5' instead of the required 20'. The existing building and proposed expansion meet all setback requirements of the GB zoning district. Trash and recycling containers shall be stored in a structure made of similar building materials as the main building as shown on the revised Preliminary Plat plan. The proposed expansion of 1,006 sq. ft. combined with the existing building square footage of 1,440 will result in a building coverage of 7.6%. Adding the canopy coverage results in • a total site coverage of 11.5%, which is under the Ordinance allowed maximum of 35%. Based on a total building square footage of 2,446 and an additional four spaces because of the motor fuel station use, the City Code requires 20 parking stalls on site. The proposed plan provides 22 stalls. The four parking spaces behind the building shall be designated and used for employee parking only. 3 GRADING/DRAINAGE/EROSION CONTROL:, This development involves the regrading • of an existing commercial site. Within the site there is a maximum differential in elevations of approximately 5 feet. The proposed grading is intended to route all on-site drainage to a proposed catch basin in the northeast corner of the site. The runoff from this development will be directed into an existing 27" R.C.P. storm sewer in Nicols Road that drains through ponds AP-6 and AP-39 and then into the Minnesota River Basin. The development will be responsible for installing and maintaining erosion control measures in accordance with the City's Erosion/Sediment Control Manual Standards. WATER QUALITY:, This proposed 0.74 acre commercial development lies in the lower portion of Drainage Basin A. Runoff from the site will be discharged to a storm sewer along Nicols Road on its way to the Minnesota River. City water quality treatment requirements apply to this development but the site itself is too small to accommodate on-site ponding. To meet water quality criteria, the City will require a cash dedication in lieu of ponding. Analyses using the City's water quality model indicate a pond surface area of 0.067 acres and a pond volume of 0.14 acre-feet would be needed to meet minimum treatment standards for the development. Based on the City's adopted unit costs for commercial land and excavation costs, the cash dedication due for the development is $9,207. • UTILITIES: The site is presently served by City sanitary sewer and watermain and the developer does not plan any modifications to the existing services. There is an existing hydrant in the northeast corner of the site which will provide adequate fire protection. STREETS/ACCESS/CIRCULATION: The site currently has two existing accesses from Nicols Road. The Dakota County Highway Department has reviewed the preliminary site plan and they recommend that the south driveway be closed. The County feels that the driveway opening is too close to the intersection of Nicols Road and Dif ley Road. The existing parking lot at the site is bituminous and concrete on the east half and gravel on the west half. The bituminous portions of the parking lot are in poor condition because of inadequate drainage and needs repair. The new parking lot shall contain a concrete curb and gutter around the entire edge of the lot to control where people park and to confine the drainage from this site to a proposed storm sewer. The new parking lot shall be surfaced with bituminous or concrete pavement. EASEMENTS/RIGHT-OF-WAY/PERMITS: No additional right-of-way along the existing streets will be required. • 140 CONDITIONS OF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL: 1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on July 10, 1990 shall be complied with: Al, B1, C2, El, 01 2. Landscaping, as shown on the revised Preliminary Plat plan, and underground irrigation of these areas is required. 3. An overall sign plan shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to final platting. 4. No outside display, or storage, shall be allowed. 5. No rooftop mechanical equipment shall be visible from the street. 6. No outdoor loudspeakers advertising shall be allowed. 7. Trash and recycling containers shall be stored in an enclosure attached to the main building and constructed of similar materials. 8. The parking lot for this site shall be upgraded to current City requirements. 9. A grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be prepared and the drainage from the site shall be conveyed to the City's storm sewer. • • • 4 ( • The Dakota County Plat Commission has reviewed the proposal and is encouraging the City to close the driveway nearest to Diffley Road because it is too close to the intersection. _ 4 • Staff has reviewed the site circulation and due to the space limitations, existing building layout, pump locations, and turning radii necessary for truck movements,it does not appear feasible to safely move traffic in and out of the site with just one access point. Landscaping as shown on the revised Preliminary Plat plan and underground irrigation will be required. The applicant will also have to submit a sign plan for the entire site, including ground, pylon, company, and building signage. This plan will have to be reviewed and approved prior to final platting. • • • FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - EZ Stop of Eagan Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and connections proposed to be made to the City's utility system based on the submitted plans. Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount Lateral Benefit Storm Sewer Trunk C/I S19.15/ff 165 ff $3,160 • • • tt. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL A. Financial Obligations J 1. This development shall accept its additional financial 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 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 or • accommodate it. 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, engineering standards, guidelines and policies. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current City standards 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. 411 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL PAGE TWO . 4. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted on the 0 proposed grading plan. The financial guarantee shall be included in the Development Contract and not be released until one year after the date of installation. 5. All internal public and private streets shall be constructed within the required right-of-way in accordance with City Code and engineering standards. D. public Improvements 1. If any public improvements are to be installed under a City contract, the appropriate project rust be approved at a formal public hearing 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 and Trails Dedication 1. This development shall fulfill its parks dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks and • Recreation Commission and approved by Council action. G. Water Ouality Dedication 1 . This development shall be responsible for providing a cash dedication in addition to/in lieu of ponding requirements in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan. E. 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: July 10, 1990 plataprv.con LTS *2 3 • • • • . _.„. 7" , I Ma,,„, 1 . - - s _, .. ,,‘iti , .,.........,, , s..........„.. , . I i . ..a..r — —S \ .aE•�atRIMG yaCEl. /1 g \ aii * 1 \ 171TAlik:- . .,4. '... A •. . ' s`Oij� •...7-1., .•i^ TRa$M S$CLD$ f t I �` ►-...... �` j IOC • F. E: I AA 411(1■A 1 :\.,; 7_l--y. .• mousey gook '1/4,.. 3 : , , .. v. \\ _7,00:: .."- ..... ... „...- •-.-- ""' 'k'4 '• • ; . ,i 411Z Hoch — 7 Pilaf M., e1G� r �a �e s� •\r 3D°C %' iii t'. F. taco s�o� •G,t Li:r '..&.-+_�I:iiith 411169.4%.• - ��t�'� \' - ----- -- '_ — --- •--- -- - --- 1—/ .. VIFFLer 'at) .• • • • 4 • N .. • • (-(4 .. w CEDAR AVENUE • p m I°.f • > e - • .' it -- ` �I� --- r.r 1.r.a•n u..a.1•.r { \ .- / I � - -l-FKE P_F.I_I�.:' � ��'1_ �- - 1, G— t • f J ` o j`• ; ;, . ill 41� -71411e/C.7� I I P�, KI ��i :f�; � (�� 1. o II. itt / . / __.Af11.1 ! , ,, , .4 x ‘ 1 I I / pg.-, i . -- - -.!...,„, s,.•. .,_.. . I It AI r,4 / / - . /- 444 ,,,F,#;' ‘1:...9//#.1\\.: , ., I I It ip;_N 1 4:1 1Z,' ' r 1/ f si ,-e ill ' \\ ‘, 1 v I I I li ;e rF10NOSEC•01.1:0014 fxrata7sow L I I I II 1 6 a , �,� I I 1, �'',1 ! / I I I; ! : � e 1 I I Ir. — /S: -_ I I ij I o ' ' -- L 1 I I II— - 1 � /y 1 I R I/ :. ; I /N If • , ' / / / '�.■ I I II 11 ----' I �✓ 1 n, - II Imo_ , \ III . I I II \, 1I t I s t/s' ' I I I I \\. 11 4, fri \ / \IP I I 1 \ Y W • _ry 1 II a is. ani iiii so as NI a al a IR a o'NB on ' --a Z Et 1RR I 1 I NICOLS FINANCIAL OBLIGATION EZ — STOP OF EAGAN _ Lateral Benefit Storm Sewer Trunk • . 4... . ylllllllllllICl 11I ! II I!: iIIIIIIIIVICEN 1 I ijil I" ill 1,11 I 1 loll 1 1 1 t. t 1 ;:; giwil All i 0 4. 2;1111 w 111.1 Ell ,. I I('' 1 1 I. ��` • I m I'� I i -------------evert----5r---------------------------- .��,,,-r: .._.....- .� --- ---� .. .. ' _., ..iv \I i t ` / .. • t i 411 -----i--r-__ -- iii�etf-S--5-1GDI r-.-----ten,=------wy---------- i • - I 7--, lzr--1-iliiiiitall111111111/111111111tAg1111111116 MILIIIII . mom t :. -. ., I/ - : 4,1,, ,i . I > V . ..' " 441- : . E . .. (I) . .,.. . , , i ' ::;,..=:. ,,,,,,.. , ; ill ; -- . _ . . .-41411.. , ic,,,,T,. to i `,.1 Jf1f ,•. \ �� s _ JfI•. • ` i ' - Lt., cp - p N I.i`�''III F t \� !F� r`� I r ; �' •C :��, I, it 'r 1 I ; III; I.�. ..-{' • .. �, 1ii ' *IPA �` ;iIt 1I1 ; II 1 ii'' I \-=l Vital a I • , a all . fill ; • Cllr"1 `, I 1 I,, ,�• I1iI j!; I I 1 is 'i l I ii1 I 1 ; l '�� - ''' t1 '1 1l I I 11i 1111111111 t � • .r w l i l#t A i s • I I I ' t 1 —sal,6 a;iHlthi , .itt •••. I ,..•_ - - - - - - - - -0+aa— sae-Jiti. - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - .• iti., ,..,.._ .• ,,.... .. i� , . ,. .. . i \ ♦ M . -------T----77- ♦ � I • .0" / . • 1 w 0 • der. J / J a.40. a • k ; 1 ii II! j !, NMVP I hil L ''';. 44 -- ' -.7 i- ± ' 41 1 i 141" I II i 1 I 1 • 1 ,iiitowswoot , 8 1411111Mihmip' �;MD..;P•1 ■ . . . r-,•■11.111.--""itus.„"ia***94ii. .I.' r i 3f1N3nv avo30 ,1; I _______) 1=l i I • . 41 . .- r • E-S STOP OP EAGAN Chairman Voracek opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding a Preliminary Plat of one lot on .74 acres of previously-zoned Business northwest Road intersection. • City Planner Jim Sturm presented a brief background of the application. He mentioned that this proposed site plan is an improvement over the existing conditions. • Dave Miller of Crown Coco, Inc. , stated that he was available for questions. Commission Member Merkley requested that a condition be added regarding a variance to allow the drive aisle to be a minimum setback of 5' instead, of the required 20'. He also had a question regarding what the exterior of the building will be. Mr. Miller commented that the new buildding'ssexteriorbwill match with the existing building on the site. will be of different material than the other two. Commission Member Merkley asked if the existing parking surface will be removed or repaved. Mr. Miller stated that he has not yet looked at the grading plan and could not answer that question. Miller moved, Merkley seconded, the motion to approve a Preliminary Plat of one lot on .74 acres of previously-zoned General Business land located in the northwest quadrant of Diffley Road and Nicols Road intersection subject to the following conditions: 1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on July 10, 1990 shall be complied with: • Al, Bl, C2, El, G1 2. Landscaping, as shown on the revised Preliminary Plat plan, and underground irrigation of these areas is required. 3. An overall sign plan shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to final platting. 4 . No outside display, or storage, shall be allowed. 5. No rooftop mechanical equipment shall be visible from the street. 6. No outdoor loudspeakers advertising shall be allowed. 7. Trash and recycling containers shall be stored in an enclosure attached to the main building and constructed of similar materials. 8. The parking lot for this site shall be upgraded to current City requirements. 9. A grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be prepared and the drainage from the site shall be conveyed to the City's storm sewer. 10. A variance to allow the drive isle on the south and west • side a minimum setback of 5' instead of the required 20' . • All present voted in favor. Page 4/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 28, 1991 Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting PRELIMINARY PLAT/STRIKER ADDITION D. Extension,Preliminary Plat for Stryker Addition,Located along Beau De Rue Drive and Rahn Road in the NE 1/4 of Section 19—An application has been received of DCR Company relative to the Stryker Addition at the above referenced location for an extension of preliminary plat through July 31, 1992. This item was previously before the City Council at its January 21, 1992 meeting and was continued to this agenda. The purpose of the continuance was to resolve issues relative to financial obligations of the parcel. Please refer to the City Attorney's memorandum on ag s 5 t7 through c/with respect to this issue. Also enclosed on pages S Zthrough' ( is the Community Development Department staff report with respect to this item. Please note the proposed change in condition resulting from improvements made at the site since the preliminary plat application. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the extension of preliminary plat for Stryker Addition, located at the intersection of Beau De Rue Drive and Rahn Road as presented. Lk°■ • • ._ MEMORANDUM 111 TO: Tom Hedges, City Administrator FROM: City Attorneys Office DATE: January 13, 1992 RE: Stryker Addition In response to a request by the Community Development Department, the following is a synopsis of a meeting in mid December 1991 with the City Finance Director, Director of Public Works, Community Development Director, City Planner, Jerry Wobschall, Jim Sheldon and Michael G. Dougherty. The discussion centered around a letter to the _ Eagan City Council submitted by Bryce D. Huemoeller dated December 6, 1991 concerning the platting of Stryker Addition. Mr. Huemoeller's letter contested the "assessments" sought to be imposed by the City with respect to the platting of the property. The assessment stems from failure to collect certain fees in the early 1970's and or under-collecting the fees at the time of installation of certain utilities. It should be noted, that the properties which comprise of subject matter of the Stryker Addition are each presently connected to the City services. •At the meeting, our offices laid out the general authority that the City has enabling it to collect monies from a developer and or property owner. These authorities consist of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 444 (Water Works, Sewer, Drains) . Minnesota Statute Section 429 (Local Improvements) and Minnesota Statute Section 462.358 (Planning - Procedure for Plan Effectuations; Subdivision Regulations) with respect to the Stryker Addition, Chapter 444 is inapplicable as the property has already connected to the City services and therefore the City's ability and timing to collect the connection fee are moot. Chapter 429 of the statutes is also inapplicable since there is no present public project being ordered by the City in connection with the plat of Stryker Addition. Finally, the subdivision regulations do permit the municipality to condition its approval of a plat on the construction or installation of sewers, streets, electric, gas, drainage, water facilities etc. in lieu thereof on the receipt by a municipality of a cash deposit, irrevocable letter of credit, or bond in an amount sufficient to insure the municipality that their utility and improvements will be constructed or installed. This is the general authority by which the City has the right to require deposits_ of letters of credit etc. by a developer prior to approving or releasing a plat of a subdivision. The key to this authority though is the requirement placed upon the • • . . • LJ v . developer to construct and install the improvements noted above. It • is our understanding in the Stryker plat, that no improvements of the kind noted above are being required to be constructed or installed. Thus, we do not find any support for the assessments being required of the Stryker Addition. MGD/wkt cc: City Finance Director City Planner Community Development Director Director of Public Works Jerry Wobschall • • • • MEMORANDUM • TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR DALE RUNKLE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: JIM STURM, CITY PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 24, 1992 RE: STRYKER ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT & WAIVER OF PLAT In December 1991 the City received a request from the applicant for the Stryker Addition for a Preliminary Plat extension until July 31, 1992. This two-lot subdivision consisting of the Big Top Liquor Store and Cedarvale Highlands along Beau D'Rue Drive was granted a one-year extension in December 1990 subject to eight conditions. In July 1991 the Waiver of Plat in order to separate the residential floors from the commercial area of Cedarvale Highlands was continued by the Council until the Stryker Addition Final Plat will be completed. That application has been submitted. The extension request was reviewed by • all departments and the engineering department is recommending that Condition 8 be deleted since the parking lot improvement has already been completed; all other conditions still apply. If you would like additional information, please contact me. City Planner JS/js Attach. • • • Page 10/E.AGAN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES • • December 1$, 1990 PRELIMINARY PLAT EX'IENSION/STRYKER ADDITION Mayor Egan introduced this item as a preliminary plat e:nension for the Stryker Addition,located along Beau De Rue Drive and Rahn Road in the aortheast quarter of Section 19. Gustafson moved,McCrea=aided a motion to approve a one year preliminary plat attension for the Stryker Addition location on Beau De Rue Drive and Rahn Road is the northeast quarter of Section 19 subject to the plat conditions as modified: 1. All applicable standard plat conditions shall be adhere to. • 2. A sum of the residual =platted area shall be t ubmitted with the Baal plat submission for the parcel file. 3. Cross ingress/egress and parking easements shall be submitted with the Baal plat. 4. Setbacks in the parking lot will be allowed to remain as k with a new poured is place concrete curb and sealcoatiag, patching, and restripping. S. The current overgrown shrubbery shall be trimmed,mewed or replaced. Uaderstory trees and• shrubs should be planted to screen the parking area. 6. The trash containers should be enclosed in a structure attached to the building and constructed of similar materials as the building. The back wall and the air cooditianing units should be covered and the ice • cooler should be removed. 7. The liquor store lot should be leaned,the weeds removed and k should be either seeded or sodded. S. The adjoining parking lot shall be sealcoated,patched s ad reetripped. Aye: S Nay. 0 • • • • • 53 +,e 0 i \ • ,.„-,0 VPINg-t4 siA /� '' _ \.'.r 1 ROAD 4 fir, 1 \ 11N.N .0"^ i A•t�1� 1 ;It. I ' ;,-.z..4 `• \io '.,� -�� RAH"T A- •�'� ., .• r.+y� jO 60 .. A. : ... �'" •-.-:— / ' �� •�� 3 •o III,'l4.' 1 N I 0. 0 1 I // '. i 1 1 ? \ 't "I'll , I 14. 'Ili t es oi% 1 h , ,, t ,s, 1 \ ttl . r , , \ N'Ilklig),,,,iii. \II\ a ■ L- a 1�`.: 4• a t-t� 1 IS / i i tl A 1' IAA I, / \ •; 1 1 \ is `^ Z %, o 3 1 11 Li'.\-, 0 „: 4 t......**- . I / li €012 .._.... ,3 1 1'I I / \ CC 1 t 1 t� �► 1 \4\-t.1 It \. . 1 O CN I S 4.- I 111L1� 1 e1I1 ‘ U, t I \SWL.... 1 1 . • let m t fII r. Ito . 3 ■ v ` I 1 i I t 1 k , I 14 , ., , , . 1 1 1 , . j -N� _ - J 1.\ et'. illiNgilliVirffillill _ ... -..L11133.4:".. - .2 4.COONI 04500 71 • 1 I -5 4/ Agenda Information Memo 410 February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting BUSINESS. MINNESOTA PUBLIC LOBBY LAWSUIT RECOMMENDATION A. Recommendation/Airport Relations Commission Regarding Minnesota Public Lobby '' \ Lawsuit--Minnesota Public Lobby, a member supported public interest group has approached the City with a request for support for a lawsuit they are contemplating undertaking against the Metropolitan Airports Commission to attempt to force the commission to come into conformance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency standards for noise. The organization is requesting that the cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights as well as the South Metro Airport Action Council and Eagan Noise Abatement Council become involved in the lawsuit as co-plaintiffs and financial supporters. The organization has also contacted but is not pursuing the cities of Burnsville and St. Louis Park and have chosen not to approach the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, Bloomington and ,/ Richfield. ' The Airport Relations Committee heard the request and has been reviewing it over several meetings having requesting a formal proposal from MPL in this regard. Upon receipt of a formal proposal from MPL's attorney in late December, the matter was considered by the • City Attorney's office and a final recommendation by the committee was made at its January 14, 1992 meeting. For additional information with respect to the City Attorney's correspondence and t deliberatio of the committee,please refer to the staff report that is enclosed on pages ' (ahrough for your review. In the past two days, 86 letters in support of the City's becoming a co-p aintiff in the lawsuit hav been received. Rather than copy all of the letters, enclosed on pages 61 0 through are a sampling of the letters received regarding this item. The remainder of the le ers are on file in the City Administrator's office in the event any Councilmember wishes to review them. After several months of discussion and consideration, the committee's recommendation is that the City not become involved in the lawsuit as a co-plaintiff or financial supporter but that the City authorize a letter of support to MPL which would not imply any legal relationship with the subject action. If the Council approves this recommendation, it will authorize staff preparation of appropriate correspondence based on committee findings and Council discussion. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a recommendation by the City's Airport Relations Committee to forward correspondence and support to Minnesota Public Lobby lawsuit against the Metropolitan Airports Commission and that the City not participate in the lawsuit as a co-plaintiff or financial support. • .6_‘ MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES • FROM: ASSISTANT TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR HOHENSTEIN DATE: JANUARY 29, 1992 SUBJECT: MINNESOTA PUBLIC LOBBY V. METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION LAWSUIT - REQUEST FOR CITY PARTICIPATION As we discussed in recent weeks, a non-profit public organization called the Minnesota Public Lobby, which is based in South Minneapolis, has been in touch with the staff of the Cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights seeking financial support and co- plaintiff participation in a lawsuit they intend to bring against the Metropolitan Airports Commission to force the Commission to come in compliance with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency standards for noise. Several informative items have been forwarded to you and the City Council in this regard and the Airports Relations Committee has been considering this request over a period of approximately three months. At its meeting of January 14, 1992, the Airport Relations Committee recommended that the City send a letter to MPL supporting their lawsuit in concept, but recommended that the City not participate financially or as a co-plaintiff in this lawsuit. It was my intention to place this item on the Consent Agenda at the February • 4, 1992 City Council meeting. Subsequent to the Committee recommendation, MPL forwarded correspondence directly to you, Mayor Egan and the City Council challenging the Committee's recommendation and requesting time to address the Council at its meeting. Given this request, it is necessary to move the item from Consent to New Business for that Council meeting. By way of background, attached you will find a memorandum from this office covering correspondence from MPL's attorney outlining the basic issues of the lawsuit and proposing terms under which the City and MPL would proceed with this case. Also attached is a copy of the City Attorney's response to this memorandum which outlines certain concerns and limitations for the City in considering this issue. Also attached are copies of the minutes of the Airport Relations Committee's deliberations in this regard beginning in October, 1991 and culminating with their recommendation of January 14 , 1992 . Finally, you will find attached a copy of MPL's correspondence to the Mayor and Council raising issue with the Committee's recommendation. In approaching a recommendation with respect to this item, the Airport Relations Committee considered the following issues: 1. While the intent of the lawsuit is positive and there appears to be legal basis for the initiation of a lawsuit, it will be impossible for the MAC to meet State noise standards and • continue to operate at the current location. While MPL has J indicated that the purpose of the lawsuit would be to force 410 MAC to develop a noise abatement plan that comes closer to the standards, the examples they have indicated as alternatives are either preempted by federal law or would restrict operation at the airport to infeasible levels of traffic. 2. MPL purports to be pursuing support from the Cities of Mendota Heights and Eagan as similarly noise-impacted communities, yet has declined to approach the Cities of Bloomington, Richfield, Minneapolis or St. Paul. Early in the process, MPL had also contacted the Cities of Burnsville and St. Louis Park. It appears that MPL's focus has not been so much cities suffering from severe noise impact as those that they feel they can lobby for support. 3. MPL indicates that they have already canvassed residents in the Cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights meaning that any contributions from the Cities would result in double payments for the support of this lawsuit while residents on the other sides of the airport are either contributing individually or not at all. 4. City Attorney Sheldon has indicated that his office has been unable to find any statutory authority for city governments to join lawsuits with non-profit agencies as co-plaintiffs in this manner. 5. MPL and their attorney have indicated that the control of the lawsuit will be maintained by MPL and that in cases of diverging interests, the lawfirm will represent MPL and not the co-plaintiffs. 6. The lawfirm of Siegel, Brill, Greupner & Duffy has represented the O'Neil family in litigation relative to the rezoning of their property. While that lawsuit has been settled, the property is not yet developed and the potential exists for conflict of interest which the City, as a matter of practice, has not waived. 7. The City does not have any budget resources available to contribute to this lawsuit. 8. Regardless of its remoteness, if countersuits for attorney's fees are filed, any co-plaintiff cities would be at risk since the non-profit plaintiff would be incapable of indemnifying other parties. 9. As a consequence of taking direction from MPL, their attorney has indicated that if a conflict should exist in the course of settlement discussions such that the City of Eagan may receive greater exposure to noise to limit the exposure of other MPL constituents, it would be necessary for the parties to part • ways. 5 • As a consequence of these factors, participation in this lawsuit appears to be contrary to the best interests of the City. This does not preclude MPL from seeking financial support from the 110 public but limits the City's corporate exposure in this regard and insures that public dollars are not spent in a manner which may not be consistent with the public good. As a consequence of the above discussion and attachments, it is the recommendation of the Airport Relations Committee that the City Council forward correspondence to MPL in this regard. ACTION REQUESTED OF TEE CITY COUNCIL: To approve or deny the Airport Relations Committee recommendation that the City support the concept of the MPL lawsuit through correspondence but not make a financial contribution or engage in co-plaintiff status. Assi ant to the City Administrator Attachments JH/vmd 431 • • • 410 MEMO TO: CITY ATTORNEY SHELDON TROM: ASSISTANT TO TIE CITY ADMINISTRATOR IOEENBTSI$ DATE: DECEMBER 31, 1931 SUBJECT: LOBBY � Y AIRPORTS COMMISSION LAWSUIT - REQIIZST PO* CITY PARTICIPATION As you may have noted from the Informative packet at recent meetings, the City's Airport Relations Committee bas been .. approached by a public interest group called Minnesota Public Lobby, which is undertaking a lawsuit against the Metropolitan Airports Commission to compel the District Court to find the MAC in violation. of MPCA standards and force compliance with those standards. MPL has requested that the City become involved as a co-plaintiff and provide financial support in this regard. At its last meeting, the Committee requested that MPL put its proposal in writing together with a copy of the draft complaint for review by the Committee, City staff and yourself. The purpose of this review 'is to determine what liabilities, if any, exist in supporting the lawsuit and/or joining the lawsuit as a co- plaintiff. The organization has indicated in the past that it has had conversations with the Cities of Mendota Heights, Burnsville and St. Louis Park, as well as initial contacts with the Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. In addition, the group has contacted the South Metro Airport Action Council (SMAAC) and the Eagan Noise • Abatement Council (ENAC) •: Over the past two months, MPL has indicated that any number of these municipalities or groups may become associated with the lawsuit. In the attached correspondence, they indicate only that SMAAC and the Cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights are considering participation at this time. As an aside, MPL's request for financial participation is in the range of $1 per capita or $50,000 for the City of Eagan. By way of background, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency . currently does not attempt to enforce -its standards on airports in general and Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport in particular because of concerns that federal government will assert interstate commerce protection and..preempt the state agency from any influence at all much less enforcement of its standards. As a consequence, the MPCA has typically operated at the margins of MAC decisions, making efforts to mitigate impacts but not enforce their standards. One of the reasons that this is significant is that MSP is so far above the state standard for noise that it will •be impossible for the facility to comply and continue to operate as an air carrier airport. By way of comparison, I was once told that the airport could operate no more than 6 jet departures per hour and stay within the state standard. During the 8 to 12 peak hours at the airport today, approximately„Off jet aircraft operate in the same time period. jos • When asked if the purpose of the lawsuit was to shut the airport down, MPL representatives have indicated that it is not their intent but, when asked if relocation to a new airport site would 59, meet the state standards, they indicated their belief that it would. 411 With that as background, please review the attached correspondence and draft complaint by January 8, 1992 and return an analysis to me which at a minimum addresses the following issues: 1. Potential liabilities and exposures for the City associated with participation and/or co-plaintiff status in the lawsuit. 2. Soundness of the legal theory under Minnesota state law or federal constitutional standards. 3. Any obvious conflicts of interest in retaining the subject firm for this purpose. 4. Other general comments with respect to the "Proposed Agreement" as described in the correspondence. 5. Other observations with respect to this issue. Thank you for your attention to this matter. information has been turnaround time is relatively short, but promised to the Committee in time for its meeting of January 14. You should be aware that the Committee is predisposed to recommend support of the general concept of the lawsuit because of the effects of noise on the Eagan community. In addition, the ENAC group has been actively supporting this request and working closely 0 with MPL. The Committee was extremely concerned by the sheer magnitude of the MPL support request and the fact that MPL cannot define an anticipated budget for this litigation. From a staff perspective, I wish to be certain that any recommendation made by the Committee does not unnecessarily expose the City or result in financial contribution to lawsuits which have no chance of success. I realize you cannot answer all of these questions to a certainty, but I would appreciate whatever feedback you could provide to help the various decision-makers in this regard. I would also like to discuss vr�iAlso� if you bave after you had a chance to look i please let me know as soon as possible. As stant to the City Administrator Attachments cc: Chair Ring and all Members of the Airport Relations Committee JE/vmd • V LAw omega SIEGEL, BRILL, GREUPNER a OUFFY, P.A. . AORMERLY - - aROffMAN,KARLINS,SIEGEL•BRILL SUSAN M.VOIGT RICHARD SIEGEL. 1300 WASNINGTON SQUARE STEVEN L.SCNECNTMAN• JAMES 1 SRILL.jet. ANTHONY J.MACAW. JAMES GREUPNER 1100 WASHINGTON AVENUE SOUTH fiNCRRI L.RO CE GERALD S wr m. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55401 •RlAN C.wE1SSERG WOOD R r GOODMAN A KRIsTINC L.EIDEN THOMAS N GOODMAN TILLEPNONE MU»9.7131 ROSEMARY TUGHT MICHAEL A NATO ANNE R.WEINMARDT•• K.CRAIG wlLDrANG TELECOatc Ism)339•5591 JOHN S WATSON December 20, 1991 wETIREo wM.CH RISTOON O►HER �ENWELL M.L.OROSSMAN .. SNELOON co.RARLINS 16, 041-TG-008 •46.6110 ADMITTED IN WASHINGTON "ALSO ADMITTCO IN CALIrORNIA Mr. Jon Hohenstein Assistant City Administrator • City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan MN 55122 Dear Mr. Hohenstein: I have been asked to propose the terms of our representation of the City of Eagan concerning proposed litigation to be brought against the Metropolitan Airport Commission ("MAC" ) to force further noise limitations and regulations by that agency. • The claim we propose to bring is set out in the enclosed draft complaint. Basically, the claim is that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ("MPCA") has set forth binding regulations on the permissible• levels of noise that may be emitted by any source. The MAC is not exempt from these regulations. The MAC has not exhausted its authority to impose further noise abatement regulations at the airport and it continues illegally to permit the airport to be operated in violation of the MPCA noise limitations. The plaintiffs in the proposed lawsuit are given standing to complain about the MAC' s violation of MPCA regulations under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act, an environmental statute designed specifically to give "any person" the right to enforce anti-pollution regulations in the name of the State of Minnesota.* There is no exemption for the MAC in the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act and the statute specifically includes the abatement of noise • pollution among its goals. While there may be other claims that could be brought against the MAC, the litigation will encompass only this claim. The goal of the litigation will be to achieve a court order directing the MAC, within a suitable, short time • • • • S regulation and testing and to implement bring the plan oise pollution at the regulate airport within lawful levels. In performing the research and groundwork on this claim so far, our client has been Minnesota Public Lobby (MPL) (formerly Minneapolis Park LoverS) , a non-profit citizens . group consisting of about 8,000 members concerned er is the quality of the urban environment. Gary Program Director of MPL. In the past MPL has successfully funded and conducted other public interest litigation involving the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act. Our firm is well known, one of Minneapolis' oldest and has extensive experience with environmental furni h any particulars the type proposed.. We are happy to you request about our qualifications for this type of litigation. We anticipate that the MAC's defense of this case will be vigorous. We expect that Northwest Airlines maand dsperhaps other carriers will want to intervene. It s tell at this point how much litigation like this will cost. Gary Wagner will , however, be drafting a rough budget. •e obviously with s b fnfeoarrt l t ntkno accurate factors. While the practical benefit of further noise abatement is , like other environmental benefits , incalculable in dollar terms , the possible expense to the MAC and the airlines might be quite extensive. There will be ample incentive for r and vigorous importancef of this and lit gat on.not underestimate the scope It has been proposed by MPL that the City would become a co-plaintiff in the litigation. In that capacity the City would retain our firm to represent it but could, at any time, discharge our firm and seek separate representation when that appeared to be in the City's best interests for any reason. Our fee for this case will be hourly based on the various hourly rates of the lawyers and legal assistants in the firm. Although MPL has agreed to pay our fees and the expenses of this litigation, the City's obligation in this regard would be only to pay its initial "pledge" and such additional contributions, if any, as it decides to make in • the future . The City could evaluate the status of the litigation and its likelihood of success before making any further promises of payment. Thus, apart from paying its initial pledge, the City would have no other obligation and could remain in the case or withdraw from the case at any time. We do not expect a counterclaim and see no need to deal with such a contingency at this point. We currently anticipate that two other plaintiffs besides the City and MPL might be involved in this case. MPL has discussed this case with the South Metro Airport Action Council ("SMAAC") which has voted to become a co- plaintiff. SMAAC's means are quite limited and we expect only a token pledge of money from that organization. The City of Mendota Heights has also expressed an interest in becoming involved on a basis similar to that outlined here. That City has already begun a separate noise lawsuit against the MAC based on other grounds. If the City of Mendota Heights become involved, it , like SMAAC, will do so on the same basis as explained in this letter. Gary Wagner or I will keep you updated on Mendota Heights ' decisions in this regard. MPL seeks no other co-plaintiffs at this point. By entering into this representation you will be agreeing to our possible representation of these other parties and that such multiple representation does not create any conflict of interests on our part. (My concern here is if you have any dispute with any other party, unrelated to this case, then I can continue to represent both of you without conflict. ) This firm, after consultation with all parties who have agreed to be plaintiffs, will determine whether or not there is a "critical mass" of financial and other support to go forward with the litigation . We will make that determination after receiving the responses from you and the other parties. We hope and expect to have these responses, including yours, by January 22, 1991. If we decide to go forward with the litigation and commence the action, then you will be bound by your initial promise of payment, whatever it may be. . 3 • In non-material procedural and strategic matters, we will make all final decisions , after appropriate e consultation. As to material � ith all partiestanln of settlement terms, we will onsult w case of disagreement of the sort that cannot instructions resoed between the parties, we will take our primary from MPL, which has agreed to pay our fee in full. The City will never be unwillingly bound to any position or decision,and we can ensure withdraw uch right separate s preserved.es We think we will ensure conflict of this sort is extremely unlikely, however. If the foregoing terms of representation are acceptable to you, then we would appreciate your signing this letter where indicated and returning it with o let letter indicating the iming and amount of financial support our fees and expenses . The City may want more information about the case, our firm, our proposed strategy, or other matters before making n commitment any time kind. Please feel free to call Gary g I look forward to working with the City and bringing about some relief to the airport noise problem. Very truly yours, homas g. Goodman THG:pd A.124 • SEVERSON,WILCOX& SHE.LDON,P.A. • A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW LARRY S.SEVERSON• EENNTTH R.HALL JAMES F.SHELDON "*SCOTT D.JOHNSTON J. PATRICE WILCOX* 800 MIDWAY NATIONAL BANK BUILDING WREN M.SOLFEST MICHAEL G. DOUGHERTY 7300 WEST 147TH STREET CHRISTINE M. SCOTILLO MICHAEL E. MOLENDA•• APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124 ANNETTE M. MARGARIT (6121 432-3136 DANIEL M. SHERIDAN SHARON K HILLS TELEFAX NUMBER 432-3780 MARK D.STENBECK 'ALSO LICENSED IN IOWA ALSO LICENSED IN WISCONSIN OF COUNSEL ...ALSO LICENSED IN NEBR&S}iA iOHN E COUNSEL January 9, 1992 Mr. Jon Hohenstein City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Re: The Proposal by the MPL (Minneapolis Park Lovers, now known as Minnesota Public Lobby) v. MAC Dear Jon: We have reviewed your memorandum of December 31, 1991, the proposed engagement letter from the MPL lawyers and a draft of the proposed complaint by the Minneapolis Park Lovers v. Metropolitan Airports Commission. • We also reviewed the appropriate State statutes and Minnesota Rules. With respect to that review, we offer these comments. There is an old saw that says that "lawsuits are easy to get into and hard to get out of" and another old saw that says "a camel is a horse designed by a committee". In this proposed suit the City is a co-plaintiff with or a financial supporter of the Minneapolis Park Lovers. We can find no authority or precedent that would allow the City to simply fund the litigation not in its own name and arguably not in its own interest. If the City is a party it should be a party plaintiff. Whether it is one of multiple plaintiffs is policy decision, however, in order to _ make that determination we must first have a distinct statement of what the City's "interest" is in the case. It is quite possible that the City of Eagan's interest is different from the other plaintiffs (Minneapolis Park Lovers and potentially the South Metro Airport Action council) . Plaintiff's lawyers state that they will take material and substantial direction from the Minneapolis Park Lovers . regarding this lawsuit. Unless the City's interest is the same as the Minneapolis Park Lovers that may prove to be detrimental. • • • Page 2 January 9, 1992 Having been supplied by you with the Airport Noise Reporter for the last several years, we are aware that this is not a local issue. Major metropolitan cities are arguing with the FAA and airports in cities in the United States and elsewhere. This proposed suit would have no effect on any kind of a national resolution, however, Los Angeles and some other major U.S. cities are making some progress. We do note that in all those other cases the FAA has claimed jurisdiction on this matter and has vigorously defended that claim in court action and other activity. Thus the issue -of state authority to regulate the FAA is in question. It is my understanding that to comply with the state rules the airport would allow only six airplanes per hour, yet in reality I understand the numbers are sometimes approximately 120. Based on the effect on interstate commerce it is realistic to think that the FAA will argue and argue vigorously. The engagement letter asked for $50,000.00 but acknowledges that a budget is impossible to create at this point. Further, they point out that "the possible expense to the MAC and the airlines might be quite extensive. There will be ample incentive for a very vigorous defense and we do not underestimate the scope and importance of this litigation". Based on that the $50,000.00 number is wholly and totally inadequate. The amount necessary to generate a viable lawsuit would have to be significantly larger. I think significantly more resources must be devoted to shut down a major metropolitan airport. The amount of legal fees, however, does not include any amount for defense of counterclaims by defendants or others who might join the lawsuit, or crossclaims by other plaintiffs in the event that they were dissatisfied with our position on this matter. Any such claims would require a vigorous defense by the City since other parties • would probably make a request for damages. Further, any such claims would prevent the City's "retirement" from the lawsuit simply by refusing to fund it anymore since there is the potential that the City could be at risk. Thus, another old legal saw: "In for a penny, In for a pound." In addition to the concerns about the City's authority, jurisdiction over the airport, and cost of the litigation, there is a concern with the legal theory that arises out of the jurisdiction. State law has treated the airport differently. Minnesota Statutes S473.612 has provided for noise abatement plans from the early 1980's for the airport. In addition, Minnesota Statutes S473.614 et seq. provides for environmental reviews for capital improvement programs and long (19(4? Page 3 January 9, 1992 term comprehensive plans for the international airport at its existing location including environmental effects, effects on the neighboring communities, compatibility with the metropolitan local physical facilities systems and airport operational characteristics. In sum, this is a piece of major litigation of problematic outcome involving significant cost, some risk and some question as to whether we know for sure what we want the remedy to be or whether we will be satisfied with the remedy that may occur if successful. Lastly, with respect to the lawyers involved in the lawsuit, we know them to be competent and highly regarded. However, they have represented the O'Neill family in protracted litigation with the City and have represented developers in land use matters. It seems . appropriate that those previously represented clients and certainly any clients that they are currently representing in matters in front of the City would have to consent to their representation of the City in such litigation. 410 If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, . SEVERSON, WILCOX & SHELDON, P.A. 111W ' G' Jai, . Sheldon -d • . ,. Ccl Page 3/AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE October 7, 1991 60 DAY CORRIDOR TEST Hohenstein introduced the item and indicated that the test would be culminating on approximately October 12. He stated that the number of phone calls indicating severe nuisance from the test procedures had diminished since August and that he hoped that meant that compliance with the procedure had improved. Hafvenstein stated that he noticed an immediate change when the procedure began ink not t and that aircraft were leaving the corridor earlier and flying over parts of the City that they typically been seen in before. He stated that the last two to three weeks have been much better and the aircraft appear to be using the corridor more before turning to westbound destinations at low altitudes. Ring stated that some times in his neighborhood have been better than others aver the course of the test. Hohenstein stated that additional information would be forthcoming from the MAC and that the kern would be placed on the November Committee agenda. MINNEAPOUS PARK LOVERS LAWSUIT Hohenstein stated that the City had received correspondence from the Minneapolis Park Lovers Organization expressing interest in pursuing a lawsuit to compel the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to enforce its rules against the airport. He introduced Norman Newhall, of MPLS,for presentation on their request. Newhall stated that the MPLS group was originally to oppose tall buildings on Lake Calhoun. He stated that the organization has 7,500 members and that they have been reviewing the airport noise issue for about one year. He stated that the organization has retained the firm of Seagall, Brill, Greupner&Duffy to analyze the potential for a case and that the firm has indicated that citizen groups do have grounds to sue for enforcement. He stated the organization has also hired Orfieid &Associates, a sound engineering firm, to do testing in the airport vicinity and that the firm has indicated clear violations of the MPCA standards exist. He stated that the intention of the lawsuit was to force the Metropolitan Airports Commission to consider higher differential landing fees, mandating more Stage 3 aircraft and nighttime curfews as have been enacted at other airports. He stated the group is aware of the recent Federal Noise Act and that they are studying the potential for federal preemption, but do not feel it precludes the right to sue. He stated that MPLS wants cities in the airport vicinity to act as co-plaintiffs in the lawsuit and lend financial support. He stated that even if finances are not available, moral support is also acceptable, but that the organization has little available money to support the case on their own. Hafvenstein asked If other cities had been asked to participate as well. Newhall stated that they had not asked any other cities at this point, but that they believe the Minneapolis Council would support their case. Hafvenstein asked if the organization had any sense of the cost of the lawsuit. Newhall stated that the initial estimate is$50-60,000, but that protracted litigation could cost four to five times that much. Ring asked what the organization expects the MPCA to do. Newhall stated that the intent of the suit is to make the Metropolitan Airports Commission become more active in reducing noise levels by eliminating Stage 2 aircraft or taxing them higher than is currently the case. He stated that MPLS believes the relocation of the airport is the ultimate solution of the noise problem,but that is not a part of the lawsuit.. Monson stated that the group's summary says they are hiring a sound engineer to find violations. She asked if the group has considered what the MAC has done to reduce noise to this point Newhall stated that the group has not focused on past actions. Monson stated that it appears the new FAA regulations will prevent local control of Stage 2 phase-outs. Newhall stated that the purpose of the lawsuit was to at least get MAC to explore the possibilities of doing so under State law. Ring dosed this portion of the meeting and directed staff to communicate to the City Council the MPLS request for consideration by the Committee at their November 1 meeting. Pa e ORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE • October 7, 1991 MAC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Hohenstein reviewed the City's position taken in the interactive Planning Group process with respect to the MAC Comprehensive Plan to expand the existing airport by adding a north south runway adjacent to Cedar Avenue. The Committee reviewed the previous position and indicated that the previous position remains the position of the Committee and that that should be communicated to the MAC as part of the public hearing process on the expansion program. STAGE 2 PHASE-OUT RULES Hohenstein stated that the Stage 2 phase-out rules were not available at the time the agenda was put together, but that he had distributed a copy of a summary of the rules to the Committee for their review during the coming month. He briefly reviewed the fact that the new rules will permit airlines to come into compliance with the law both by buying new Stage 3 planes and by phasing out Stage 2 planes. As a consequence, more Stage 2 aircraft may remain in the air for longer than had been anticipated under the draft rules. Monson asked if the airlines could meet the phase-out schedule. Hohenstein stated that it would be easier for them to do so under the new rules than under the proposed rules because greater flexibility is provided to meet percentages through growth. Ring requested that staff place this item on the next agenda for further discussion. ADJOURNMENT Following discussion of other informative Items, upon motion by Hafvenstein,seconded by Verble, all members voting in favor, the meeting was adjourned at 9:03 p.m. JH Date Chairperson Secretary • (Q. a\ • MINUTES FOR A MEETING OF THE AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE • Eagan, Minnesota November 12, 1991 A meeting of the Eagan Airport Relations Committee was held on Tuesday, November 12, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. Present were Randy Verble, George Martin, Dustin Mirick, Lois Monson and Greg Langan. Absent were Tim Ring, Larry Alderks, Bob Hafvenstein and Bruce Nauth. Also present was Assistant to the City . Administrator Hohenstein. ACTING CHAIR In the absence of Chair Ring, Dustin Mirick agreed to serve as acting chair for the meeting. . AGENDA Upon motion by Martin, seconded by Verble, all members voting in favor, the agenda was approved as presented. MINUTES Upon review and hearing no objections, the minutes of the October 7, 1991 meeting were approved by acclamation. • MINNESOTA PUBLIC LOBBY SUPPORT REQUEST Hohenstein introduced the item and explained that the Minneapolis Park Lovers z ober 7 had chap ed its name to appeared thei r meeting g o of the Minnesota Public Lobby and of O Oct g was again present to reiterate their request with respect to support for their lawsuit to compel the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to enforce their noise standards against the Metropolitan Airports Commission. He introduced Gary Wagner of MPL to answer any questions. Mr. Wagner indicated that preliminary contacts had also been made with the cities of St. Louis Park, Mendota Heights, Burnsville, Minneapolis and St. Paul, but that none of those discussions were to the point that they were with Eagan. He stated that the organization wants to go to a press conference in December with as many co-plaintiffs as possible. He stated that citizen groups such as ENAC have pledged their support. Martin asked for background about the Minnesota Public Lobby. Wagner stated that it was a membership organization consisting of approximately 8,000 people directed by a 25 person board interested in environmental and quality of life issues. Martin asked if the budget had been established for the lawsuit or if they were receiving legal support on a pro bono basis. Wagner eaent and tthattit was hoped that the lawsuit would move quickly to a summary judgement cost would be approximately $30,000. He stated that it could be as much as $100,000 but that support was needed from co-plaintiffs to the suit. Mirick • 'SS°. 0 • ARC MINUTES NOVEMBER 12, 1991 PAGE 2 asked what dues are for MPL members. Wagner stated that the organization canvasses for voluntary support but there is no set amount for dues. Verble noted in the MPL summary that Orfield and Associates was to do noise monitoring and asked if it had been done to this point. Wagner stated that preliminary noise monitoring had been done in South Minneapolis and shows that there are many areas clearly above the Ltn 65 standard in the MPCA rules. Mirick thanked Wagner for his discussion and asked for committee response to the request. Verble stated that it might be helpful to know what the impact was in Eagan if monitoring had only been done in South Minneapolis to this point. Hohenstein stated that the City has received computer modelled contours in the past showing portions of the community well within the Ltn 65 contour. Eagan resident Joe Harrison stated that it is imperative that Eagan take a strong stand. He stated that the City should give at least moral support to the lawsuit as ENAC is. Monson asked if other alternatives had been exhausted before pursuing a lawsuit. Wagner responded that other groups have discussed other means of addressing noise but that MPL had not done so to this point. He stated that MPL • is interested in moving quickly and that a lawsuit serves that purpose. Monson indicated that it would be interesting to know if other avenues could be pursued first. Hohenstein stated that MPCA staff has indicated in the past that in order for the airport to meet state standards, the MAC would have to severely restrict operations at the airport to a small fraction of the current 1,000 operations per day. Martin stated if that is so, what is MPL's anticipated outcome. Wagner stated that the strategy was to create political pressure to do more than the airport has done to date, but the group recognizes that to meet these standards, the airport may have to move. Mirick asked if the new airport would address all of the MPCA standards. Wagner stated that it would. Langan stated if there are violations known to exist in the city as a consequence of previous modeling, the committee has an obligation to support efforts to change that. Martin stated that it is important to support improvements but stated that it is necessary also to consider the long term implications. Upon motion by Langan, seconded by Martin, upon a vote of four to one, the committee recommended that the City Council consider support for the Minnesota Public Lobby lawsuit, such support to consist of co-plaintiff status and a financial contribution. . Monson stated that she voted against the motion because she could only agree with moral support but not financial support in a time of budget constraints. Mirick asked if there was any sense of bow much money MPL was expecting from each participating co-plaintiff. Wagner stated that there is no limit to the amount a city can contribute. He stated it could range from $5,050 or a per capita contribution of $.10 • $.25 per person. He stated that the organization does need as much money as possible. Langan stated that it was his intent in the motion that the City provide a proportionate share whatever that may be. He asked if it would be possible to get feedback by the December 10, , #1 \ • ARC MINUTES NOVEMBER 12, 1991 • PAGE 3 1991 Airport Relations Committee meeting to identify an amount. Wagner stated that it would. MAC PART 150 LARD USE PROGRAM Hohenstein updated the committee and reviewed the progress made at the neighborhood meetings. He stated that a summary of those meetings would be distributed to the committee as soon as possible. He also stated that at a recent Part 150 staff meeting, he had found that Eagan is the only City that is interested in the purchase assurance program. He stated that Minneapolis wants to concentrate their dollars in the sound insulation program to ensure that as many residents as possible receive some benefit rather than spending additional - dollars on a purchase assurance program. He indicated that other cities were likewise focussed either on sound insulation or buyouts of neighborhoods. He stated that the principal question before the committee was to identify a method of selection for committing the money to various projects if and when it becomes available. - Verble stated that in terms of a method of selection, he felt that some consideration should be given to when a house was bought or built. Martin asked if the value of a house affects the cost of its insulation. Hohenstein stated that the size of the house and the type of construction had more to do with the cost of insulation than the value of the home itself. Mirick stated that some criteria that should be considered include the date of purchase, when there has been any change of marital status and the age of the occupant. It was suggested that it would be interesting to see the demographics of the impacted areas. Hohenstein stated that such information could be provided at the next meeting. Monson stated that it is necessary to be careful on discrimination with respect to age and marital status. Langan stated that the only criteria that would probably be legal to consider would be length of ownership of the home. Otherwise, he indicated that it would probably be necessary to do a simple lottery. • • Martin asked if there were different hierarchies of choice. Hohenstein stated that some alternatives could be prepared for the committee to review. Langan asked about the time frame for this decision. Hohenstein stated that a final recommendation had to be considered by the committee and the City Council no later than January for submittal to the MAC by January 31. Langan stated that there had been clear indications from the neighborhoods of their preferences and that some alternatives could be prepared for the committee to look at in December. He asked if another alternative should be for the McKee Addition to give priority before Country Home Heights. Hohenstein also indicated that one of the residents suggested that people inside the Ldn 65 get assistance before those outside the contour. Verble asked if the selection method could be different for each of the neighborhoods. • Page 3/EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE • December 10, 1991 be a somewhat artificial approach to the problem. Ring stated that any system besides a simple lottery was bound to be criticized. Martin stated that since the Committee had taken several meetings to consider this matter,the City Council might require more than one meeting as well. He stated that as a consequence, the Committee should move forward with a recommendation in December if possible permitting the Council to consider it at both January meetings rather than be forced to a decision at one meeting to meet the MAC deadline of January 31. Ring suggested the Council receive a report of the recommendation on an informative basis at its December 17 meeting and that it be placed on the agenda for January 7, 1992. Mirick moved, Aiderks seconded a recommendation to offer sound insiatlon and purchase assurance to Eagan residents with two-thirds of the City's funding allocation being applied to sound allocation and one-third being applied to purchase assurance in any given year,with the condition that any purchase assurance money not used in a given year could be used for sound insulation. The motion failed one vote to four. Hafvenstein stated that he agreed with the general concept of providing purchase assurance if sufficient money were available, but feared that a combination of programs might tie up necessary money to assist other eligible homes. Martin agreed and stated that the City's goal should be to maximize the benefit to the public to the greatest extent possible. 411/ Upon motion by Hafvenstein, seconded by Martin on a vote of three to two, the Committee recommended that the City Council request that the MAC use Part 150 Program funds for sound insulation only and that the eligible homes be chosen through a simple lottery of those applying for the program in any given year. MINNESOTA PUBUC LOBBY LAWSUIT REQUEST Hohenstein noted that Gary Wagner of MPL had arrived and the kern was taken from the table for further discussion. Hohenstein introduced Mr.Wagner and the background of the Committee on previous discussion in this regard. Hafvenstein asked Mr.Wagner who is currently supporting the lawsuit financially. Wagner responded that the South Metro Airport Action Coalition is a co-plaintiff and that they have hired a professional fundraiser to raise a$10,000 pledge toward the lawsuit. He stated further that neighborhoods in South Minneapolis have committed another$1,000 to$2,000. He stated that the Eagan Noise Abatement Council is also a co-plaintiff and that k has committed one-half of its 1992 budget to the suit. He stated that MPL has yet to receive any commitments from any cities and that its discussions with Eagan are farther along than they are with other cities. He stated that St. Louis Park is reluctant to be the first city to join. he stated that Mendota Heights is developing a report to its City Gourd to be considered at some point in late December or early January. He indicated that MPL can handle the remainder at the costs,but k will be a financial strain since the organization is member supported. He stated that the MPL Board has suggested a contribution amount for city participants, but that it will accept any level of assistance. He stated that the level of assistance suggested by MPL Board is$1 per capita or approximately$50,000 from the City of Eagan. He stated that the organization is drafting a memorandum of agreement for organizations and cities that participate stating that all dollars raised would be committed to litigation and lobbying on the issue. • 3 Page 4/EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE December 10, 1991 Ring asked if there was any progress with any other cities. Wagner stated that Burnsviile is discussing the matter but has not committed anything to it. He stated that Mendota Heights is considering taking a recommendation to the Council on par with Eagan's action. He further stated that Minneapolis and St. Paul have had only preliminary discussions In this regard. Hafvenstein asked if the group had any discussions with Bloomington or Richfield. Wagner stated they had not yet approached those two cities. Hafvenstein stated that in the initial discussions of the nlzati lawsuit is Mr. Wagner had indicated that the entire lawsuit would cost$30,000-$50,000 and � probably requesting $50,000 from the City of Eagan. Wagner stated that the initial expectations optimistic and that current estimates range from$100,0004250,000 for litigation. Aiderks asked what MPL was hoping to accomplish through the lawsuit. Wagner stated that certain strategies not used at this airport are used at other airports. He stated that examples included mandatory curfews on Stage 2 aircraft, the phase-out of Stage 2 aircraft, mandatory noise budgets and differential landing fees. Mirick stated that he would like to see copies of legal documents relating to the formation of MPL, its Board of Directors, financial reports and the like before recommending financial participation to the City Martin stated that with a request of$50,000,k would necessary to have a written proposal together a memorandum of law or outline of the lawsuit for City consideration. He stated that MPL's request compares to the cost of a full-time staff position at a time when the City Council has had to �gein budget cutbacks due to tight revenues. He stated that the direction of the lawsuit is laudable, b level of cost demands more documentation. Wagner stated that it will be difficult to identify the ultimate cost do of this lawsuit since few, if any, lawsuits of this kind have been undertaken in the past. Martin asked if any of the legal work is being done pro bono of if the organization is paying direct cost for all of it. Wagner stated that much of the work is being done pro bono but that significant costs remain. Aiderks asked if MPL has ever conducted any other airport lawsuits. Wagner stated that the organization had not, but that it had successfully opposed the high rise apartments on Lake Calhoun and managed a lawsuit of approximately $100,000-$200,000 in that regard. Alderks asked if MPL considered MSP to be a loud airport compared to others. He asked if,for example,MPL thought that MSP was among the top ten noisiest airports. Wagner stated that he did not know where the airport would rank comparatively, but that the airport is a significant problem from a local perspective and that it does exceed to MPCA standards. Alderks asked why it was MPL's knpression that k would take a lawsuit to get do more than it has to date. Wagner responded that Northwest Airlines drives the decisions at the airport Hohenstein stated that It was important for the Committee and the City to receive a written proposal, including a draft complaint, organizational documents concerning MPL and a written request for funding to consider the matter further. He suggested that this information be provided prior to the Christmas holiday to permit review by City staff and attorney in time for the January 14, 1992 Airport Relations Committee meeting. Martin stated that he also wished to hear more concerning progress on talks with Minneapolis and St. Paul. Don Grant, of 1275 Tower View Road, stated that the Committee had previously agreed to recommend to the City Council that the lawsuit be supported and that additional information was needed with respect to the amount of money necessary to do so. Hohenstein stated that Mr.Grant was correct that such an action had been taken by the Committee at the previous meeting. Martin responded that personally he continues to support the concept of a lawsuit, but that he does not wish to send a tAld nts • , the Council without appropriate documentation because of the amount of money being requested. stated that he has no problem supporting a lawsuit, but the dollar amount being suggested a problem.• Page 5/EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE December 10, 1991 Grant stated that even $1 would help k the City committed its moral support to the lawsuit. He stated that all parties of the lawsuit are permitted to withdraw at any time. Akderks stated that certain funds were set aside for a consultant's support on the corridor issue. Hohenstein stated that those funds were deleted from the 1992 budget due to the necessity to maintain existing programs. He stated that funds in the 1992 budget are extremely tight Grant stated that even though the budget Is tight.the City should do something to support the lawsuit. Aiderks asked Wagner If the contribution could be spread over time. Wagner stated that k could be spread over time, but that it is anticipated the lawsuit would be completed within one to two years. Martin stated that it would be necessary for MPL and the Committee to be very direct about the expectations regarding money and timing. Upon motion by Akderks, seconded by Hafvenstein, all members voting in favor,the Committee continued this matter to the January 14, 1992 meeting with a request to the Minnesota Public Lobby to prepare a proposal, including a draft complaint,organizational documents and a written request for funding for review by the City Attorney for a final recommendation to be made at that time. EXTENSION OF MEETING As the meeting had proceeded beyond 9:00 p.m.,It was pointed out that policy required a majority vote of those present to continue it beyond that point. Upon motion by Alderks, seconded by Hafvenstein, • all members voting in favor, the meeting was continued beyond 9:00 p.m. for review of the remaining business items. • STAGE 2 PHASE-OUT RULES Hohenstein introduced the item and indicated the final rules had been completed by the FM and that they had substantially slowed the phase-out schedule over the next ten years. Alderks stated that no matter how the phase-out occurs, it will still take ten years. He stated It was very unfortunate that the FM was permitting It to occur on a slower basis, however. Ring stated that he would have preferred that the phase-out occurred much quicker than the current rules provide,but that the City's comments in this regard had not been heeded. DUAL'TRACK PLANNING PROCESS Hohenstein updated the Committee on the dual track planning g process and the selection of preferred alternatives for both expansion and relocation of the airport. EAGAN/MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORRIDOR UPDATE Hohenstein stated that the MAC was in the process of completing the'flight track information from the sixty day corridor test and that information should be available for the Committee sometime in January. • RUNWAY 4/22 EXTENSION DRAFT EIS Hohenstein updated the Committee on the public hearing to be held on December 11,1991 on the • comment period extending to the end of the month. He indicated that the City tad taken a position in the _ past which did not oppose the extension but did oppose the addition of flight tracks east of Cedar Avenue. Administration: Canvass&Program: 2918 West 39th Street 4601 Excelsior Boulevard#402 Minneapolis,Minnesota 55410 MIM\VESOTA PUBLIC LOBBY Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 Phone(612)922-2852 Fax (612)922-5448 Formerly M.P.L.B. -Minneapolis Park LoverS 4111 B oard Of Directors •Norman L Newhall President •Mam^ M°° January 20, 1992 Vice President •Flan Davis vise President Mayor Tom Egan •Kathryn Glessing City of Eagan Vice President 3830 Pilot Knob Road •Katherine Christianson Eagan, M N 55122 Secntaryrrrrarvror •Dave Anderson •Bob Andrt:ws,Jr. Mayor Egan: Stephen Benson Susan As you may know, Minnesota Public Lobby is preparing to Susan William Boudreau bring a lawsuit to abate noise pollution stemming from MSP In- Bruce Candi in ternational Airport . The suit would be filed against the Jonathan Cohen,Ph.D. Metropolitan Airports Commission, who, as proprietors of the Barbara Diamond airport are responsible for controlling noise and therefore George Doerr,Jr. Malisel B.Fisher for allowing violations of state (MPCA) noise standards . •Martin Freeman,M.D. Robert Gauthier,M.D. We have been talking with the noise affected ThomasHclgeYo municipalities , enlisting them as co-plaintiffs and con- Greta Hesse AlexandraIl,,ag tributors . Because of the severity by which it affects your Virginia Flu mphrey community and the City of Eagan' s commitment to solve the AO Steven J.Johnson noise problem, we have sought your support in this regard. Ruth Jones Peggy MPL has been discussing the issue for several months now Peggy Kaplplan an Junes LKriesel with Eagan's Airport Relations Commission. The Commission has Laurie Lundy told us they fully support the efforts of MPL and the pr i nc i- WahetMay,Jr. pies of the lawsuit. Nevertheless , the Commission will be John Moe recommending to the City Council that Eagan pass a resolution Gougeurns supporting our effort but that it not become a co-plaintiff or Gouge Murnaoe John Richter provide any financial support . Renee Selig iatries Sarin,Ph.D. We are pleased that the Commission considers us and our Linda Stinson Michr:l Weitz effort worthy, but we are disappointed that the recommendation Claraueland did not include signing on to the lawsuit or a financial con- .•Gary Wagner t r i b u t i o n. Deb Waldo Warren Woodricb As we understand it, the basis for the Commission' s deci- sion was the opinion of Eagan city attorney, Mr . Sheldon; that Thomas Goodman Eagan might be subjected to a counter-claim or other costs . We feel strongly this is simply not realistic. The suit would SUM ask only for a declaratory judgment on a question of law. Katherine Christianson Secretary/I-matter Only if the court ruled that the MAC is noise polluting would Michael McDonald it be asked to force the MAC to come up with a plan to control CanvassDitector the pollution. We are not asking for any particular noise Gary Wagner Pl gam Di cctor •Executive Committee Members • Contributions to Minnesota Park Lovers,a 501 (c)(3 sister organization,are tax-deductible. abatement measures to be instituted, nor are we seeking any damages or injunctions which would in any way interfere in MAC control of the airport. We would be requesting a judicial decision in a manner very similar to lawsuits your city and other cities commonly undertake quite often. We strongly feel that you should specifically ask your attorney exactly what type of risks would be involved for the City and why this case would subject the City to any more risk than any other lawsuit the City might bring for perhaps less worthwhile purposes . We are confident that there is not a significant risk and such risk that there might be should not prohibit Eagan from pro- tecting the interests of its residents. We are asking that the City Council focus its attention on this question of liability and risk before deciding on the extent of the City' s involvement in this proposed and worthwhile litiga- tion. After a meaningful examination of this question of liability , if the City Council feels that it would be at risk , then the City can still do something tangible about this problem by simply providing some financial support to the effort without becoming a formal co-plaintiff . In that way, you are taking ac- tion to protect and serve the community, but without the risk . As you know, Minnesota Public Lobby is a public interest or- ganization which is trying to organize people in several municipalities to get something done on this important issue. This past fall our staff knocked on doors and spoke with many Eagan residents about noise pollution. The overwhelming majority felt very strongly about the noise and were most supportive of our efforts to find co-plaintiffs and funding for this suit . The Eagan Noise Abatement Council agrees. In fact, ENAC has agreed to become a co-plaintiff in the suit and do whatever else pos- sible to help. In the near future, as part of our normal efforts to build support, shape public opinion and seek financial help, we will again be contacting residents of Eagan and organizing house meet- ings and coffees to discuss the issue. We will be asking people to express their position directly to the Council so that you have an accurate understanding of the breadth and depth of senti- ment in your community on this pollution issue. We understand that the .City Council will be hearing the recommendation from the Airport Relations Commission at the next council meeting. Please put us on the agenda so that we may ad- dress the Commission's concerns and explain this suit directly to the Council . MPL can work with city staff to answer any questions or to provide any further information that you would like. We look forward to meeting and hope that we can persuade you that it is in the City ' s interest and with the complete support of most residents that Eagan take the important step of becoming involved 410 in this declaratory judgment lawsuit. Very truly yours, Gary Wagner Program Director (612) 922 5978 cc: Tom Hedges Jim Sheldon City Council Norman L . Newhall Thomas H. Goodman II/ • • MINUTES OF THE AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE Eagan, Minnesota January 14, 1992 A regular meeting of the Eagan Airport Relations Committee was held on Tuesday,January 14,1992 at 7:00 p.m. Present were Chair Tim Ring, Dustin Mirick, Bob Hafvenstein, Lois Monson,Greg Langen and George Martin. Absent were Larry Alderks, Randy Verbie and Bruce Nauth. Also present were Assistant to the City Administrator Hohenstein,representatives of Minnesota Public Lobby and members of the public. AGENDA Upon motion by Hafvenstein, seconded by Langen, all members voting M favor, the agenda was approved as presented. MINUTES - Upon motion by Mirick, seconded by Hafvenstein, all members voting in favor,the minutes of the December 10, 1991 meeting were approved as presented. MINNESOTA PUBUC LOBBY SUPPORT REQUEST Hohenstein introduced the item and provided background with respect to the Committee's previous discussions of this matter and referenced correspondence from MPL, the City Attorney and additional information received from MPL after packet distribution and attached as Appendix A. Chair Ring then asked the Committee if they had any questions regarding the background as provided. Hafvenstein stated that he is concerned about the amount of money being requested and issues raised in the City Attorney's memo about the potential that the City might not be able to extract itself from this lawsuit. Mirick stated that he shared the concern about the fluctuation in the dollar amount being requested. He stated that he is personally acquainted with members of the Board of MPL and that it is a very distinguished group, but he stated that it appears to be focused in Minneapolis and the inner ring suburbs. Martin stated that he was struck by some of the observations made by the City Attorney concerning potential exposure if other parties become involved in the defense of this lawsuit. He stated that it may be wise to observe how anti-noise lawsuits are conducted in other major cities and to follow on their precedents. He stated that he was further concerned by the dimensions of the lawsuit and its potential cost and that he was more concerned than he had previously been when the issue had originally come before the Committee. Langen stated that there were concerns with respect to whether or not the City's participation in the lawsuit was in its best interest and was reluctant to proceed, especially in light of the openendedness of the cost. Chair Ring then invited MPL representatives to make comments to the Committee. Thomas Goodman of the firm of Siegel, Brill, Greupner&Duffy, representing MPL, introduced himself and provided background with respect to experience in land use law. He stated that MPL is his favorite client because of their straightforward agenda and motives. He stated that MPL typically works through political action and occasionally uses lawsuits to cut through gridlock and red tape. He stated that the lawsuit in question serves the best interest of the metropolitan area because a reduction of airplane noise will enhance the livability of the area. He reviewed the legal theory of the lawsuit and stated that the basis for Minnesota environmental law is that noise is actually harmful to citizens, not Just annoying. He stated that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Metropolitan Airports Commission had cooperated on airport noise studies, including one done as recently as 1988. He stated the results of those studies had indicated that aircraft noise dearly • exceeds MPCA standards in residential areas. He stated that the Minnesota Pollution Control Act permits \°\ Page 2/AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES January 14, 1992 • individuals to sue agencies to enforce the Act. He stated that if his theory is correct, MPL should be able to win its lawsuit. He stated that the intent of the lawsuit is to get a judgment that would force the MAC to at least do those things which are not preempted by federal law. He said that the intent of the effort was to bring noise down to the State level. He said that MPL is targeting the Cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights because of the effects of noise on those Cities' residents. He said MPL wants the legitimacy of the Cities' names behind the case. He further stated that it was MPL's hope that the Cities would financially contribute to the lawsuit as well. He stated that MPL is already canvassing Eagan for contributions and wants the City to contribute as well. He stated that legal action would be necessary to get a MAC response since the State's loan to Northwest through the MAC would result in a conflict of interest limiting the amount of additional regulation the airport will consider. Langen stated that meeting the MPCA standards would require a reduction of operations from approximately 105 per hour to approximately 10 per hour. He asked if this was the remedy MPL expected as an outcome of their lawsuit. Goodman stated that it is not up to the plaintiff to prescribe the solution, but that the lawsuit asks a judge to force the MAC to come back with a plan to meet the MPCA standards as nearly as possible. He stated that the MAC could force the updating of Stage 2 aircraft, insulation of homes or even moving the airport as alternatives, but that is up to the MAC. Langen stated that it was his impression that it was highly likely that the FAA will actively participate in the defense of this lawsuit. He asked how that would affect the cost of the suit. Goodman stated that the FAA could invoke the interstate Commerce Clause as a means of intervention in the lawsuit, but the means by which MAC chooses to reduce noise is up to them. He stated that federal law still permits the addition of restrictions on Stage 2 operations after a 180 day waiting period. What the MAC chooses to do is their prerogative. Monson stated • that the MPL tax form for 1990 shows all revenues coming from contributions and gifts and that substantial expenditures have gone to salaries. She asked ff the City can be sure that a contribution would be used to fund the lawsuit as opposed to supporting the organization's other expenses. Goodman stated that funds could be segregated in that way. Hafvenstein asked If the suit were successful, what would it achieve beyond what the Part 150 program Stage 2 phase-out is currently achieving. Goodman stated that it is not necessary to wait until the year 2000 to begin fixing the problems at MSP. Hafvenstein asked for examples. Goodman stated that one example would be the institution of a higher glide slope on landing to reduce the amount of landing noise in the neighborhoods. He said there were other options as well. Martin stated that he was concerned that counterclaims by the defense could result in significant cost to the City since a public,non-profit agency such as MPL could not cover such costs. Goodman stated that he doubts there would be a counterclaim on a Motion for Judgment. Hafvenstein asked that if MAC has a conflicting interest, how would the lawsuit overcome that. Goodman responded that a judgment would force them to focus on the MPCA standards rather than financial interests. Langen stated that he hoped that a win-win solution could be identified. He suggested that a letter of support and nominal contribution could be considered instead of co-plaintiff status. He asked if the concerns raised about counterclaims would be diminished by such an approach. Goodman stated that It would. Martin asked why MPL was not receiving support from other cities. Wagner stated that the MPL Board narrowed its efforts to the two target Cities of Mendota Heights and Eagan because other cities would require substantially more political effort and staff time. Martin asked why Richfield would not be interested • • Page 3/AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES • January 14, 1992 in this type of lawsuit. Wagner responded that the Board determined not to spend its resources on Richfield or other cities at this time. Martin referenced the City Attorney's memorandum stating that there was no authority or precedent for funding a lawsuit not in the City's own name or control. Goodman responded that he does not believe that the City's interest and MPL's Interest diverge. The oily point that he felt a possible diversion could occur would be if a settlement offer differentially affected residents of Minneapolis, Mendota Heights and Eagan. Monson stated that no one on the Committee is opposed to the general thrust of the lawsuit, but that substantial concerns had been raised which needed to be addressed. Goodman indicated that he had not had an opportunity to review City Attorney Sheldon's memorandum to respond to such concerns. it was suggested that a five minute recess be taken to permit Goodman to review the memorandum. Chair Ring called for such a recess at 8:05 p.m. The Committee reconvened at 8:10 p.m. and resumed discussions. Ring asked if Goodman had an opportunity to review the information from the City Attorney's office. Goodman stated that he had and that most of the points had been responded to earlier in his presentation but that he wished to highlight his position that MPL's interests and the City's interests coincide,that this is a major case but there are limited risks associated with it, that MPL has handled major litigation In the past, while he admits that there is a potential conflict of interest because of his firm's representation of the O'Neil family that conflict can be waived and that while MPL is not seeking to shut down the airport,they do expect more to be done In the areas of noise abatement. Hohenstein stated that in previous action, the Committee has supported the general thrust of the MPL lawsuit and that neither the Committee nor the City Attorney necessarily oppose the theory or question the validity of the effort. He stated that the conflict of interest was a concern because the City as a matter of past practice has not waived such conflicts for other firms. He further stated that the potential exposure, no matter how limited,would fall disproportionately upon the taxpaying citizens of any city which becomes involved and that the exposure was more limited for a public, non-profit agency than for a city government. He stated that the concerns raised in the City Attorney's memorandum were not intended to be negative comments about MPL, the lawfirm or the suit, but rather were practical concerns about the City's interests and exposure in this regard. Langen moved to recommend that the City Council forward a letter in support of the MPL lawsuit and consider a financial contribution but not be a co-plaintiff to the lawsuit The motion died for lack of a second. Hafvenstein then moved, Martin seconded a recommendation that the City Council consider correspondence prepared by staff and reviewed by the City Attorney in support of the MPL lawsuit, but that no contribution nor co-plaintiff status be considered. Mirick asked if the City should be considering pursuing such a lawsuit on its own. He stated that it was his understanding that Minneapolis was not being asked to be a co-plaintiff because it might take over control of the lawsuit. Goodman stated that Minneapolis has been a defendant in other lawsuits by MPL and that it would take more political effort to get support from Minneapolis as a result. Mirick asked If the City Attorney's correspondence meant that the City should not support the suit at all. Langen stated that it appears that the co-plaintiff status and contribution are the larger problems. Martin stated that he seconded the motion because he felt that the City should support the concept but avoid potential exposure. Langen stated that moral support is fine, but the suit does need financial support. Martin stated that MPL, like other public organizations, is supported by its members. At that point, Langen called the question. The motion as presented was passed three to two. Monson had previously excused herself to be Interviewed by the City Council for a committee appointment • ( 0 • • • Page 4/AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES January 14, 1992 • STAFF REPORT Staff then provided updates on the following: 1)the dual track planning process in which legislation had been introduced to prohibit extension of Runway 4/22 until the conclusion of the dual track planning process and a decision on the expansion or relocation of MSP, 2) the Eagan/Mendota Heights corridor procedure in which tracking information should be available to the Committee for its meeting M February and Mendota Heights' apparent action to pursue a lawsuit against the MAC to dismantle the corridor and 3) the City Council's decision on the Part 150 land use program in which noise insulation will be provided . on the basis of a lottery beginning first with residents who purchased their homes prior to airline deregulation in 1978. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Mirick, seconded by Hafvenstein, all members voting M favor, the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. JH Date Chairperson Secretary • 'CL)se)-* t Administration: Canvass&Program: 2918 West 39th Street 4601 accelsior Boulevard #402 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55410 \JIx\TSoTA IJBIJIC BBY Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 Phone(612)922-2852 Phone (612) 922-5978 Formerly M.P.L.S. - Minneapolis Park Lovers Fax (612)922-5448 II APPENDIX A Board Of Dlrecton •Norman L Newhall President •Marc Anderson Vice President •Ran Davis Vice President •Kathryn Glessing January 8, 1991 Vice President •Katherine Christianson City of Eagan Secretaryfrreaixer Airport Relations Committee •BobA Anderson Jr. •Bob Andre 3830 Pilot Knob Road Stephen Benson Eagan , MN 55121 • Robert C.Bergford Susan Bunnell Dear Committee Members: William Boudreau Bruce Candlin Jonathan Cohen,Ph.D. For some time now Minnesota Public Lobby and the Airport Barbara Diamond Relations Committee have discussed Eagan 's possible partici- GeorgeDoerr,Jr. pation in a lawsuit MPL might bring to abate airport noise M,chaelB.Fisher pollution . The suit will be directed against the •Martin Freeman,M.D. Robert Ciaurhier,H.D. Metropolitan Airports Commission for permitting violations of 7LomasHelgeson state ( MPCA ) noise standards . Greta Hesse Alexandra Hoag As I understand it , your committee will be recommending , nia Humphrey nJ.Johnson to the city council that Eagan become a co-plaintiff in the nJones suit and provide a financial contribution to help fund the Keith Kajander effort . MPL is obviously very pleased . Peggy Kaplan James L Kriesel uaurier.ttndy There has been some confusion , however , as to the level Walter May,Jr. of contribution we are seeking as well as some questions John Moe about the lawsuit and MPL itself . This letter and the in- WilLam'v1u1Ln formation packet enclosed is intended to address those is George Mumane John Richter sues . Renee Selig lames Seam.Ph.D. With regard to the financial contribution , we have dis- Linda Stinson cussed the matter with city staff and feel that a commitment Clhae1&re� Chia Leland of $10 ,000 over some period of time is appropriate . We have •Gary Wagner taken the City 's budget concerns into consideration and feel DebWaldin that in light of the importance of easing the airport noise -•WarenWoodrich burden around MSP and its benefits to Eagan, that our request cotmseL is a fair one . Thomas Goodrran As we have discussed previously , any pledge the City com- Stafi mits could be paid upon institution of the lawsuit or peri- Katherine Chrisnanson odically throughout its course . And , as outlined in Thomas SecretarytFresurer Michael McDonald Goodman 's letter of December 20 , 1991 , an agreement can be Canvass Director arranged allowing Eagan , in the unlikely event of a disagree- Gary Wagner ment between the co-plaintiffs over tactics , strategy , or Program Director settlement , to withdraw or retain separate counsel . 4.1 wtive Commune .abers • •Contributions to Minnesota Park Lovers,a 501 (c) sister organization,are tax-deductible. Regardless of any financial contribution we still want the City of Eagan 's support as a co-plaintiff . The financial commit- ment is important in its own right because the final decision whether to bring the case or not depends on the level of finan- cial support we can muster . Your "pledge" would be important in this regard . Enclosed in the information packet is a very rough forecast for what we expect the lawsuit to cost and how we intend to pay for it . It is difficult to estimate the end cost of any legal battle but , based on our successful efforts in two prior lawsuits in Minneapolis , we have put some figures together as you have re- quested . It is our best estimate that , in an ideal situation where - very little time is actually spent in the courtroom and excessive motions are avoided , we can win a favorable judgment for as little as $80,000 . This , of course , will be one of our goals . On the other hand if we are forced into a long , dragged out courtroom battle with extensive expert testimony the cost could be as much as $225 ,000 . Everyone knows costs of this -nature are difficult to estimate because we cannot anticipate the other side 's response . We feel , though , that based on our past experience as a non- profit citizen 's organization fighting in the courtroom that the cost ( not including any costs from implementing a workable noise abatement program after winning in court ) will be somewhere around $150 ,000 . The forecast enclosed is based on this estimate . We look forward to discussing the matter further at the ARC meeting on the 14th . We are enthusiastic and anxious to get the support we need to get this important case filed . Very truly yours , Gary(W�[gner , Program Director cc: Jon Hohenstein Joe Harrison • Norm Newhall Tom Goodman MINNESOTA PUBLIC LOBBY Formerly M.P.L.S. - Minneapolis Park LoverS MINNESOTA PUBLIC LOBBY AIRPORT LAWSUIT PRO FORMA BUDGET January 8 , 1991 INCOME Field Canvass Net ( through 10-15-92 ) $48 ,035 Phone Canvass Net 30 ,000 ( through 10-15-92 ) Board Fundraising 20 ,000 Co-Plantiff Contributions 25 ,000 Special Events 20 ,000 Grants 10 ,000 TOTAL INCOME $153,035 EXPENSES Legal Fees and costs $130 ,000 Expert Fees 20 ,000 TOTAL EXPENSES $150,000 110 4601 Excelsior Boulevard#402•Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416•Phone(612)922-5978•Fax(612)922-5448 M.P.L. S . . Minneapolis Park LoverS 2918 West 39th Street • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55410 Board of Di ecthn Commentary/Counterpoint , President Dave Andersen Vice President _ Peggy Kaplan Vice President • - Star Tribune/Saturday/April 28/1990 Katherine Christianson ------ Secretary on Trcnasudnr Maaaers Plans to exp and the airport are Robert C.Bergford nearby Jonathan Diamond Ph.D. unfair to neighborhoods Fran Davis Barbara Diamond George Doerr,Jr. Michael B.Fisher Richfield city officials recently pro- If anything, Richfield residents sion of MSP also call for the destruc- Martin Freeman.M.D. posed a new comprehensive redeye!- would benefit from the move. The tion of adjacent areas. The newest Dick Helgerson opment plan for Minneapolis-St. removal of noise, odors, congestion requires the leveling of homes in Thomas Helgeson Paul International Airport and adja- and air pollution created by MSP South Minneapolis and Richfield; or Virginia Humphrey cent communities. would almost certainly improve the rerouting of Cedar Av. and the Steven J.Johnson property values. Crosstown Hwy. 62 through tunnels. Ruth Jones The plan calls for a new"stunningly taking part of Fort Snelling; or tear- Dean C.Mathews lit designed"terminal and a third north- In addition, residents of south-cen- ing down the Met Center. Ideas like Walter May Jr. south runway. It also includes a cor- tral Minneapolis, Richfield, Bloom- these further demonstrate the need William Mullin porate office center and hotel located ington and Eagan would no longer be for a new facility instead of expand- George Mumane on what is now the New Ford Town forced to flee their neighborhoods ing our existing one. lip R..Peterson neighborhood of Richfield.The plan, due to the unbearable level of aircraft in Richter officials said,was designed to elevate noise. Obviously, these plans are no an- Robert Schmelzer the inadequate MSP facility to a swer. The airport exists to serve the• Renee Selig more competitive.one serving the Of course, most homeowners who residents, not the other way around. James Ph.D. greater metropolitan area well into bought in neighborhoods and sub- The solution is not to keep moving Carl Sharpe the next century. urbs near that airport knew it was neighborhoods until some day we Charles Stapleton III there. But who would have anticipat- have to abandon Lake Harriet. Now, Clara U lanrtz More like! the proposal stems form ed that, since 1978, air traffic over while rural and exurban land prices. Gary Wagner land likely p Gary W :Richfield's wish to have the airport many neighborhoods would increase are as low as anyone can remember. Deb Waldin remain in its present location. City by 500 percent?Air traffic is expected is the time to buy the land for the Warren Woodrich officials view the existing airport as. to increase continually through the new airport. • key to future economic development end of this century,Ind residents in Counsel: in Richfield and fear that construe- the affected communities should not Even with a new terminal and three Thomas Goodman tion of a new airport would result in be forced to bear this excessive bur- parallel runways (all aimed at south • a loss of jobs for Richfield residents. den. Minneapolis) it is not at all likely that an airport of' less than 4,000 But what the Richfield officials over- In addition to the New Ford Town acres can compete with dozens of ` look is that construction of a new, area in Richfield, parts of the south others in the country ranging from Urger and more competitive airport Minneapolis neighborhoods of Wen- 21/2 to 10 times the size. elsewhere would provide as many onah and Morris Park, likewise hit jobs as the existing one, and maybe with intense noise levels, would be Austin, Denver and Kansas City -more. The actual construction in it- earmarked for destruction to accom- have all made the sensible decision self would provide thousands of new modate a new north runway. to build new airports instead of ex- jobs. The threat of Richfield resi- pending or upgrading their existing Menu losing jobs is real, however, if' It seems Richfield's solution to the ones.And in of these cases,the the airport remains where it is and problem of airport noise in affected cost of building the new airport, be- the metro.area is thus forced to im- neighborhoods is simply to bulldoze cause of federal aid formulas, was provise around an outdated, under- them and replace them with new less than the cost of expanding the sized facility. . nonresidential development Using present one. At any rate, a new air- this kind of logic, it follows that the port would likely cost taxpayers Even with a new terminal and run- neighborhoods of Nokomis, Hiawa- nothing. way, a steady loss of jobs could be tha, Minnehaha Creek, Lake Harriet • expected due to competition from and Lake Calhoun. which are also But keeping the present one. d more modern airports around the severely affected by high levels of cost a fortune, and perhaps a f country.At worst,the construction of aircraft noise,should similarly be de- our future. a new airport could force current stroyed and turned into industrial Gary Wagner, Minneapolis. Board employees to drive an additional six parks. member of Minneapolis Park Lowers, or seven miles to work This is a a citizen lobby group. small price to pay. Other nt proposals for the expan- Tri Et v 14.1d E1.0-10E -284 w ---3i;Eer • ur5 .. o^ c o x � • CU a" s t6 • .� 1.=, ,,,.. m °- 41).4g 1 -s12 0 Tiro -- urael •u CO /2 • °41" Wir - EEE S7 Q 't� E si o • r00 .a ° : , E Oc.5 d , ° o O " $ 'd v oo rftEE c .IAM y e Z c C C "E t >.O "so ' " co u �as vmp. v.- , c.0" E a ° oca Cti Erg ° ° `° • `1.g =3 " e13 e'b gaol. c ,dEeoc ZS3i..sR 41.11 � t+ ,°vo reos.Y r-6°_ Zb_ s o� h 0) . '•p § ` c s3 1 § OMM ' fttu 0.0 oi,..1 .. Oj i I "s w .5 pp Fad c 40 plo., - 17,1742 $ • • ID :4615 Vrr-VIskg4 _'�p.. pp •g us o -agivt; cog 1 Q-U ° lal2E E .- 1 • c O. fl :ii c.° fill v <g " E l h °oo^ $ = E• E ooh 9 hAE831 ez S;< 8Scaai F 2,� . C r I 461.11 41 SUM a,3 , £ E a • ,,, e•- • c ..., . >I mg g7).- 70a al.ti Ao .. . .. a o^Dl • O hm'°--' o � E'ce)• go • M.P.L. S. Minneapolis Park LoverS 2918 West 39th Street • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55410 Board of Directors Norman L Newhall President Dave Andersen ' O e v w c 2::: c e -' as e d .: '° .: are..' 2E0-- e O �j'E0 >,ak.. uea• Vice President .. 0 d. o �- a = •p 'v w o^ = 3 U . � ea� � u Planning C ER @ As= = a wuaovwa � v � �•E � E� eZSmE •PeggY President = O •`m v t 3 t c O 10 �' " 3 o o › `-' c is . Gary Wagner hi .n iIi ..0 MI O cos , = .e R E g auo° 0 G se.a Ica Christianson ` 3 E eV .. " y c Z ,O, p e°'= Yi,� .0 111404 u-v~''• < 3 t/1 do is Alexandra Hoag O poop }i;!4. vEpe flu `' =_ �- ep e e e.$ " lei c V >,'g, & vas : o O = j ,�"� u•O i. o E >• ea r L .,-: 1: a l'-- _ �e u di o Bob Anews k• r o o w u m G _6 eve ,o El Ankeny Ir. s c �v h_ a, ce u a t3. a ;Tr co v my c u- Robert C Bergford (- c t: C,Q a 3='v o I C�= l-Ca- a.C 3 Er, Z'g ar Jonathan Cohen.PhD. Fran Davis .se e'- i. h • r. v ,- '..- .� 'a ' _ v. v u h � co o� � �' kc _' v-0 = es eaooGts m Barbara Diamond o p �' - o v e ea e c 't7 George Doer.Jr. 3 n. V a� >,Y 00 t C R V V , ~ a . = o e 7 Michael B.Fisher t -'� V.- O ~ �Uin c .`9e= v.- -u �'(� v � gi = u '- Martin Freeman M.D. t0 '= d '> • e e es E •.• h= ad E °- vTa e u 'd - .1 W =-- Robert Gauthic,kLD- -Z`c- • p=1...oss` O g V c c c;• a `- " Thomas Helgeson _ e 2 10. = . ..., Virginia Humphrey e p u e m'= 3 c o E s a'_.c 5',.0.5.- Q.-'O 03 pg O Stew-r Johnson a VS Euv Et- .�„ alu-7 3ro ,—e'=ODo' `'.zs $ a Rut s -1c- s .. cvev =t ., E"_ ov,--• U Jima_Kriesel .fl A ^'C O >,m u._ ee C s 'E .5 ,- E. a .02.= ,.E an Dean C Mathews TB 0 7 V v.=C _ h ET >.8."o E V •u as v ea Walter Map Jr. PIM v c eo'vv'es v 2'o 3•� e$ u v _ .-s o m-A a Qjohn Moe ea ee tS u'^ •p._ 7 A• William Mullin II. � E. ;_ _c E W c o°O. a.e u c "'o, 0-Le o _ w c v < C,eorgtMurnane Q og �u sue `— cI, gv =a E.?== c 0.. _ v W = s Phillip R Peterson a m.< m F-x a E.c c� to : E--.-.• - as ev C... se.=.....= �' F- john Richter ' II:Robert Schmel:e i- .O-to - -Y u= e... Renee Selig ■ v w w V�'OV E c .�o e _ - o�'p o e E.e e e•- Jats,es Serrin Ph D. • Linda Stinson e i- in ar 0 Oe, v u s u c a= e E crte, ate'--C� y ee • Michael Streitz c Q C = -'" = e.. as £s s:6-7. ea C g Y u c= v v o o v•v� = e_ m oaaueiana g t';e .ti src.h�e � o� teoa > °c ,=r 0.5,E Deb Waldin _ CO •p Eou ° .= 6. a3�.° .°, �N— Eu�,_ coi $ Warren Woodrich r_ _ _�' e°- ., o;v_'fl o .°, svc `�o= o o a 1 mbit Counsel sea e u s'3. =•=;, a v =.. c O if; tfiI t . Q .•- ao y u o O = � aeoe v ; ., O e s' 00111 .�10= 3 c o.8 �-is c Q F. 3 S �oH ,..sow in = .2c � 'a i'.. UI) MOM a EI v 0 o'C.. "f•p; u o = }� ilH c sec•- o =V= EP.c 4 C ab..- °�•- e's oc-o o $ v r._ma e E :Z a V e..5 • 3h e 3 e az \ `• oo.z' s= '0tAz' .v, i �e At •site j,.c -. E1177... °398.3> e'- o P II 11•111111 ..0 0 t=•-ea= a tauc =,= O > pt c Z 3� u o ff, o_ >= o o 0 is .. _ .:'_ ,vc_, 2oc � suss— 6. = 'off �eau 'av ov.^ v�._ - - CcE �< •E��c °'zh ° ^� =.. a$� Uo=dam IIIIII •a1-)- v0 12 os •tgocv 'cga "-o flIL! tiIi CD as ...= 1w o v b ' �':U > 3 c S' c t v m$y C>�_ 4-. N a- o c c c u u-o h t 0 u o •- - 2 =v N�v low I� liiI 1øhtii � es ao4I1 e �ifl• 44,M m 0 a.,�� c c . .•� c....,.. .0 fill �� S i • Cr) 2�_ = 'sou oh � v€ o�u�po s � � `° "o to mrn Qr w�L V•... 0 Gy `- +-'v` .:.._- ars Commentary/Counterpoint • City ignoring neighborhoods in fight over Calhoun towers Five years ago Minneapolis officials to 34 stories, 560 new residential another two acres of it And turn it changed the zoning on two key par- units).The same developers,inciden- into a parking lot with a pedestrian . eels of marginally stable land near tally, are in federal court trying to bridge across Excelsior Blvd. to the Lake Calhoun and Lake of the Isles collect a multimillion dollar judg- lake. Council Member Pat Scott and promptly approved the construe- meat against the city for delaying the points to the potential need for a tion of four buildings: one on the project by not using best efforts to it ght rail transfer station and parking Beach Club parking lot and a cluster condemn someone else's private lot very near that intersection. of three in the"V" between Lake St. property to enhance the develop- and Excelsior Av. These towers meat. If the city let the office building use would dwarf even Lake Point's 20 part of this parking lot during busi- stories, and would bring in more Our legal claim is that if Minneapolis ness hours,the park board could tear than 900 new residential units. Park LoverS wins and the court rules up the pavement add return the park- that developers never had the right to ing lot created a year ago to park Last year an office building on what build in violation of city ordinance, land. It could be Minneapolis' first by all rights should be'lake shore state environmental laws and shore- "ground restoring"ceremony. park land was expanded.(This parcel land management rules, the city will was offered to the park board for a owe them nothing. The remaining land could be sold to dollar decades ago, and turned a private developer who would agree down.)Then the city turned around How many cities would pass yyp an to put up something on a smaller, and virtually gave the new owner opportunity to help a neighborhood, more fitting,scale—perhaps a three- more than an acre of park land to side with their own constituents and, or four-story luxury hotel and restau- pave and use as a parking lot. in the process, save hundreds of rant overlooking the lake. thousands, perhaps millions of dol- Both decisions have drawn over- leis?But even if the project is found The net cost to the city shouldn't be whelming disappointment from sur- somehow to be legal, that doesn't much more than S2 million, far less rounding neighborhoods, and nearly mean it is right. The City Council's than the tax abatement given the unanimous criticism from those who job is to make best use of such land Calhoun Beach Club high-rise and a use the lakes. for everyone, for 10, 50 and 100 pittance compared with money given • years hence, not just for developers to downtown projects in recent years. Now, facing lawsuits charging they who stand to make a bundle. violated not only their own ordi- While S2 million sounds like a lot of nances but state law as well, Minne- What we all need is an end to this money,it would only come to about apolis officials have quietly overrid- neighborhoods vs. City Hall syn- S8 per resident. Spread over a 20- den the wishes of the community and drome and the siege mentality it is year bond issue it would be about Si the three council members represent- causing. a year,including interest. ing the affected area, and sided with the developers. We at M.P.LS. recognize that this The city would get its fire station,the • six- or seven-acre site on the north- MTC would get its park and ride Mostly, I suspect, they are defending west corner of Lake Calhoun will not station, the developers would get a the decision because they have been stand vacant forever. But we think fair price for their land, the park sued. They have been helped to this there are a number of solutions to the system would get back its 1.2 acres decision by city attorneys who tell problem which will be fair to every- and the city would get a tax-paying them that to do anything else will one,including the developers. development more appropriate for a cost the city millions.if they don't do lake shore. everything they can to help the devel- For example,the city is looking for a opers,city attorneys say,the develop- site for a new fire station west of the Most importantly it would send a ers will sue. nearly impassable Hennepin and powerful message from City Hall to Lake intersection. There is talk of the residents. So city officials are doing nothing. condemning a restaurant not 50 feet They are not seeking to stop con- from the proposed three-tower LCA It would say neighborhoods are more struction. They have not told their project. • important than lobbyists and devel- lawyers to side with the citizens(the • opers, and that what residents want • membership of Minneapolis Park Instead of taking a ping business, for their neighborhoods really counts LoverS,plaintiff in the lawsuits,now why doesn't the city instead buy the •at City Hall. It would say our park 1110 exceeds 6,500 and it is supported by high-rise site?We could use part of it land is still precious and our lakes eight other community groups). In- for a fire station, park police station remain invaluable and inviolate.And stead the city lawyers are spending and government services outpost. it would say we all can work together taxpayers' money to help the devel- (Would it be unthinkable to add a to keep Minneapolis one of the best opers prove in court that they have small branch library where a person places in the world to live. the right to build the Lake Calhoun could get a book to browse on a Norm Newhall, Minneapolis. Presl- Associates project (three towers, 24 nearby park bench?) We could take dent,Minneapolis Park LoverS. Saturday/Decertrosr EV19904Ptar Tribune • c.;6 ft,(fr,14-; j? Lie, 413 r-A,t,-,p5 Ito) Mc, 40,) ov A t; -6,4<4;v arj n.. Mks ad 4' � j 444war ra 4/44°."41 �-�,pd 1/1 ,,;�---.a- 41c 41*., • 5'"3/ • CO • , TO E O.catl CGE C,,-Lvy‘4 � -�YT +�,U 0 �,,, cam. m� U c� �, Pte, ka,lycz) WM) -fie CikAfeNki • CA,-)ry-vrawYu Luiykzo GryLwiyi -Lk rytasL • (.0.2) _xIp/ E • d C)JU-CO . • I , (-64 Lo-d32, rt.0.4 (111-4) 1/Lwo-c& • a. cts-cw/t Lo-kilRo ttx- n1-.lJb-Q) kcothf Cdkiz.e) aoLi4/0 4') F 960, 6-5")0 a • ert) Lo-u44ai CA/ tL// Octia-4 • Cam- - a -t • '7 �j 2pci). ,(Jeik-66 /A7 ?3 7f ---v 027-1-62-71-)i -"= , 5-57,7S &`42-Q%3/4 AQQrD (CQ l _ Lrs2--- 49-1) C:1 (elAAD tAA k\e-(;): .0 f4=1'cia,0--FX-0,A ,�- e, '.I, :r 1 h—Lk7 Yw-.e. • • i ifrt 144-- cti / -2f- 2 a �' -- z „y . le-c-cp--- "P4r...,246 e I - 3 -7-7f / LL 0 ': cfrS 4 N57- M 5 S/Gn' 7+ - C--c+i C4 rt/ 4/6".....- oF N6E,11/ - _ P1104--s 61-A- -P41_( t •- ayei, c`- e° 1ilawg LAN-) cir_44 4-4)(/4122f--- 14-9- vIA . c 6.6 vf-e‘.4.-/, 4-( • Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1992 City Council Meeting REVIEW PRELIMINARY PLANS, DIFFLEY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION B. Review Preliminary Plans,Diffley Road Reconstruction--The Dakota County Highway Department has requested an opportunity at the February 4th Council meeting to present the preliminary plans for the reconstruction of Diffley Road from one-half mile east of Pilot • Knob Road to Trunk Highway 3. The County would like to receive some feedback from the City Council in regards to the proposed design configuration which ultimately impacts the amount of permanent right-of-way and temporary slope easements needed to be acquired through negotiations an. or condemnations from adjacent property owners. Enclosed on pages_*Cthrough la are typical plan view sections of the different types of roadway configuration associated with this improvement. As you will note, the existing five lane design (two lanes each direction with common center left turn lane)with trailways on each side as presently exists east of Pilot Knob Road is being reduced to a four lane design by eliminating the center left turn lane through that portion adjacent to Tony Caponi's property. As it approaches Lexington Avenue, it will widen back out to a divided roadway section with left turn lanes and right turn lanes at its intersections with Lexington Way, Lexington Avenue, Daniel Drive and Braddock Trail. From that point, it will then be reduced to a three lane design (one lane in each direction with center left turn lane) and • an eight foot safety/shoulder lane all the way to Trunk Highway 3 with right turn lanes being provided at a majority of public street intersections. City staff has worked with Dakota County Engineers to modify not only the width but the elevation and centerline location of this improvement to minimize the impact of the cuts and/or fills of the side slopes on adjacent properties. However, due to the rugged topography through the Tony Caponi property and the Country Hollow Addition, there will still be significant impact to adjacent properties. The City staff is in the final stages of completing a feasibility report to be presented to the City Council on February 18th for consideration of scheduling a formal public hearing to be held on March 17th to formally present to proposed improvement to all affected property owners. Representatives of the Dakota County Highway Department will be available to further discuss the proposed improvements and schedule associated with this County road improvement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve/deny/modify the preliminary design for the upgrading of Diffley Road from one-half mile east of Pilot Knob Road to Trunk Highway 3. • * Updated information will be available with the Administrative Packet 01) ' t - , _ t / 1 1 / 1 • / I Vi t I i• � Z ` • 0 1 . %1 \ SCALE I"= 100 / I ` I ( / I ' / I / ' , , 1 I • -- I I ' , , rZ A I ` 1 I 0' � ` 'A%I ' % A 1 ` , ` I / ' , , It / ` , 'A. j n i °,c ' „ • 410 ■ 2 / 4' y C 1 ‘1 : \ I e / 0 Li I 'I 41It Z 'f 0 r-. i _ t // I i' '.I ' ' ' f I • ti / I / A` I 0/ , / p, i. , t / I 1 % � 1 .00. f1/ - P. C. •STA. • 17 4 , - _ 1 \city of eagan . D I FFLE'Y ROAD . stan approved: plate #:--': Et,- PUBLIC CITY PROJECT 1110.607 , . WORKS ¶(p STREET SECTION. - 1 DEPARTMENT CAPON I PROPERTY _ • N .1 Q 11 : \ 1 � 1 1 �'\\ \ I SCALE In=50' Y114 � . ' �\ � 1 Z t- 1 \ , r\ 1 _ �� 1, 1 tz \1 , _ , , _ . ,-_ . . ,. . DROP ,�... j DROP M'c CURB -•- .._ --- 14 CURB 4r- .12';___ ._ ii . .....„..„___ ___.....'' 14, 15 - k • � I - R-3' . - -- 14' - - - 12' • 12' --_ DROP 14' - — - - - CURB. DROP--• 14' 12 CURB � ` =; z. 11\1 a3_._ ._ �� II. g \L;3 d , \6 \ 1 , I z 1 i IS -- 1 � \--I 1 iS - \ct:: • I - city of eagan DIFFLEY ROAD approved: Standard plate # -- ,; WORKS PUBLIC ��-_ ' \_ CITY PROJECT NO. 607 . I � DEPARTME DIFFLEY RD. B LEXINGTON AVE. N • t . \ % % \ \ \ a3 , ' 1 >o , • ', o , SCALE I"=50' g , • ,I\ EXISTING R/MI • , '• 1■9, t% , (kY43-4 PROP _ - - , . . CURB �. ..... t . - I___ 14' RT. TURN LANE _ �s�-�� ____260__ _ .: � n _.__ 12 " ! �- — - -••110 12' ' ' —.. IN LANE -� -- —DR g, rr A,4Nt CUR $. i (.1 4; „ \ i \ i T....4_____ _____ t_ , 1 EXISTING RA1 - 1 1 • % 1 • 1 • , 1 1 EVEL,AED ADDITION 1 1 i 1 ' - e , . I 1 • • Stan City of @agar q . DIFFLEY ROAD approved: plate #: PUBLIC CITY PROJECT NO, 607 - WORKS ` 1 Et, 1 DEPARTMENT DI FFLEY RD..& DODD BLVD. Agenda Information Memo • February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting WAIVER OF PLAT/VIENNA WOODS C. Waiver of Plat, Scherer Brothers Financial, for a Duplex Lot Split for Lot 6, Block 6, Vienna Woods, Located in the NE 1/4 of Section 31—An application has been received of Scherer Brothers Financial Services for waiver of plat for the above referenced parcel. For additional information with respect to this item, please refer to the Community Development Department staff report which is enclosed on pages fob through /0 I for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a waiver of plat for Scherer Brothers Financial for a waiver of plat for a duplex lot split for Lot 6, Block 6, Vienna Woods, as presented. V1 -c_ o • SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT SCHERER BROS. FINANCIAL SERVICES INC. 410 APPLICANT: LOCATION: LOT 6, BLOCK 6, VIENNA WOODS EXISTING ZONING: PD R-2 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - DOUBLE) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: FEBRUARY 4, 1992 DATE OF REPORT: JANUARY 23, 1992 COMPILED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted to the Community Development Department by Scherer Brothers Financial Services, Inc. requesting a Waiver of Plat for Lot 6, BLock 6, Vienna Woods. The purpose of the Waiver of Plat is to allow a duplex lot split for individual ownership. The existing duplex meets, or exceeds all setback requirements. Both lots are served by separate utilities. If approved, this Waiver shall be subject to all applicable Code requirements. 110 _11 ,d, ,__, _., , ,, „ ,,,„„ , ...., 1-4 NIII( IL \W '51141 Laii"-Ps iit .4.:It" '1r ---- =:6,04 WA �l.p ``` f r+! .h(F : t�n off , � y ��,.!!��lc 7 TTLE \ : liY''.�� (` r•~NW - Z cw r ff e �: _' i �,( i..ss.na 3±f`trig+ / , •-• • o SLATE . ,C. 5 ; , . gw trust. d:.11.0,1:'� s k : ii'iJ! Y \ '�L_ .„...._:„;,.:4 s t=,:ge __ L „„ 1 A,,Tizr r ' ç1 ' Ji ,, y ( ,(-/k ,I, \ ,r E' i v.. iGVe /< I I flI \fit-fli7S-W TO y Street Map Zoning Map • 0( ' Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting • TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGN PERMIT/ROBERT ENGSTROM COMPANIES, D. Special Permit,Robert Engstrom Companies,to Allow Two Temporary Advertising Signs in Excess of 7', Lots 1 & 12, Block 1, Knob Hill Professional Park, Located in the SE 1/4 of Section 21--An application has been received of Robert Engstrom Companies for a special use permit for advertising signs at the above referenced locations. For additional information with respect to this application, please refer to the Comm ty Development \o3 Department staff report which is enclosed on pages through c S for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a special permit for Robert Engstrom Companies to allow two temporary advertising signs for a period of two years from the date of approval as presented above. ►J v - Yv 0 • SUBJECT: SPECIAL USE PERMIT • APPLICANT: ROBERT ENGSTROM COMPANIES LOCATION: LOTS 1 & 12, BLOCK 1, KNOB HILL PROFESSIONAL PARK (SE QUARTER OF SECTION 21) EXISTING ZONING: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: FEBRUARY 4, 1992 DATE OF REPORT: JANUARY 28, 1992 COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted requesting a Special Use Permit to allow two "For Sale" advertising signs for the above-referenced lots to be located at the NW corner of Pilot Knob and Diffley Roads. COMMENTS: The subject signs exceed Ordinance-allowed temporary signage height of 7' and therefore require a Special Use Permit. The sign structure measures 9'x 5'with a sign area of 36 sq. ft. If approved, this Special Use Permit shall be subject to the following City Code requirements: 1. The signs shall be placed a minimum of 10' from the property lines. 2. The Special Use Permit is temporary and shall expire two years from the date of approval. 3. Both signs shall be subject to the one-time sign fee of $2.50/sq. ft. • \ 03 ■ ill • : 10 --a—mil/ 1 j a 110 210 I ORTH " . ' 9 .. . . .. : 12 :.0 8 existin existing • business • • , building existing • business �—, building 0 4 5 cc 4 ��0 m � o O z • 3 0 2 . Q- . o .•..• existing ...1 business — building 0- 1 •s .... I :i DIFFLEY ROAD ) \ / Knob Hill Professional Park • LOCATION 0 \.04 , I 1 - . /\?' O • „\ \ 1 . . / �LC�TS ---.- • - _. FOR. ._...... _. .. . /.4 SALE _ . • ,.1,2�� - jai_ _ . . __ wit If • Business .\ . . if-7.,\, 0 _ , , 41, ,..r i‘t,I ' a ►:; 'mot_ •.-I. tiol' i■-,,k,' -'' ' t- ' - -i-f . . 8 3-1001 7 1. j ; \..i. .,_..-Lti. ENGSTROM .11 • . • \COM PAN I ES ..4_ i , 9 4'-off ��- r - ..�- NI • t ........._.,... 1 I r1 C I 1 1 - 1 i Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting • AMENDMENT OF PLAT CONDITIONS/AUTUMN RIDGE 2ND ADDITION E. Request, Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition/James Development Company, to Change a Conditional Plat Approval to Add 20 Additional Lots, Located East of Dodd Road, South of Diffley Road in the NE 1/4 of Section 25—Enclosed on pages CY through \l b is a memorandum from the Community Development Department covering correspondence from James Development Company relative to the Autumn Ridge Development at the above referenced location. The applicant is requesting a modification of conditions for the original Autumn Ridge preliminary plat approval which does not permit development of the second phase of the project until a second access is provided to the property. At the present time, as a consequence of intervening properties, the second access is neither installed nor available. The applicant is requesting permission to develop some but not all of the remaining lots of the overall project to permit development activity to continue at the present time even though this access is not available. Action on this item would only modify the existing condition relative to the preliminary plat. The applicant would still be required to submit a final plat application for the proposed phase II addition. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a request by James Development Company to change a condition of plat of the Autumn Ridge Addition to permit the development of Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition consisting of 20 lots as presented. • loL • MEMORANDUM • TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR DALE RUNICLE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: JIM STURM, CITY PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 28, 1992 RE: PROPOSED AUTUMN RIDGE 2ND ADDITION The Autumn Ridge Addition consisting of 99 lots on 39 acres received Final Plat approval on August 7, 1990. A Condition of Plat Approval stated that Phase II of the development shall not be constructed until a second access to the development is provided. Forty-six lots were included in the Autumn Ridge First Addition. The applicant is requesting 20 additional lots for the proposed Autumn Ridge Second Addition prior to the construction of a second access. Hackmore Drive would be extended to the east approximately 500'. The City has the capability of providing utilities for the 20 lots, however before any further development would occur, utility connections must be made to the north into the Country 110 Hollow Addition. The petition for those utilities was presented at the January 7 Council meeting and the Council authorized the preparation of the feasibility report. At the time of the original Preliminary Plat approval, there was concern of having only one access serving the entire development there were no definitive plans for further development on adjacent properties. The 50-acre parcel to the north is now in the planning process (Hawthorne Woods Addition) and is tentatively scheduled for the February 18 City Council meeting. Staff anticipates a roadway connection from that plat through undeveloped property to the north connecting to Diffley Road. Also, there have been discussions of having a shared access onto Highway 3 with representatives of the Catholic church which owns the undeveloped property to the south. This item was reviewed by both the planning and engineering departments and no major concerns were raised. If you would like additional information, please contact me. • • Planner JS/js • James Development Company • JAN 21 RECO James L.Ostenson 7808 Creekridge Circle President Suite 310 Bloomington,Minnesota 5543 January 14 , 1992 612/941-7805 Fax/941-7853 Mr. Jim Sturm Planning Department CITY OF EAGAN 3830 Pilot Knob •Road Eagan, MN 55122 RE: AUTUMN RIDGE 2ND ADDITION Dear Mr. Sturm: This letter is in response to our recent conversation regarding the condition imposed by the City Council upon the development of Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition. Autumn Ridge 1st Addition has been a great success and has only two remaining unsold lots. The new residents, as well as the builders, would like to have the neighborhood completed as soon as possible. So that we can complete our planning, we would like to request that the City Council review the condition contained within the Autumn Ridge Developer' s Agreement that restricts the development of any additional lots until a second access is secured. In the way of background, shortly after purchasing this property, we were approached by the school district to sell 10 acres for Pinewood Elementary School and worked with the school and other adjacent owners to have the city construct the new Hackmore Drive. We have cooperated fully in both of these requests. Meanwhile, the other adjacent parcels have either been unwilling to sell (Mrs. Roth) , haven't begun their planning (Catholic Church) , or entered into an agreement which fell apart (Sterns roperty) . For these reasons we have not been able to obtain a logical second access into our site. Recently, the City has levied large assessments nts against my remaining land which I am -willing butefoy reasons outside my control , to develop. . In a sense, this property arjpeety is being "held hostage" by current city policy properties. In reviewing the need for an additional access, p lease keep in mind the status of the adjacent properties and the timing for Autumn r Ridge 2nd Addition. If we were to start grading19 in April , our first occupancies would not occur until August, unlikely that we would have more than 15 residents en a reasonable 2nd Addition by the end of the year. 1993, economy, we could add another 30 homes which would be spread evenly throughout the year. Therefore, the opening of 2nd Addition will not create an immediate traffic problem or potentially hazardous situation. If necessary, we do have frontage on Highway 3 and could plan our site for either a permanent or emergency access to Highway 3. • Os • • Mr. Jim Sturm CITY OF EAGAN Page Two A compromise position might be to allow just 20 lots to be • developed in the 2nd Addition which could be served by the present sewer and water laterals. Meanwhile, the adjacent properties may have progressed in their development and we would be able to obtain the second access. While this is certainly not my preferred solution, I understand the concerns of the City and would do this as a reasonable alternative to developing all of my property. After you have had an opportunity to review this letter, please contact me. Thank you for your kind consideration of this matter. Sin rely, tames L. Ostenson or Autumn Ridge Limited Partnership JLO/nr • 4 V • 1 1 , • 1 • 1 • � • '1 - I , I 111 11 S I ! % V' I ri: I 1 1 I % I •, • •---• i • I ! L.iF I .'1 . _ - i .iti . `•� � 11r .__IA, \I, Y/:•'. `°. 1 i is I; ' e • 3- . .. r,-ZI311411%,`4*..f.P0_&,;%._.VT:rxt--:1 . ,.. 4 I ...\% . , si a 1 -ile Tii i /7- - 6-44 %, ?1.)3 al a i .; •I • 4, ;kis 7---. . . 1 v\-f/../. , .. .. . 1 I. (, . • Ii , . 1. i i. - A 41 It'.a.±::"4-..:..2;1::d 1 Z.t.=7.-. .r-- _11.1._;A• ,• - 4... . 1 ._i 4, aux,.-k-. .4.• -I_ ......,_.__ . .....„,„„„,., ..7 _ iiiiv....-....t.t.0 et pil 1 —. ‘ 41 , \ -4 • \ II* ‘b-r-re 4 3!: .1 1.11-:1 11 '1‘.k "d■AgfirtH-:-.-fifiiicrtitr ' '''4'1-c-I Ili I •� .`� .:1---1 i, ri • `)� e tt - 4 1 -= '� *■..:41;7i."- --(CI.- 1: /:-. ' ' ` +T I,' 1111 II, - " ;. , 1 • lt2 el (11,1104 CI 1,;-j ii 1 1 i .1 lk. .1.. i ilio . ... ri -..„4„...,r-0.1 )1 ., (4 .711,1 ‘ , _ 1 • i I • ' • 1,,,ii ,I.,i ...ii .1.1.7.1*..\ 1 f' 1 .41k1,1_k\ lel■ 2 r I. k.--- - -11 - — . T2r;Pr - ,_.). t4V.i.. ..:. t 14 : AZ:. Yt,i itk . • .., • _ .. i PM lilftipt( \ .1 - r 0 • ,. o ign .\A c- . • ' i• , I -: •• Imo. • 1 • )- . iritirtilay4sr. - - - - - - - I _ It �\ 11 ji (i III l..-�," �• •`•� - - - - - - - -I---1- \ iii 11 _ � . }; - II ' • 4 f n s • \VO • • Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting REZONING/PRELIMINARY PLAT/WESTON HILLS ADDITION F. Rezoning,Weston Hills Addition/Lyman Development,of Approximately 64 Acres from an R-1 (Single Family) District and a Preliminary Plat Consisting of 132 Lots Located East of Highway 3, South of Cliff Road in the East 1/2 of Section 36—An application has been received of Lyman Development Company for a rezoning and preliminary plat as referenced above. For additional information with respect to this application, please refer to the Community Development Department staff report which is enclosed on p es ( k.through '30\for your review. Also enclosed on pages N,0 through /(./ is a copy of the Advisory Planning Commission minutes in this regard. Please note that while the rezoning was approved on a split vote by the commission the preliminary plat was not approved, also by a split decision. While the commission's actions are advisory in nature and the Council can consider both applications, it is appropriate to note these actions. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a rezoning and preliminary plat for Lyman Development Company for the Weston Hills Addition as presented. • V • GecK)-A-0'k t./._ • MEMORANDUM • TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR DALE C. RUNIKLE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: JIM STURM, CITY PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 31, 1992 RE: WESTON HIT.T S ADDITION At the January 28 Advisory Planning Commission meeting, the Rezoning from AG (Agricultural) to R-1 (Single Family) for the Weston Hills Addition was approved 4/3. The location of this 64-acre development is along the east side of Dodd Road, south of Cliff Road. The Comprehensive Guide Plan designates the entire area east of Highway 3 D-1 (0-3 units per acre). The Preliminary Plat consisting of 131 lots was denied 4/3 after approximately 2-1/2 hours of discussion. There were approximately 30 residents, including those from Inver Grove Heights, in attendance. The major concerns dealt with having urban development in this portion of the City adjacent to 2-1/2 acre minimum lots in Inver Grove Heights and Agricultural parcels in Eagan, as well as traffic issues. While the development will generate more traffic along the Cliff Road/Highway 3 intersection, the City's traffic consultant felt the proposal could be accommodated at this time. However, acceleration of the Cliff Road/Highway 3 intersection and signalization that may occur in the next three to five years would be desirable with or without this development. Glen VanWormer of Short, Elliot, Hendrickson prepared the traffic report for the City and will be at Tuesday's City Council meeting to address questions. This item was reviewed by the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission and they are recommending a cash dedication. They will be looking at adjacent land to the south for potential land dedication as that area develops in the • future. The submission by the applicant was very thorough and they provided a good oral presentation to the Advisory Planning Commission. Attached is the staff report, APC minutes, and the minutes from the Inver Grove Heights Council meeting that directed the stub streets and utilities to their border. Please note changes in the existing conditions, as well as the addition of some new conditions. Refer to the applicable APC minutes rather than the staff report for these changes. If you would like additional information on this item, please contact me. City Planner JS/js • SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT & REZONING • WESTON HILLS ADDITION APPLICANT: LYMAN LUMBER COMPANY STEVE RYAN LOCATION: P.LD. #10-03600-010-02 & e+° P.I.D. #10-03600-021-08 EAST 112 OF SECTION 36 a Op EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JANUARY 28, 1992 DATE OF REPORT: JANUARY 21, 1992 COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been received by the Community Development Department requesting a Rezoning of 58.49 acres from Agricultural to R-1 (Single Family) and a Preliminary Plat of 131 lots and six outlots. The Comprehensive Guide Plan designates this area as D-I Single Family (0-3 units/acre). The proposed 2.06 • density of this plat is in conformance with the guide plan and therefore no amendment is necessary. This proposed plat is located south of County Road 32 (Cliff Road) and east of Trunk Highway 3. BACKGROUND: In 1988, the Mentor Development Corporation submitted applications for Rezoning and a Preliminary Plat of 18.8 acres for a development named Boulder Crest West Addition. At the same time, Mentor submitted plans to the City of Inver Grove Heights for a plat called Boulder Crest East Addition consisting of 49 Single Family lots on 24 gross acres. The overall development would consist of 86 lots. The Inver Grove Heights Planning Commission and City Council denied the Boulder Crest East project due to the need for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment and Rezoning to allow a deviation from the five-acre minimum lot size in that area, as well as the policy issue of extending the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) line. In July 1988, the Mentor Corporation withdrew their application due to Inver Grove Height's decision to not allow urban-type development. Originally, the Weston Hills plat was submitted for the December 19, 1991 Planning Commission meeting. After staff review and review with Lyman Lumber,it was determined that further analysis with the City of Inver Grove Heights was needed . Eagan staff asked Inver Grove Heights staff to review the proposed plat. A staff-level meeting was held on December 17, 1991 to ask Inver Grove Heights if the proposed plat should accommodate the potential for development within Inver Grove Heights (i.e., roadway connections, utility • services extensions,joint park development,etc.). The Inver Grove Heights staff asked their • City Council for direction and at their December 23, 1991 City Council meeting, it was the consensus of their Council to provide assistance in planning for future urban development, • specifically for the provision of utilities and streets. No interest in a joint park was expressed. With Inver Grove Heights' comments, Eagan's staff review comments, and neighbors in both Eagan and Inver Grove Heights, Lyman Lumber has resubmitted new plans addressing all concerns. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located south abutting County Road 32(Cliff Road), west of the Inver Grove Heights city limits, and east of Trunk Highway 3 and the Soo Line railroad tracks. Zoning of the surrounding properties is R-1 Single Family (12,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) to the north across Cliff Road; E-1 Residential (2.5 acre minimum lot size); and Agricultural (5.0 acre minimum lot size) in Inver Grove Heights to the east; Agricultural (5.0 acre minimum lot size) to the south; and R-1 (Manor Lake Additions) to the west. Two homesteads currently exist on the site (one gaining access from Cliff Road, the other from T.H. 3), and will not remain with the development. Currently, there exists an access easement extending from T.H.3 east into Inver Grove Heights serving five homes and acting as the southernmost boundary for the project. The site is largely open grassland on a rolling terrain with a large stand of approximately 40 oak trees around the north edge of Pond LP-27. A detailed grading plan was submitted for Lots 39-42, Block 1, showing existing trees, their sizes, proposed and existing grading contours, house pads, and wetland limits to illustrate the developer's intention to ensure the • retention of this natural amenity. COMMENTS: Weston Hills Addition proposes 131 lots and 6 outlots on 58.49 acres; the largest lot is 40,590 square feet, the smallest 12,000 square feet, and the median lot size is 26,295 square feet. All lots have been designed to meet or exceed requirements for size and width at setback. It is the intention of the developer to phase the project in two or three phases from north to south. The proposal includes three cul-de-sacs: Weston Hills Court, Weston Hills Place, and Weston Hills Circle<The northernmost cul-de-sac exceeds the 500' maximum length and will require a Variance of 240' serving 18 lots. Access to the project is from a median divided entryway onto Cliff Road. Lot 1, Block 1, shall take access from Weston Hills Court> The developer believes that secondary permanent access to this project should occur in a southerly direction, with potential to connect with Gun Club Road accessing onto T.H. 3. Stub streets have been provided on Stratford Lane to the east and Weston Hills Drive to the south to accommodate future development access. At this time,the Inver Grove Heights neighbors do not wish to relinquish use of their private road and the unimproved portion of the 33' wide roadway easement. The developer has taken the 33' wide easement and created six outlots attached to the backyards of the adjoining lots. The outlots can then be added to the lots in Weston Hills or to the area south of Weston Hills if Lyman Lumber purchases the property. • • 1 • TRAFFIC: The City's traffic consultants have had an opportunity to review the Preliminary Plat plans and a future conceptual plan to the south with the County engineer and MnDot representatives. Based on their review, SEH suggests that any secondary access to T.H. 3 come from the conceptual area south of the proposed plat and it is their recommendation the plat be approved without access from Bristol Boulevard onto Highway 3. SEH's comments also indicated two concerns with the platting of Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2. First, the divided roadway along Cliff Road may have operational problems. They suggest that if a median boulevard is desirable, the developer reduce the size and the southbound roadway and platted area be moved east, giving Lot 1, Block 1 a straight north/south property line rather than a curved property line. Secondly, they feel that a portion of Lot 1, Block 2, should be eliminated. It is the portion directly across from Weston Hills Court. If removed, it would allow the City a future option for a combined roadway development with Inver Grove Heights and eliminate a triangular shaped area which is unbuildable. Both issues can be accommodated with the Final Plat. SEH's traffic analysis is included with this report. Staff concerns with the Cliff Road and Highway 3 intersection prompted an accident report for the years 1986-1991 from the police department showing the number of accidents as 39,with two being fatal. The two fatalities represent one-third of all fatal accidents in Eagan during this time frame. MnDot has acknowledged that accidents are on the rise and are a concern as volumes in that area are expected to rise. MnDot does not anticipate a signaled intersection there for at least three • to five years. PARKS AND RECREATION: The.Advisory Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission at their regular meeting of January 9, 1992 recommended this project be subject to a cash park land dedication and a cash trailway dedication. • GRADING/DRAINAGE/EROSION CONTROL: A grading, drainage and erosion control plan was submitted for this development. • The site will drain primarily to the northwest into the proposed water quality and storage pond,which will be designated as Pond LP-27.1. According to the preliminary grading plan, approximately 53 acres will drain to Pond LP-27.1. This area includes 5.3 acres of Inver Grove Heights that is currently undeveloped. The 53 acre drainage area will require a pond with a storage volume of 8.3 acre feet and a flow out of 4 cfs. A storm sewer outlet for Pond LP-27.1 is proposed to be provided to drain into the Cliff Road and S.T.H. No. 3 ditch system. • Fifteen lots on the southwest corner of the proposed plat will have their backyards drain into City Pond LP-27. Also, three acres along the north edge of the site will drain into the Cliff Road ditch system. There is a proposed cut of 10-12 feet on the north and westerly parts of the site and a 8-10 foot fill on the south end of the site. The developer proposes to save and protect the existing trees around Pond LP-27. The rest of the site will be disturbed by the grading for this development. There is a need for additional catch basins and storm sewer to be added at the south end of Weston Hills Court. Also, at the intersection of Cliff Road with Weston Hills Drive, catch basins shall be added to collect the runoff from Weston Hills Drive. The site must be in compliance with City requirements for minimum and maximum slopes. • The final grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall include protection of adjacent properties, construction of temporary and permanent vegetation to control erosion and construction of silt fence to control erosion. WATER QUALITY: This 64 acre single family residential development is located in the upper reach of drainage basin L. A 1.0 acre wetland is located in the northwest portion of the site along the railroad tracks. This wetland is not identified on the City's Water Quality Management Plan. The wetland is proposed to be improved to provide storm water . retention and water quality treatment and the pond will be designated as Pond LP-27.1. The preliminary grading plan shows that approximately 48 acres of this site will be directed to Pond LP-27.1. A 3.5 acre pond is located in the southwest corner of the site. This pond is identified on the City's Water Quality Management Plan as Pond LP-27 and is classified as a wildlife habitat pond. The preliminary grading plan proposes to direct only backyard areas to Pond LP-27. • I �X Drainage basin L contains a high concentration of recreational class lakes immediately • adjacent to, and downstream of,the proposed development. These lakes include LP-26,LP- 28 (Manor Lake), LP-31 (Hay Lake), and LP-32 (Schwanz Lake). Maximum protection of these lakes as well as some protection of the habitat around LP-27 will be accomplished by routing most of the runoff to the north away from LP-27. One probable impact of adjusting this drainage divide, however, will be to decrease the volume of runoff that enters LP-27 after development. Based on a rough estimate, runoff to 1.2-27 is expected to decrease by about 33% on an average annual basis. Normal pond elevations in LP-27 may therefore decrease until runoff from prospective future developments in the undeveloped areas to the south are routed to the pond. On-site ponding to treat runoff from the proposed development is both desirable and feasible. The treatment pond (LP-27.1) will be constructed according to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards and will have a minimum wet volume of 5.2 acre-feet, a minimum surface area at the normal water level of 1.05 acres, and a minimum mean depth of 5.1 feet. The inlets shall be separated from the outlet to the maximum extent practicable. Consistent with design standards, a minimum 10 foot wide bench with a 10:1 slope must be constructed around the edge of the pond just below the normal water level to meet safety requirements. Finally, a skimmer should be constructed on the pond outlet. UTILITIES: With the completion of Manor Lake 4th Addition, sanitary sewer service of sufficient size and depth will be readily available to the southern two-thirds of this site. The 'sanitary sewer in the Manor Lake 4th Addition will be constructed in Todd Avenue up to S the west right-of-way line of S.T.H. 3. The preliminary utility plan proposes to construct an 8" sanitary sewer line across Highway 3 at Todd Avenue to serve the development. The northerly 34 lots are proposed to be served by a sanitary sewer line in Cliff Road that needs to be extended from East Greenleaf Road to the east side of the railroad tracks. The Developer intends to petition the City to have the sanitary sewer extension along Cliff Road constructed as a public improvement project. Watermain of sufficient pressure and capacity is readily available to this site in two locations. A 12" DIP line will tie into a 12" stub at the east end of Todd Avenue and an 8" line will tie into an 8" stub located at the northeast end of Manor Lake Addition with both lines crossing Highway 3 to provide water supply and fire protection to the site. A study was conducted of the trunk water supply and distribution lines in this area of the City and it was determined that a 12"trunk watermain should loop through the site from Todd Avenue and then to the south property line. The watermain layout shall provide hydrants in locations that meet the City requirements for fire protection. • STRl?i TSJACC SS/C'IRCI,11.ATION; Street access to the site is readily available from Cliff Road on the north end of the development. The street layout plan proposes to connect 1) to Cliff Road along the east boundary line of the plat which is also the east boundary of the City of Eagan. The street layout plan proposes to provide a stub street into Inver Grove Heights 1300 feet south of Cliff Road that could serve as an east-west corridor into Inver Grove Heights. The street layout plan also provides a stub street to the south that could be extended to Gun Club Road as the area to the south of this plat develops. EASEMENTS/RIGHT-OF-WAY/PERMITS: The development will be required to provide the appropriate ponding easement for Pond LP-27.1 to incorporate the required high water level and storage volumes. The City will require a 30 foot drainage and utility easements centered on the common lot line of Lots 32 and 33, Block 1; Lots 8 and 9 of Block 4; and Lots 22 and 23 of Block 4 for the purpose of repair and maintenance of the sanitary sewer watermain and storm sewer lines located within. The City recommends that these lots be widened to accommodate these larger easements. The Dakota County Plat Commission recommended that Lots 1-5,Block 1 be enlarged with more depth from CSAH 32 because of the severe slope to provide for future slope construction when Cliff Road is upgraded. All regulatory agency permits shall be acquired within the appropriate timeframe as required by the affected agency. A Dakota County Highway Department permit will be required to allow discharge of storm water runoff in the Cliff Road ditch system. FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - Weston Hills Addition Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and connections proposed to be made to the City's utility system based on the submitted plans. Improvement Use Rate • Quantity Amount Storm Sewer Trunk S.F. S.069/sf 2,284,722 sf 1 $157.646 0>This area will be credited for the area of any ponding easements granted to the City. There are outstanding assessments totaling $48,287 on these properties. At this date, there is no record of a pending assessment against these properties. • JAN-22-1992 14:24 FROM SEH INC. TO 6814612 P.02 A MEMORANDUM 35351010M45 MITER DM S7 AV+t,UNMOOR Rt 55710 6/2404000 TO: JIM STURM, CITY PLANNER, CITY OF EAGAN FROM: GLEN VAN WORMER-808 BYERS, SEE DATE: JANUARY 16, 1992 SUBJECTS EAGAN, MINNESOTA WESTON HILLS PRELIMINARY PLAT TRAFFIC REVIEW SEH FILE NO. 89040 We have had an opportunity to review the preliminary plat for Weston Hills located in the southeast corner of Trunk Highway 3 and Cliff Road (County Road 32). We recently met with the County traffic engineer regarding the plat and access to it and have also discussed it with representatives of Mn/DOT. Based on our review and conversations, we have several comments for consideration by the City and by the developer. Our review • included a consideration of future preliminary plans for extending the Weston Hills development south to roughly Gun Club Road. SURROUNDING ROADWAY 8YSTBM T.H. 3, the westerly boundary of the plat, is a major north-south route in Dakota County now and will continue to be so in the future. Currently, there is limited access to the highway due to the parallel railroad tracks on the east side and the orientation of development along the highway. This plat helps to retain the limitation of access by orienting all development to internal roads. Cliff Road currently Carries relatively low volumes, especially east of Highway 3. However, it will continue to grow in stature as a major east-west route in Dakota County providing connections to 135W on the west and potentially to Highway 52 on the east. SHOW Eworr Nennermov vac w CPOPPentg ors VISCONSON JF -22-1992 14 25 FROM SEH INC. TO 6814612 P.03 • Jim Sturm January 16, 1992 Page #2 As such, the traffic volumes in the future will continue to grow east of Highway 3. The existing intersection of Highway 3 and Cliff Road has had increasing volumes with continuing development of the area. Mn/DOT has indicated that accidents are increasing and are becoming somewhat of a concern. We anticipate that the volumes will justify traffic signals and that they should be in place within the next three to five years. WESTON HILLS PLAT The plat shows access to Cliff Road at the northeast corner or as far away from Highway 3 as possible within the platted area. This is the most desirable location, maximizing the distance between the potential signalized intersection and the railroad crossing and the plat access. This distance is approximately 500 feet from the railroad right-of-way and approximately 600 feet from the Highway 3 intersection. Dakota County has indicated concerns over this distance and would like to see it increased. but recognizes the limitations within the platted area. The concept plat for the completion of Weston Hills indicates access to Gun Club Road and ultimately onto Highway 3 at Gun Club Road. Future traffic in the far southerly portions of the future development area will probably utilise Gun Club Road to gain access to Highway 3. However, it is likely that all the traffic from the proposed 132 loto in Weston Hills and a significant portion of those in the northerly portion of the area just south of the proposed development will gain access to Highway 3 via Cliff Road and Weston Hills Drive. • .L�O J144-22-1992 14:26 FROM SEH ]tom. TO 6814612 P.04 • Jim Sturm January 16, 1992 Page #3 The lots shown in the preliminary plat for Weston Hills will generate approximately 1300 trips on an average day. With single access to the north to Cliff Road, all 1300 trips will be concentrated past the northerly few lots. With the additional future development to the south as shown on the concept plans, there may 400 to 600 vehicles added all along Weston Hills Drive. This places the volume just south of Cliff Road at just less than 2000 or relatively heavy for a residential street. ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION Dakota County is requesting consideration of additional ecoess onto Highway 3 from Bristol Boulevard, just south of Todd Avenue as platted in the Manor Lake addition (West of TH-3). The County indicated that if the Cliff Road and Weston Hills Drive Sintersection becomes congested because of its relatively close spacing to Highway 3, that this connection from Bristol Boulevard to Highway 3 could serve as an alternate. We do not favor the concept of additional access to Highway 3 between Cliff Road and Gun Club Road. If the need for additional access becomes apparent in the future, we would suggest that it may be better to consider a secondary access from the conceptual development area south Of the proposed plat. Better overall spacing could be achieved if the access were located near the property currently owned by Finch. With some minor modifications of the street system layouts in the development south of the proposed platted area, more traffic may be oriented to Gun Club Road, both reducing the volume on Weston Hills Drive and at the Cliff Road intersection. \ a Jr:N-22-1942 14 26 FROM SEH INC. TO 6814612 P.06 Jim Sturm • January 16, 1992 Page #4 Our recommendation, therefore, is that the plat be approved without access from Bristol Boulevard onto Highway 3. This would help protect the integrity of the higher speed, higher volume Highway 3 in the future. We have also reviewed the internal street layouts within the Weston Hills plat. Weston Hills Drive is a major north-south street and could carry volumes as indicated earlier of up to 1900 vehicles per day. The alignment at intersections appear satisfactory within the preliminary plat area. We do have some Concerns over the concept development design south of the preliminary plat area, especially the S-curve and the modified cul-de-sac on the Neary property. Again, some modifications are possible to remove that concern when it is finally submitted for plat review. • There is a potential extension of Stratford Lane to the east into Inver Grove Heights. Although Inver Grove Heights has limited interests in expansion to the east, this roadway will provide opportunities for movement of local traffic in the future without forcing it onto County roads and trunk highways. We have some concerns with the details of platting on Weston - Hills Drive between Weston Hills Court and Cliff Road. The divided roadway at Cliff Road may have operational problems and we would suggest that if a median boulevard area is desirable that it be smaller in size and that the southbound roadway and the platted area be moved further east. Lot 1 of block-1 would therefore have a straight north-south easterly border rather than a curved easterly border. \P)- • J(*J-22-1992 1427 FROM Sal INC. TO 6814612 P.06 Jim Sturm January 16, 1992 Page #5 We would also suggest that Lot 1 of block 2 be terminated directly across from Weston Hills Court eliminating a triangular area which is basically unbuildabie. This would give the City options in the future for a combined roadway with development from Inver Grove Height*. If the County restricts access from Weston Hills Drive onto Cliff Road in the future, a secondary connection into Inver Grove Heights at Weston Hills Court would also be possible. This should have little if any impact on the platted lots as shown. SUMMARY We feel that the preliminary plat as shown is basically acceptable from a traffic standpoint. Minor modifications to two lots and an understanding of the relationship of the plat to future plats to the south and east should eliminate any operational problems and give the City some future flexibility. We recommend that the plat be approved without access to Highway 3. The issue should be reevaluated as the area south of Weston Hills develops. GVW/cmb o: Shannon Tyree - City of Sagan Steve Ryan - Lyman Development Co. TOTAL P.06 \-13 REAL ESTATE DEPARTMENT Soo Line Building Box 530 Minneapolis MN 55440 �Q� Tel (612) 347-8258 K L LLIVED JAN 93Z Fax(612)347-8170 Line Railroad Company Wag Soo Li P Y . • January 17 , 1992 Shannon Tyree , Project Planner City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122-1897 Dear Ms . Tyree : After a review of the Lyman Development Company' s plans for a portion of Section 36 easterly of Highway 3 and the railroad which were furnished with your letter of January 8t4, and telephone discussions with Mr . Ryan of Lyman Development, we have decided that the major crossings at Gun Club Road and Cliff Road, the latter which is adjacent to the proposed development, should be sufficient access to this area. Consequently we are not willing to permit an additional crossing of our right of way at this point. The plans are returned herewith. Sincerely, R. J( Tait Manager Real Estate 612/337-7681 RJT/by Enclosure cc: Mr . Steve Ryan Lyman Development Co. 300 Morse Ave . Excelsior , MN 55331 • • \]:)14 • CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL FOR WESTON HILLS ADDITION • 1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on July 10, 1990 shall be complied with: Al, B1, B2, B3, B4, Cl, C2, C3, C5, D1, El, Fl, 01, H1 = ^- L :oulevard trees shall be allowed seven feet from the back of the curb. 1 L Q t 3. Snow fencing shall be installed around the oak trees located near the pond to ensure tree preservation during grading and construction. The snow fence will be inspected prior to the grading permit being issued. 4. Lot 10, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 5 shall have driveway access from Weston Hills Drive 5. Lot 1, Block 6 and Lot 48, Block 1 shall have driveway access from Stratford Lane. 6. Lot 1, Block 1 shall have driveway access from Weston Hills Court (cul-de-sac). 7. Berming shall be located along Trunk Highway 3. • 8. Pond LP-27.1 shall be designed to accommodate a surface area at the NWL of 1.05 acres, a wet storage volume of 5.2 acre feet and a pond storage volume of 8.3 acre feet and a flow out of 4 cfs. 9. The watermain layout for this site shall include a connection to the 12"watermain at Todd Avenue and S.T.H. #3 and a connection to the 8" watermain 350 feet south of Cliff Road at S.T.H. #3. 10. The watermain layout that loops through the south portion of the site shall include a 12" trunk watermain from the Todd Avenue connection to the south property line at the Weston Hills Drive stub street. c"\-5 vi .- 01 J - lam" • STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL A. Financial Obligations • 1. This development shall accept its additional financial 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-Wav 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 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 or accommodate it. 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, engineering standards, guidelines and policies. 2 . A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current City standards 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. (f7 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL PAGE TWO 4 . A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted on the proposed grading plan. The financial guarantee shall be included in the Development Contract and not be released until one year after the date of installation. 5. All internal public and private streets shall be constructed within the required right-of-way in accordance with City Code and engineering standards. D. Public Improvements 1 . If any public improvements are to be installed under a City contract, the appropriate project must be approved at a formal public hearing 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 and Trails Dedication 1 . This development shall fulfill its parks dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission and approved by Council action. G. Water Oualitv Dedication 1 . This development shall be responsible for providing a cash dedication in addition to/in lieu of ponding requirements in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan. E. 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: July 10, 1990 plataprv.con LTS *2 MOM s►w ' T 1 r ' ..„.....41 . , - I -1-47 ,..e...;0„,ri._ 6 ..„.„r, r..,E i.,,„ • _ . ,ii �j STREET MAP fug POND RD �w,i /ILLS m mr N ,. . 7/4; 1 M0tl9 �„ lARM GUN O .. ----- ) l...1' 2�. ,� . 14 •,- ■ R I .may �p". <-,---�,t� im -. .).. ..,.: -, \R-2 Iff-,- .. - ' - If . ZONING MAP =- -- 7 Yr .y ._, 1: _ \,.1 i l � s' r y __ .L _ ., - r�aCrZKE ID ` a - ..s:k. f „ CPO L •F. -• • . - . _ _ C- COMP GUIDE PLAN MAP � - _. = .. o • e+ /r.' . W s g. \ . 9 -. l.)- i :: . r. i __J• • 1 r":FP 2 1 ....cr. Ni)f T A i - - - ROAD / r CUFF ROAD ° >iQ s i i ; 1. .! / E=EIY ON 'fir` Z t i I ' 1 i . EP t s c- r, / / I ! NO1f7M q -- ; r O . u Althirai- L en lifir /1 - ,i i... . 1 ! I ' 4411* fritligi e• ...D 1..! 1. / .-Ti.,:: .... i .1 ./v,,, lift , i.,, a f if I '.lilt; I 1 s**"/ . ' .DOLL_ .tl'. -Tip' ` �1/ i' /I t t E Y i t jP ;C[ , , .., / 4. ma • 14 e ' " / °�� e( E„ tt de t!::411: ET-E Vi=i k i :, �, !; \� / t P s THI ig: a ss Et s _�� jF j r i s R Laae t. .. , • 1,-Tc.i...., p-'s- a F1f? ;` t t l�-c :j r Pi j? /� / i / • i' — ` `: las+{' i.St . 3 �= Ey , t0 0g cep.i; .. illtopt_ „4 ot. A. • ,,.., ii il. .f:i 1 !....t F _i j' ti: � / V 1 1e t t Iii it I i'ea , /./ • I,II L Eq =, 1.4 m t L X71 I. 'afros ma .., A Z s ,. j /j • E �NI �• _ = r l ..-ctili" -g 411/ 1-. / • t 0 #•a 1. IP-e—WI / 4 . .I rt S j e • L cE P . ,. t W. / t = tc /IY €it�.J yL [ [• �P �� 3 N. :�:�LU�3i�k iE. 3.04-441— w 1 •.ww. Niiiiii Me 71 1 ,1 gel tr i Ith:: i • I: ri \ C\ • • Si:F i _ CF F ROAD ;'�? _it} a _ CLIFF IgAD / I T 132fh `g ti: I . •222 ISM{/' i ;r ::c::±j7 /// 11ItN • ii: ; ■.i 1S i� / :l�t y� r LE .....'..74:-.. 1.:_-J-_.il-.. / -s--.7/ / / i il/i ref gill 8 t S Ar'`--y �� / i- M Ea ' i; t o i. 1. t1. :' .mot_ t ' '�`L`• `// / / -�3r *II ; ,-- ,Ili ' •. } --1--"1/ t, � l 1, l , /�O.,--ii ill • i ., r et-,... / 0 / s ..41'•3' fi ciL Ill.n _� S 'y ��e/ j ` i. ..."4_..............,,'4--T.?' , 1 "--.,".../ ., /• :...4th _ . it Atli' I p .. . !,i, " 77' A '0/ I 7' t .t ,'41 . IrillWs ' 111T1.14:2 Di " Isil /, /// 411ZWb. .tak I ' ff / r/I MAW. 4* 411i 1 al / / / .1 iir fic' . 4**_ 111 1 41.9111Lill • 6 ...../ E/1./ /4 illThItt/k,* 1 . ill ® p.' It i 4. • m R / $i mi, j ii . z - / / / ./P- 1. Ai cn //,///ei A4ifil\ j lima:.. 1•re . .1 : _:,,, . • /. !1 na1a 11111111••••II § 1 it Ai...........1_,...._...0„; 1 ///. f .: i / / j'e a I 4 1 A ..‘ 1! . • • • El f< La S F1 'A 4= Si • t N I a .: nag —7----- ... v. . 12i.r. ..., ...„ . . . 1 r -z - : a. 0 . i ' . i . .• -... _ -:•---•:,) '--.:,-. ---.=4;11.1.%' - i"3. --.'.. ..."' .%.:.‹....:::•■ .!,:chr,.....%"-t •.".r.-..,......., (":•Z::::;:7.:i.:77 ,Z, ..:___._ i ,rt a .i • I t! ....,-- -- -_ .___---:,,,,-- ;. .-.. ,/,... ....f,i/„..e..- --T4imi,ift-•.,....,: --7-7.-z-.4.::„.-_,-,;:J,, ti , „ '-.,: ,•,.,.,;'re,.67 i, -illti MI ftliQ , T , . • „ 1 i I il . , -- --. ,,--,-::::!, :i,:.7/1 ',7.:,:4.-II ltAvg.Ps' ve-.4..w. • '.-". VI -- , ••• • ••••., ,...s.,.,,,. f .. ..--• , • . -. * or ....• / -, .,• ::,,,,...-% ......„.4-..-, or, .:..--i •.t....„-I- -- 17:,_40,- ri. -- ..1 i- _,.‘ - . . .. ... . .:..... . .. .vi:/,,......, ...... ,/,•11(4.--.•'• -,:w.irr• iee'i--- ;---• . -,-. -.•• ,... :II: ,,,,,t.ir ,...,,, fp• / ti / . ..._ '.4 • --..::::;,......itik''.7';Ffilti,p- ---. , 40 ::::.---.: ._. .. .., ._. ,. -_ ........... , ,,, ,--- /..., , .4,,,r_f- f.—% __ .... . . ._ . . ......./ ....:,./ _."_,..„. (a).,,,,, ,,/..ritifis___,., I ,,,,-.. -- . .. „.. ....:.....,...„,„:„...?„...(0, ,,,....„.. . , ,... „. ..,.. ...„..., . - ..... 1r ,,, g 0 ,.., . ,z...-,. ,....;:. ....;,,.:..:,:.. ..„ ,v" -G_a_A ihreit,,t,44Q; i 1) r . • i .■-:...; : /::',"...:71 /.-\ ‘4-...,-- -'02.41Iii t '''.44 •syriiii : i : i. 2 :•: . . , g, I:C4 • t g Onielt ... J. A./ • .•.',.". • .•'4.:' . • A■ '''-'•--7---,..,-;;;I _ . fl! !e I 3' __L._..: !.';# I--. :::1;:y./..../..::."..1 4-.•. __ tare _ .. -rx. z ;' ----,• 4,' //,...;!.::/ii .-N'. ' low. wr- ASOF Vita40,--- 4 . . i2P.Ii 0 s'•I ■ I I:;:: C6 : -...:ii.:. .1'.:,?;,..7d. ...". ;,.• • 0 NOVX1i0eNOL. ipitgi :,/, , ! / ' •• ..4:',•: ,7:.::1/...$ -.-:: 84 1,'.ii'i -- -7' i . „.7.- ,,:•.,:‘,... 4' -' ..0‘. '...64, 4—e.--- iteS/ :1 ii g, , ., ;-,-.;.;,,/, ,....,4',../: , . •...z7,,,--.-----:',..--.63011gt .-0; - I A' ,,, :. . ..-'4:,';-i ' (?. . ' :ffaCO'I' ' . „1" - 1 1 ' ''./ :/ ill //l v -- ./ „' ::".../-,:!i -' '' i -‘4),W.". - I. ej 'M'' I :i 0 Z Temp '. , 1- _,... 46.-,4■ .60 • ' - * i I il 1 0 -' •. 'N 1.1./. 0, • ,t ;.\,,,.- 7..---0...v.-... ,44, , . , Ees ' ' :I; I i A LI/ •r: i;fit,,0•---:44:0,4 le,' ce#'4:,,i i,.f. .1-'1- .1..._-.. ..4,.,i • --. .rf-3-7. A_ _Alik --. ' • :'' %;:.(,•;;;;./6;/:-:.4'44tAsy . * 44) (#14,11ral iffill- 'N,....4, z 1;7,,,•••1/4".6V,V,": .44.- e4-...-.....-----‘6. ,-....e....7.: - -4 N ilk‘ 1 12440937 rely- 0 m n, E *,..3 2 I'," •., 4' 4 0 . ,,.7,f!", t ,...:.,.4„,■• . ‘.We)... iiej._..:.-:kJ; , 4>.IS,zik _ e ,,,e...f...?;;,, /,',,,•,:,.t.. , `kg; frig , wo ••( ::::•.--::,5,,:,,,r....:,.;,,,,,--,,,,,,„-:- .. ,..,..,!..i.,-. ‘9-KA,(6449-ivilkim.okuR , ASP IW"'7 a4r4m4s, W--.1.-- IVILO L.' Zigo •. v :„ /,,,,,,..4.-r .,',.....-.... ,,,24,.... -1,-...-k 23 p .i'a',i ' ,.../y',-.41:,le--".."...' S.-4- .V&.` 'Px.4\10k, ‘a bi, is • - 2 rg • k,,:".;,,';''/:,./;-1 e" / ( '.. %. .1.-N.•*kV>A. . .•• ---- a /IN --,.: ' . :. ,., ...'‘..v' -- - -'..".t::r--- v 1 _• qv,* ---.1-'1' 0411, : p-.0 g 114f,•,,,, ,,,,/, , % : : .-, „..,:. *.4t.. •• titiguli \.4.1 -clod :az Le* .--- r-,r- :. 471,•::.:-.7/:;:'?;!." -. . \ -:1.:.:.:=.- , ....•:%A.--It•te wet-1-7 . •7;10„, .-4- -- ;.=• -- ./..---: ... s., ,,,...„..., .„ :- 2+ 47,1,/,'',///,'..i.V.."`:;- .'.%';f : I •:1 '43, ,a01.„„ ,,,p4,4 ir......-.., .. '_,•g:4,,:,' , .- .:?,r ••" Z ( ..54,---.,,,•:-.. -ar-'•'s - -aeskw.---1-474-11:40 It[7- 1 .; ,..,......,... .r, ,'-',0;:',:--/ - — -4 i4.-..;..!.-: :::-; .- -,,.::!----- ----------z.-:-..----4,Fri5 r „4,4;.i Y./ ik(P5107.--- - cs.,,i r..13,—,,,, lc, , i'1,1 :y...,.; .,..., _....u.kL, 1/4,5.......473.Aar', / " .i4:,"---%; - /4•".• .." '-i';: . 1111.71;:::Pt,..,;;.: :.i (11,31 Mr4r4-a--ki- \ce2 %, fi 1 :-1'.."' ";.'4::::.. ".: :1.x_il.... .•::,.. 1 . .,..:i, -..Srp. iioilo---.74:-;; 7 -"" \ ., ...,....,:::.. .........,.._, -- .;; 1A` ....wehr . a 1:::„;;:::::::;....::::::.:-.....15;iF-___ :::: ::zth-,.....:---:::-...i.:::::::::-_p_a___::-..--;:.-.,:.,-:!::1.7itt,...:.::::::: ::.5.J: 2:,;1.. .diezr,7.:.(..::;:i,.„:".__._r4.:"..i......7...:-.;::..::::,........i....,:c.. 1 r i i ; 1 • n . ...• .. i I , 1 1 • • . . • . • r3 \ • 0 _. i :_•,..... ...1) fp, 7, So I- r I------------T-. —77-- ,. ■ • l• ? . • r i !o ' Ilt Fr f 11. r qf : t- 0 ;..4 [ .1 It '1 3,.! li,.r. . i141,, .ri.--,1;,,, .1. 1 ,,..— :co V. ;.i =, 'I! .. ;,) i =: '0,..'r,sf-,,, =.:1 = m 11.•I,'. • 11-a I.!. .... .., I . .11 ; I! ,f! N; 17..!...4.4'10 . 74•.:!rt' .: :4: •▪• 71 •Z I 1_ C) 11 i i C iii-1 g 1 li 41I01 Eil!;; • i ••• Lt. . , F.r..1.1111t. r Z - .-■..■...114...- liri 1 1 fit!-E42.) FIV4';i1 igtfl . ": g'.1 I t ?-:: -i,.1) i Ig 0 ? 0 '-‘,1, . TitiE '; ; ii'',T ',1, 1 \\11.t. .4.iittili :trill i i il rn Ali -1 S = ttft 1 i n 1-1 :k1.1.\ .11 11;1 1 ; 0 1!--.II 1, r ), t.,. , ;lit 1 •14 ti , ::_.1C, i z lite iw• 1.tits 1St iF-17 '1' $ F f!: == I: r,-. ■ pr. TEE ..„1., I • : ill 1 01 10; I: li ili !NI i ----. ..„.........- rtl 5 1 FE ' t I 1 : 1 !rt I' a = • 'Of Tiqt f t il Vi I 1 . .- hI ' ' .- • e I 1 T i 1 ■■ . . . - i i• : ill J • 1 t il: : Lii 1 1 \ r:. : ' •.1 on....L1.1 •Zi I .< CP ; 'Ak`A■'..: T''' , " A • i..7. • m ,•,11:•4;,4',:: i '1 O c Z V6( rn 0 '2 m ZE111.= . 320o . X;-''• F., r pi, 9 ll Cl .F 2 . In > c= m ; - r -; 1 -0M F ..) N F i 1 IiI.;.4t e ; ''. -• 0...,4. e • / 41:17:11/1. t I , It Ir■-4 I I ; , , , , T. f 1 1 i == ' '-f .17, q 0 !; !1 :=, 1 ':- 7t'' l':- :I, t' 6:q Oz1.1 tf.:E 111!1 HIV 1 i ft q 1 ..,r ,; ii .: : rl ilili t;i0 izit !0:1- t:Tr 'VI Z ' -T- ; ': !i P.. liij' illi!. Ira kt;!: 2 4ills 5 f,,\ ‘‘ : II :*.ii .i•f.. i ;rt0 j;' • 1 . :: k E - I; ;! EZil 2 = : 1 :!== tt ,, .? 1 ?, . ,t ?: ,:'" r 2; :, : t F7 '.; —VI ; i ' t • :1- te ;•-•::5 1•01 !•-tn Lk!. .7..4. V.- 1-\_ "' - =Ili- • : 2 ..- , 6 , II !I▪ ret 4:16 '6', It': '-i.! • • 8 • E 1 ' 0 F'T1 . " :11 t , E . - ttril tFt ' 1 51, Fli si,• .11: S: • 4.1 ZIA 1 • .' ;. . \,P 2..... —. CLIFF ROAD r) / / / \ I. 1 1-1 . 0 i / N. -/ / , - • A _ i ,rn / .,.4-_ , _ e 1 _ .. ----L�/ --t ` -1---- '1 f -• _ / / _- • \ \ i -----1 Z / , , % :y, ,. \ .a' .. • --•-.• / ,,'�G M / \ .- \ 1. 0 -• cr 4 Zima / 4 NYS\ \ :...-----t H 'o / /4 .Y or 1 / /*,/ I ' . • (1) . . i ■ L.44 7 /I . - 4.- . ;.L.,::;,i i . -,.. --K3,..„- --<- ' I T i ./ --1 I I � ;I■/ >' .4: ' .. f ' ' \ -'. -- - - : -_ _ i 1 / /26t° .. Ab- — --\ \ I ---1 . I .1 8 ' A- • i : ! I mg Li / / _ t 1 I 1 I . . 1 • .1 . . . . .,i / 1 1 I . \ r 7 — ' "1 -1i/ / I / - - . III / / 1 I a s a l l ‹. / il 1.../ , GUN 4 I ! 3 i \ \ 01.1111D _E o \ w o4'• ti r =a OJJ pN • \ \ Mi 0 J` . • \\\ • if is . \ \‘ \ \\ ,.k. -- ,._,- ,, , 1 o: !N ♦ \ 1 \ \ , \ice` , • :• 25` \ \\\:\:. S / 0„‘ „ :, ... \ \ \ Q. 4ePt#s'. - ./:. \\ke• \ : • \ \ ‘ N1‘. , „40)....° \,, .. , :\yirit.\ ■ 41.7c1%., \ . ,.:, ti •:,.. ss \‘ ,.....{ s•""..... .\\‘`. __. ' '\. ‘ 1* ,,, %.1' \lib. -. b ‘ \ \ ‘:',...„ 4.,44,0it .,. Nt. \\. ._ ��u� CIO,\ `� `\'' %.• -,`�o ,; • V4,(..„.,V • fit ,,,,.; \ .,„,,,, \ 7s, - ......----- ---'----------------' ---•SO' : • , -S i CA •• :::,„ '%• • S S t F t _• D t I I r I rf.: o , Z• 23 . s • • ••••- .0•>" I , , c▪ •• , • • // (�� /i c / • S • /y I l M d • °Y i/ : ii :I I 1 s I. 'i / O 9 T O till 1En 5 r • CS 1 S )51 = i 8 V I i g . • . • 1-7.70 _,n ID 0 •• • •..wen VON NOM i: : ...•.1 [....4•41.1;4+.:T...01.% 777 •••••..v.•.....• ...*:c`••• :•:•:::::. ::::::::.;Z:::;::::::. 1"4 g 1 gi to : X. ,''' i 'L ..:N1:::::* ::%:!...-• ::.:".4: :-...5:::: ??,:.:::...:;:::: 0 1-z it I If m : :.I '• -v---T-.--/- -r* --if )4 -- „ / ' / .:4., :ridi.../:. .t.....s.......:. .'-‘1.1 4--—I --11v" 'Z -1 , / .::::...... .:::::::::::.'...::: ::40114. ::::.:lEs. i i i I ! t � rsh - / • � . / s .,i•:; .:•:•.,5::::.- t"! , / , .............:•▪... •••• ••:•.K.•••••••• I `.'r r--tee • ... f ••. ;;:1 1 1 ',/ .......1; il i:...:::::::::1::::::::i::::::._:::::.!..i.......::::::.::,::::::• :".!......1.,:.;;.::::...::::.!::::..:.::;:..;:i...,:::.;:!••••••::::::.....iii..,;,....,:::.::..lit:i......0 1111161 ski !;{ ; !i iri /// i 7 ` : ::::':•:: ::••::.:.:.::.•. :; :• :e?j'-f r :fri a �•' i '. •Y�':•'•:.;:::•:'.. '.;' • . •:':v, ::• . • .;• .•;;;•....,` : 3 `t %::14:,::. :; ;:• . •: ::•::• =• t ; I ! t1i .t i r a I- i i v a " i / .'rojRv;, • ' v.. 0 ..�rl •tit°� III ii .�/ .•1`. ' ' 1. Win{ : .'i :;• ."4"... .'... ....:::::.• ...);••••••••.,:...........?....• ...::%%7..............▪ ::::▪:Lat . // i •:•: .• • •..... ..--.........". •:.::::4t ...if:0 WI igEt . In T /./ •:::*:•••••:-.:7:::::• *•4'...-.;::!•:::•.•:'..•: ..... ,. ....if.. -.••• .. • :fix ' ? : , ...... .... SW F ; / ..::::::::%;:s:::.)::::Tx.:.::::. :::::.:.:... :.1....:.: ....40-:::. :::::....0. , b,,....i?:....::.:..:.:....: .:: .....;....:......:::.::.:::...: // ••••••••••:•:".::::::•:::::••.•:•. •••••••••••.:::::::::::::. .... .::::.(:::::,:::. .......*••• *.•,,:. /•:•• •1:::•%.*•::•• Ch •:`.A / II.:.::,:.:::::::::::::i.:::*.fiz.,::.:::::::::::.t a somii •-1:..::::. •••• ...--•: "-- .. ..• ..:f.::;:::::::: ni:::::: ..;:11/4: %•:::•... owe ili HID 1 -I i -III \SJ,--43;,. 7, 11 " LI P f 111 1151; ' h I It r.w 1%.3'' ,i -"j . N 41111 1 ;"•3 �� j !! MI i Mil , ' .. liktvi.:;: 441 _1 .. -1 15 i„,, ...„ ,H1 R11141k , 0 4 S. 1 i 1 +- :y JP-26.3 29.1 1 1I 1 ,.l i1.��s,.. -11..5.-1 - j`' -f 800.0 -26.2 -i i \ , ,," 36..8/8.0. -iI=1817.0 ` % 1 .. `,__ ++- J 896.71 -\..._ 8000 -. it • '-'822.0 _ 1902.5 18/8.0i4� !�i lir- 952.0 27? . :vJP=69.1 1 JP=2T,t Jr•c,,.?,�r .., ;6''f h '' I «�.'. \ \ �` N 954.0 I 1 19/2.01~ ) _1Ci��lr.,_,li ■ A,•rnTi h•sJ�-2611 , .2 959.51 i a1 0 . • i 1 i _ 1----.1 832.0 52'1 r�,1• JP-2p8 ;j.;9144f. I.,114i1}11711 4�.; , � JP-66 862.0 L� O.fl �1'%- 966:0 wR*aa ;� �'••.. I :,•,r 824.1 4�rrra-> �►' ;nr, 826.0 877.0 / 'T i ar--- • -•i i , ,1 ;.::• �Li'=32.1'.f-._��__ --s--7-, '2i" . V', .958.8 _� =,1 ---+ ., f+ :964•0 ;rt?l•,. JP-50 -�.L'• 77.' . L'P 32f ti.j. I ri-;'� ;,- "41.14. '� 964.0 ' ;,a• „T fir, r. �. .1 ' LP-61.1 -1484 1 - 4i+0100-+.r' �: j 69.1 ., 900.0 I , /771; i;14.t- r .6 LF 806.0 ," r r' P-4,8- i + 7.0 .- T� •.r� �•p 7 lM C 16.2 12 1 891.3 LP-894.0/:88 ,4\ rAa, �'1 5:'!4'arc x/8.0 I� •�. ' 9 / '687.0- qtr, :1• .;r/7.1_77 .4,r,.,,....„„.14.1.7"'t \." •-,CP-691...... ,... ..L n.”,93.0 . t �4 rGH^ , ..;, !.-.410--,1 �� 893.0 LP7 6 l• r< :lP. 64 t1r.. 8897.._•.•',1 IS} i�"'�89a:�`4��1"'�'" „.I `2• 2• 7: 41"111116\11.1 .\ LP-37 s'M a�'(t = ��'�Ry` \90,1:-.7, -4 ` 679.6 - .,) n Jq',; LP-67 LP•33- } f._I:f 910.0•`{ ' 918.5 88/.0 .- 886.3 ,•�1 %.1546501.'' 1 i;, 1 - 3081p -30 924.0 LP-3: .Lp.-35 -87 °x:990.0 1� A . L �49 y�. 910 6 08.3 L 870 5' 8 V kvtfajr it 4 l 864.5, '880.0 '89 53a,'•1.i:\ ,- •41j1.g' -92/.0+��t P- 9 - 1 '/3.0 ,�, h�. �i _ ,�;,�. _ �-%,l X12 l �_ - L 5 v\\- 1 4 �., 8r,- r- 0 P-4 ti -38 k•. ,�! I - .5 '8.5 0://, s-' \i it• 410P -- ---- 1 _r---7 9a. '- 9�O.z "r �� 4 a `9P .0 922.5 LP-21 LP-24 12• 1 a 902.5 „I 883.2 903.0 886.0 _ 1 °; „ I , if ik 7 :1' . "."-.1 1 1.-1-7.- ( 0 _,, LP-19 : -N1 1.1,,1 r:N-- ' I__ 900.2 111 ',•. :I'8 903.0 ]7� r ..-1,T_ 1. 4,', 8. ^y 901.-02 --l A- --�_f kr '904.0 / 12 i ��5 3 `j 930.0 i LP-66 \, • LP-17 �) I T 928.7 J J -� -I _--��: r93/.0 ■ FIGURE No. 17 . STORM SEWER LAYOUT' MA ! - • • CITY OF . . • 0 EAGAN , ) 36 • January 21 , 1992 To: Eagan City Council , Advisory Planning Commission, and Parks and Recreation Department Subject: Weston Hills Addition/Lyman Development located east of Highway 3 and south of Cliff Road in the east half of Section 36 Dear Members, As Eagan residents living near the proposed Lyman Development we would like to point out our basic concerns. We believe the following points contain important information that you must take into account as you review this development. Please consider the following information before making your recommendation/decision. 1 . Impact to the existing pond on the southwest corner of the development. - The existing pond maintains its water level solely from Spring melt down and runoff from a large portion of the Behr property. The preliminary plan for the development shows that the developer will direct all surface runoff water to a proposed pond on the north side of the development . As a result, the south pond will dry up. This will cause: * a disruption of present wildlife which includes Canada Geese, mallard ducks, woodducks, egrets, pileated woodpeckers, bobwhites, phr_.:sants, deer, raccoons, muskrats, fox, opossums, ermine and many others; * the death of the oak .trees adjacent to the pond because their shallow root systems will not be able to withstand the stress brought on by the lack of water. This is evidenced by dead oak trees on the east side of the pond which died as the water level receded; * the devaluation of our property values because of the damage to the wetland/pond areas, the wildlife and the scenery which is critical to the quality of life in our rural area and affects our property values. 2. Substantial increase of traffic for the Cliff Road/Highway 3 intersection and a hazardous outlet on to Cliff Road. - The current volume of traffic at the Cliff Road/Highway 3 intersection already creates a dangerous situation, especially at rush • hour. The development on the west side of Highway 3 has already complicated the traffic at this intersection, but the proposed development will contribute much more traffic congestion , as the vast majority of the residents will exit the development and head west, •• directly into the already congested intersection. - The installation of traffic lights may help the problem but the lights would also disrupt the flow of traffic on Highway 3, complicate the railroad crossing, and create a stacking problem as residents exit the development. - The railroad crossing creates a hazard for this intersection with the current levels of traffic. The hazard will be significantly • greater with the increase of traffic from the proposed development. Especially since the outlet onto Cliff Road is the primary and perhaps V51 only outlet that will be used. This may also have adverse effects on. emergency vehicles. - The Cliff Road outlet itself will be peculiar and perhaps unsafe • because of the very great difference in elevation between Cliff Road and the land the proposed development would occupy. 3. Proposed road designs for future connections and development including traffic flow into and out of the proposed development. - the Weston Hills Drive stub street connection for "future" connection to Gun Club Road jeopardizes the southern property owners and threatens them with increased assessments, property taxes, possible property condemnation and destruction of nearly 2500 evergreen trees . • - stubs leading into Inver Grove Heights may not be usable because the zoning there does not provide for dense, urban type development. Plans to use these stubs may be unrealistic. 4. Increased traffic on Farm Road will require additional road maintenance. Currently road maintenance is provided by the adjacent property owners. Who will maintain this road when the traffic on it increases as the number of residents in the area increase? 3. The developer has not taken into account the surrounding zoning of Inver Grove Heights. There are no "transitional" lots, only small lots adjacent to 2.5 acre lots. Inver Grove Heights has been unilling to change their zoning to accommodate previous high density developments and is not proposing to do so at this time. 6. Unsupervised children playing near the railroad tracks possess AIL a potential safety hazard usually found in industrial and inner city areas. 7. Increases in assessments and taxes may cause some of us to be unable to stay on our property. Why should we have to pay this price? We didn' t choose to live in an urban development. S. We don't consent to having our privacy infringed upon by the people who will walk around our properties, ponds, and wetlands believing it to be part of a nature preserve, park, or open recreational area. 9. We are uncomfortable with the increase in crime and vandalism that canes with high density developments. If you would like further information regarding our concerns please call me. - I am the spokesperson for our group of concerned residents. Sincere Michael J. rattalone 657-153S days 452-7740 nights • 7 • To: The City of Eagan Planning Commission From: Residents of Inver Grove Heights living near the proposed Weston Hills development January 21 , 1992 We are opposed to any development in southwestern Inver Grove Heights that would result in a density greater than the currently zoned and , planned 2 1 /2 acres per lot. If the developers of Weston Hills are considering a continuation of their development into Inver Grove Heights in order to improve the economic feasibility of their development, they will need to reconsider their plan. Inver Grove Heights has • . hi ;toriculiy and is currently opposed to any such development in this part of the City. The residents are adamantly opposed to such development and support the Mayor and council in their efforts to maintain orderly development in this section .of the City. Those of us who live in the surrounding areas have no intention of allowing a development allowing densities greater than 2 1/2 acres per lot and/or sewer and water assessments to be placed in this area. The developers may wish to save themselves some time and effort by checking into the success of previous developers in this area that attempted to develop at densities greater than 2 1/2 acres per lot. "k1115- Sincerely, c\ Inver Grove Heights residents 0' (D living near the proposed Weston Hills development • cc: Lyman Lumber Company \ 31 • WESTON BILLS ADDITION LYMAB DEVELOPMENT Chairman Graves opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding a Rezoning of approximately 64 AG (Agricultural) acres to an R-1 (Single Family) district and a Preliminary Plat consisting of 132 lots located east of Highway 3, south of Cliff Road in the east 1/2 of Section 36. City Planner Sturm stated that this application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. He further stated that at a recent neighborhood meeting several concerns were raised including: utilities, stub to Inver Grove Heights, and traffic problems. Mr. Sturm requested that condition i11 be added to require the applicant to obtain from the City a variance allowing a cul-de-sac in excess of • 500 feet. He also requested that condition #12 be added which states that all wells and septic tanks on site shall met City specifications. Mike Gars, a representative of Lyman Lumber, summarized the application. Mr. Care stated that they agree to all the conditions plus request that condition #13 be added that requires them to accommodate the intersection at Weston Hills Drive and Weston Hills Court per the SEH report. kc SAN 29 '92 15:05 195 P06 • Page 5/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 28, 1992 Michael Frattalone, 4784 South Robert Trail, stated that his main concern was that the existing pond will dry up because of the new proposed pond. This will effect wildlife and the value of his home. He is very opposed to this application. Debbie Fitch, 4790 South Robert Trail, mentioned that one of her concerns was the Cliff Road - Highway 3 intersection. The traffic is already bad there and more residences in the area will not help the situation. This intersection has 1/3 of all traffic fatalities in the City. Bill Loomis, a resident of Eagan, stated that the density for this particular area is too high. He would like the density to match the Inver Grove Heights side of the road. Gene Fitch, 4790 South Robert Trail, mentioned that he is concerned about the possibility of losing the existing pond. Earl Moroski, a resident of Eagan, stated that he opposes this application. Wayne Mullin, 4786 South Robert Trail, felt that the proposed development does not conform to what Inver Grove Heights is doing. He further felt that the Cliff Road - Highway 3 intersection is bad. Deb Asselamus, an Inver Grove Heights resident, stated that her - main concern was having a high density development located next to a low density area (2/5 acre lots) . She felt that high density areas should stop west of Highway 3 and east of Highway 3 should be rural. A representative of SEH (the City's consulting engineers) stated that the proposed development will generate 1,300 trips per day and that this number is not unusual. He predicts that in 3 - 5 years MnDot will construct a stop light at that intersection. Mr. Gare mentioned that the existing pond will not dry up. They can drain the water to the newly-created pond and then run it to the existing pond. The water will be cleaner then also. Commission Member Voracek stated that the intersection needs immediate traffic signals erected now, not 3 - 5 years from now. He disagrees with the SEH report. Mr. Gare stated that the 2.2 density that they are requesting is within the limits and that they can not economically justify lowering. the density. 411 \L4 JAN 29 '92 15:05 195 P07 Page 6/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 28, 1992 Commission Member Voracek requested that condition #14 be added to make the proposed 6 outlots part of the parcel to the north or to the south. Commission Member Markley recommended that City staff review the possibility of making the area in the southeast portion of the development a park. Commission Member Voracek requested that condition #5 be amended to read, ". . . Block 1 shall have driver access to the north." Commission Member Markley requested that condition #15 be added to require the developer to dedicate a 30 foot drainage and utility easements centered on the common lot line of Lots 32 and 33, Block 1; Lots 8 and 9, Block 4; and Lots 22 and 23, Block 4 and that these. lots be widened to accommodate these larger easements. He further requested that condition #8 be amended require a skimmer instead of a shut-off value. Commission Member Griggs requested that condition #8 be amended to read, ". . . shall be designed and constructed such that . . . and a flow out of 4 cfs. , with effective erosion control measures throughout construction." Griggs felt that there were many gray areas with this application and that he could not support it. Commission Member Hoeft complemented Lyman Lumber on their proposal, however, he was concerned about a high density area next to a low density area, traffic problems, and a lack of coordination with Inver Grove Heights. He can not support this. Paul Bare stated that he is the landowner of this property and he is selling because of assessments. He tried to keep this piece of land natural as long as possible, however, he is forced to sell. He felt that Lyman Lumber did an excellent job with the proposal. Markley moved, Voraoek seconded, the motion to approve a Rezoning of 64 AG (Agricultural) acres to an R-1 (Single Family) district. Markley, Voracek, Graves, Miller voted for; Hoeft, Gorman, Griggs voted against. Approved 4-3. Markley moved, Miller seconded, the motion to approve a Preliminary Plat consisting of 132 lots located east of Highway 3, south of Cliff Road in the east 1/2 of Section 36, subject to the following conditions: JAN 29 '92 15:06 195 1:08 Page 7/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 28, 1992 1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on July 10, 1990 shall be complied with: Al, 81, B2, 83, B4, Cl, C2, C3, C5, D1, El, F1, Cl, H1 2. Boulevard trees shall be allowed seven feet from the back of the curb. 3. Snow fencing shall be installed around the oak trees located near the pond to ensure tree preservation during grading and construction. The snow fence will be inspected prior to the grading permit being issued. 4. Lot 10, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 5 shall have driveway access from Weston Hills Drive. 5. Lot 1, Block 6 and Lot 48, Block 1 shall have driver access to the north. 6. Lot 1, Block 1 shall have driveway access from Weston Hills Court (cul-de-sac) . 7. Berming shall be located along Trunk Highway 3. 8. Pond LP-27.1 shall be designed and constructed such that to accommodate a surface area at the NWL of 1.05 acres, a wet storage volume of 5.2 acre feet and a pond storage volume of 8.3 acre feet and a flow out of 4 cfs. , with effective erosion control measures throughout construction. A skimmer shall be used instead of a shut-off valve. 9. The watermain layout for this site shall include a connection to the 12" watermein at Todd Avenue and S.T.H. #3 and a connection to the 8" watermain 350 feet south of Cliff Road at S.T.H. #3. 10. The watermain layout that loops through the south portion of the site shall include a 12" trunk watermain from the Todd Avenue connection to the south property line at the Western Hills Drive stub street. 11. The applicant shall obtain from the City a variance to allow a cul-de-sac in excess of 500 feet. • 3 JAN 29 '92 15:07 195 P09 Page 8/EA CAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 410 JANUARY 28, 1992 12. All wells and septic tanks on the site shall be capped to City specifications. 13. Accommodate intersection at Weston Sills Drive and Weston Bills Court per SEH report. 14. The proposed 6 outlots shall be made a part of the parcels. to either the north or south. 15. The applicant shall dedicate a 30 foot drainage and utility easements centered on the common lot line of Lots 32 and 33, Block 1; Lots 8 and 9, Block 4; and Lots 22 and 23, Block 4, and to widen these lots to accommodate these larger easements. Markley, Killer, Graves voted for; Hoeft, Gorman, Griggs, Voracek voted against. Denied 4-3. Commission Member Voracek stated that he voted for the Rezoning, but against the Preliminary Plat because he felt that a development would be developed on this site in the future, however, this is not the right development at this time. Be shared the same concerns as the neighbors regarding traffic issues. Be felt that more information was needed and specific issues needed to be worked out with MnDot 411 regarding the traffic signal. S \ 44 • JPN 06 '92 10:03PM INNER GROVE POLICE P.2/2 • CITY COUNCIL Of INVER =VI !ZIGNTS - =CUM 13, 1441 • PAGE 10 Council discussed the proposal for a preliminary plat entitled DIRECTION IN VISION Seaton gills located adjacent to the Inver Grove Neights/ratan HILL FLAT IN SAGAN border, south of 110th Street (Cliff load) and east of T.N. 3. It vas the consensus of the Council to direct staff to provide assistance in planning for future urban development, specifically for the provision of utilities and streets, in the western portion of the City contained in the Zapan sever district. • i - S \L( Agenda Information Memo February 4, 1991 City Council Meeting • AMENDMENT/FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS G. Ordinance Amendment,City of Eagan,to the City Code,Chapter 11 (Zoning) Regarding Flood Plain Regulations--Community Development Department staff recently completed revisions of the City's flood plain regulations as contained within City Code Chapter 11. A copy of the amended code s ctions is enclosed on pages //7through�for your review. Also enclosed on page is a copy of the Advisory Planning Commission minutes in this regard, the APC is recommending approval of this item. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny an ordinance amending Eagan City Code Chapter 11 regarding flood plain regulations as presented. S l CITY OF EAGAN • 10/09/91 - FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS • i PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CITY ZONING ORDINANCE/ -� CHAPTER 11 f SECTION 11.03 Definitions shall be amended by adding the following definitions: Regional Flood: A flood which is representative of large floods known to have occurred generally in Minnesota and reasonably characteristic of what can be expected to occur on an average frequency in the magnitude of the 100 year recurrence interval. Regional Flood is synonymous with 100 year flood plain and with the term "base flood" used in the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Basement: Means any area of a structure, including crawl spaces, having its floor or base sub-grade (below ground level) on all four sides,regardless of the depth of excavation below ground level. Flood: A temporary rise in stream flow or stage that results in inundation of the areas adjacent to the channel. Flood Frequency: The average frequency, statistically determined, for which it is expected that a specific flood stage or discharge may be equalled or exceeded. • Flood Fringe: That portion of the flood plain outside of the floodway and which has been or hereafter may be covered by the regional flood. Flood Plain: The channel or beds proper and the areas adjoining a wetland, lake or watercourse which have been or hereafter may be covered by the regional flood. Flood Plain areas within the City shall encompass all areas designated as Zone A on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Proofing: A combination of structural provisions, changes or adjustments to properties and structures subject to flooding primarily for the reduction or elimination of flood damages. Floodway:. The channel of the watercourse and those portions of the adjoining flood plains which are reasonably required to carry and discharge the regional flood. • 2 • 1 • SECTION 11.03 Definitions shall be amended by replacing the definition 68 "Structure" with the following: • Structure: Anything constructed or erected on the ground or attached to the ground or on- site utilities, including, but not limited to, buildings, factories, sheds, detached garages, • cabins, manufactured homes, and other similar items including travel trailers/vehicles not meeting the exemption criteria specified in Section 11.80 Subd. 8 of this Ordinance. SECTION 11.10 General Provisions shall be amended by adding Subdivision 3E as follows: E. In the Flood Plain District, a structure or the use of a structure or premises which was lawful before the passage or amendment of this Ordinance but which is not in conformity with the provisions of this Ordinance may be continued subject to the following conditions: (1) No such use shall be expanded, changed, enlarged, or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity. (2) An alteration within the inside dimensions of a nonconforming use or structure is permissible provided it will not result in increasing the flood damage potential of that use or structure. (3) The cost of all structural alterations or additions both •ofl�e svucoturse shall 440 a structure to any nonconforming structure value of the structure unless the not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the conditions of this Section are satisfied. The cost of all structural alterations and additions constructed since the adoption of the City's initial flood plain controls shall be calculated into today's current cost which shall include all costs such as construction materials ntanoosa of all reasonable eviousst and proposed manpower or labor. If the current P alterations and additions exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the current market value of the structure, then the structure shall meet the standards of Section 11.80 Subd. 4 of this Ordinance for new structures. (4) If any nonconforming use of a structure or land or nonconforming structure is degraded or destroyed by any means, including floods, to an extent of fifty percent (50%) or more of its market value at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this Ordinance. The City Council may issue a conditional use permit for reconstruction if the use is located outside the floodway and,upon reconstruc- tion, is adequately elevated on fill in conformity with the provisions of this Ordinance. 3 \ 412 SECTION 11.40 Administration and Enforcement Subdivision 5 Amendments shall be • • amended by adding the following: • H. flood Plain Zoning District All amendments to this Ordinance affecting the Flood Plain Zoning District, including revisions to the Official Flood Plain Zoning District Map, shall be submitted to and approved by the Commissioner of Natural Resources prior to adoption. The flood plain designation on the Official Flood Plain Zoning District Map shall not be removed unless the area is filled to an elevation at or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation and is contiguous to lands outside of the flood .• plain. Changes in the Official Zoning Map shall meet the Federal Emergency Management Agency's(FEMA)Technical Conditions and Criteria and shall receive prior FEM.A approval before adoption. The Commissioner of Natural Resources shall be given ten (10) days written notice of all hearings to consider any given amendment including variances to this Ordinance and said notice shall include a draft of the Ordinance Amendment or technical study under consideration. SECTION 13.20 General Provisions of the "Subdivision Regulation" Ordinance shall be amended by adding the following: Subdivision 18 110 With the approval of a preliminary plat the City shall review the plat to insure that each lot or parcel contains sufficient area outside of the flood plain for structures, sewage systems and related activities. • • • 4 \L4 SECTION 11.80 FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS shall be entirely amended to read as follows: SECTION 11.80 FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS. • Subd. 1. Finding of Facts and Purposes. A. A portion of the lands within the regulating jurisdiction of the City is subject to recurrent flooding by overflow of rivers and other'watercourses� causing ,e life and property, disruption of commerce and g interruption of transportation and communications, allandwhich of residents the Council to be detrimental to the health, safety, property the City. purpose of this Section to promote the public health, safety, and general B. It is the pure welfare by minimizing the losses described in Subparagrap h A above. C. Statutory Authorization: The Legislature of the State of Minnesota has, in Minnesota Statutes Chapters 104 and 394, delegated the oloss local units to adopt regulations designed Minnesota Statute Chapter 104 further stipulates t�n eligibility communities w the National Flood.. recurrent flooding must participate and main gl tY Insurance program. A purpose of this Section is to maintain the City's eligibility D. Statement of Purflose: P rp potential losses due to in the National Flood Insurance Program and to minimize po hazards, periodic flooding including loss of life, loss of property, health and safety h zard , disruption of commerce and governmental services,extraordinary public neral expenditures welfare. • base, all of which adversely affect the public health, safety general E. Disclaimer of t iability This ordinance Section does not imply that areas W� outside of the flood plain district or land uses permitted within on shall districts o ��te .. free from flooding and flood damages. This Or liability on the part of the City or any officer or employee thereof a dec�sflood Ce damages that result from reliance on this Ordinance any administrativ lawfully made thereunder. Subd. 2. Definition. The following terms, as used in this Section, shall have the meanings stated: • M . point not less than one foot above the 1. «Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation“the regional� flood plus any increases in the water surface profile associated 5 S 5 • flood heights attributable to encroachments on the flood plain. It is the elevation to which uses regulated by this Section are required to be elevated or flood proofed. Subd. 3. General Provisions. A. *Adoption of Flood Insurance Rate Maps:, The Flood Insurance Rate Maps for the City of Eagan, Minnesota dated August 11, 1978 developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency is hereby adopted by reference as the Official Flood Plain zoning District Map and made a part of this Ordinance (Ref: Flood Zone C 270103001B and 270103002B). B. Lands to Which Flood Plain Regulations Apply: Ordinance Regulations in this Section shall apply to all lands designated as flood plain within the zoning jurisdiction of Eagan, Minnesota. C. Map Interpretation: The boundaries of the flood plain district shall be determined by scaling distances on the Official Flood Plain Zoning District Map. Where interpretation is needed as to the exact location of the boundaries of the Flood Plain District,the Zoning Administrator shall make the necessary interpretations based on elevations on the regional (100 year) flood profile, if available. If 100 year flood elevations are not available, the City shall: 1) require a flood plain evaluation consistent with Section 11.80 Subd. 5 of this Ordinance to determine a 100 year elevation for this site; or 2) base its decision on available hydraulic/hydrologic or site elevation survey data which demonstrates the likelihood the site is within or outside of the flood plain. D. Relationship to Other City zoning Regulations; The flood plain zoning district shall be considered an overlay zoning district to all existing land use regulations of the City. The uses permitted in Section 11.80 -Subd. 4 of this Ordinance shall be permitted only if not prohibited by any established, underlying zoning district shown in Section 11.20 of this Ordinance. The requirements of Section 11.80 shall apply in addition to other legally established regulations of the City and where the flood plain regulations contained in Section 11.80 impose greater restrictions, the provisions of the flood plain regulation shall apply. E. Compliance: No other structure or land shall hereafter be used and no structure shall be located, extended, converted, or structurally altered without full compliance with the terms of this Section. Within the Floodway and Flood Fringe areas, all uses not listed as a permitted use or a conditional use in Section 11.80 Subd. 4 shall be prohibited. In addition: (1) New manufactured homes, replacement manufactured homes and certain travel trailers and travel vehicles are subject to the general provisions of the City Zoning Ordinance and specifically Sections 11.80 Subd. 4 and Subd. 8. • 6 • • fs (2) Modifications, additions, structural alterations or repair after damage to existing nonconforming structures and nonconforming uses of structures or land are regulated by the general provisions of this Ordinance and specifically Section 11.10 Paragraph 3E of this Ordinance; and (3) As-built elevations for elevated structures must be certified by ground surveys as stated in Section 11.80 Subd. 5 of this Ordinance. F. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions:. It is not intended by this Section to repeal, abrogate,or impair any existing easements,covenants or deed restrictions. However, where this Section imposes greater restrictions the provisions of this Section shall prevail. Subd. 4. Flood Plain District (FP). A. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted uses within the Flood Plain District provided they are not prohibited by any other City Code provision: (1) Road,bridges and associated fill,subject to meeting minimum State standards set by the DNR and MNDOT. (2) Any use of land which does not involve a structure,an addition to the such outside dimensions to an existing structure or an obstruction to flood flows excavation, or storage of materials or equipment. • (3) Agricultural uses not.involving a structure such as general farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant nurseries, horticulture, viticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming, and wild crop harvesting. (4) Private and public recreational uses that do not involve a structure such as tennis courts, picnic grounds, boat launching ramps, swimming areas, parks, wildlife and nature preserves,game farms,fish hatcheries,hunting and fishing areas, hiking and horseback riding trails. (5) Residential uses such as lawns, gardens, parking areas and play areas. (6) Loading areas and parking areas. • B. Conditional Uses: The following uses shall only be permitted by conditional use permit in the Flood Plain District (F.P.) provided they are not prohibited by any other City Code provisions: (1) Storage of equipment and materials. 7 • • (2) Gravel mining and other earth material extraction operations. • (3) Clean earth fill to elevate newly constructed buildings in the flood fringe area above the 100-year elevation. (4) Clean earth fill to elevated existing buildings in the flood fringe above the 100-year flood elevation. C. Prohibited Uses: The following uses shall be strictly prohibited in the Flood Plan District (F.P.): (1) The placement of new or used building structures in the floodway, including new residences. New residential subdivisions are also prohibited in the Flood Plain (F.P.) District. (2) Travel trailer or travel vehicle parks or campgrounds shall not be permitted in the Flood Plain (F.P.) District. (3) Manufactured homes shall not be permitted in the Flood Plain(F.P.)District. D. Standard for Flood Plain Uses:. The following standards shall be met for any use in the Flood Plain (F.P.) District: (1) Storage of Material and Equipment: (a) The storage or processing of materials that are, in time of flooding, flammable, explosive, toxic or potentially injurious to human, animal, or plant life is prohibited. (b) Storage of other materials or equipment may be allowed if readily removable from the area within the time available after a flood warning. • (2) Obstructions: No uses shall be permitted or issued a Conditional Use Permit which will adversely effect the capacity of the channels or floodway of any main stream or any of its tributaries, or of any drainage ditch, or any other drainage facility or system, unless it is a flood control or conservation project approved by the DNR and the County SWCD. (3) Vehicular Access: Uses that do not have vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than two feet below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation to lands outside of the. flood plain shall not be permitted unless granted a variance by the City Council. In granting a variance,the City shall specify limitations on the period of use or occupancy of the use and only after determining that adequate flood warning time and local emergency response • 8 . 53 and recovery procedures exist. Vehicular access'to agricultural lands for purposes of working the farmland shall be exempted from these provisions. (4) Parking Lots and Public Access: Accessory land uses, such han the oad yards, public access and parking lots may be at el• evations Protection Elevation. However, a Conditional Use Permit for such facilities to be used by the employees or the general public shall not be granted in the absence of a flood warning system that provides adequate time for evacuation if the area would be inundated to a depth f greater peer second upon or be subject to flood velocity greater than four occurrence of the regional flood. (5) •n- i ew-•e - I • W W. • • h. +1 • Where public utilities O systems must be designed to are not provided: 1) On-site water supply sys prevent infiltration of flood waters into the systems; and 2) new replacement on-site sewage treatment systems must contain check valves or other devices designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems • and discharges from the systems into flood waters and they shall not be subject to impairment or contamination during times of flooding. Any sewage treatment system designed in accordance with State (Ru1e 7080) shall be standards for on-site sewage treatment systems determined to be in compliance with this Section. (6) Manufactured Homes: All existing manufactured homes ame be be Aft anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system and lateral movement. Methods of anchoring may include, but are not to be limited to, use of over-the-top of frame tied to ground anchors. This requirement is in addition to applicable state or local anchoring requirements for resisting wind forces. All utilities and transportation facilities, including railroad tracks, roads and bridges, shall be constructed in accordance with state flood plain management standards contained in Minnesota Rules 1983, Parts 61203000 to 6120.6200. Subd. S Flood Plain Evaluation Procedure i v ,ati°n: Upon receipt of an application for a Conditional g a � variance, manufactured borne park development or subdivision approval within Flood Plain District,the Zoning Administrator shall require the applicant s certified sufficient site development plans and a hydrologic/hydraulic analysis y a develop- engineer,hydrologist,or other qualified person,specifying or Flood Fringe and develop- ment and whether the proposed n Elevation located fo the site• Procedures ores consistent with the Regulatory Flood Protection 4111 Minnesota Rules 1983, Parts 61203000 (Technical Standards and Requirements for Flood Plain Evaluation) and 6120.5700 (Minimum Flood Plain Management • Standards for Local Ordinances) shall be followed during the technical evaluation • and review of the development proposal. • B. Notification to DNR:. The Zoning Administrator shall submit one copy of all information required by Section 613.4 (1) of this Ordinance to the Department of Natural Resources' Area Hydrologist for review and comment at least 10 days prior to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit, Variance or Zoning Amendment, and at least 20 days prior to the granting of a subdivision approval by the City. The Zoning Administrator shall notify the Department of Natural Resources Area Hydrologist within 10 days after a Conditional Use Permit,variance, subdivision or manufactured park development/subdivision is approved by the County. C. Certification of Lowest Floor Elevations: Lowest floor elevation shall not be permitted below the flood line. The applicant shall be required to submit certifica- tion by a registered professional engineer, registered architect, or registered land surveyor, that the finished fill and building elevations were accomplished in compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. The Zoning Administrator shall maintain a record of the elevation of the lowest floor (including basement) for all alterations or additions, to existing structures in the Flood Plain District. Subd. 6 Special Provisions for Flood Plain Variances A. For flood plain regulation purposes, a variance means a modification of a specific permitted development standard required in an official control including this Ordinance to allow an alternative development standard not stated as acceptable in the official control, but only as applied to a particular property for the purpose of alleviating a hardship, practical difficulty or unique circumstance as defined and elaborated upon in the City's zoning enabling legislation. B. The City Council may authorize upon appeal in specific cases such relief or variance from the Flood Plain Regulations as will not be contrary to the public interest and only for those circumstances such as hardship, practical difficulties or circumstances unique to the property under consideration, as provided for in the state enabling legislation for planning and zoning for Minnesota cities. In the granting of such a variance, the City Council shall clearly identify in writing the specific condition that existed consistent with the criteria specified in the enabling legislation which justified the granting of the variance. The variance shall otherwise be processed in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.40 of this Ordinance. • 10 Subd. 7 Special Provisions for Flood Plain Violations When an ordinance violation is either discovered by or brought to the A. v • attention of the Zoning Administrator,the Zoning Administrator shall investigate the situation and document the nature and extent of n the shall violation be submitted to the Depart- ment As soon as is reasonably possible, this information plan of action to correct the ment of Natural Resources along with the City p violation to the degree possible. B. Order: The Zoning Administrator shall notify the suspected party of the require- ments of this Ordinance and all other Official Controls and ut the r and extent o f the suspected violation of these controls. If the structure order the const struction or development, the City Zoning Administrator may o the atIf the immediately halted until a proper permit or approval is gran ted by construction or development is already completed, the Zoning Administrator shall either: 1) issue an order identifying the corrective actions that must be made within a specified time period to bring the use or structure into compliance t -ith the official controls; or 2) notify the responsible party to apply for an after-the-fact permit the development approval within a specified period of� be not brought into permit is not granted, the use or structure compliance. C. Final Action: If the responsible party does not appropriately i additional day the Zon g Administrator within the specified period of time, each shall constitute an additional violation of thiOrdinance upon the and of therspecified accordingly. The Zoning Administrator shall response period, notify the landowner to restore the land to the condition which existed prior to the violation of this Ordinance. • 11 11111 • /S • • MEMO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR DALE RUNKLE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: JIM STURM, CITY PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 30, 1992 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT At the January 28 Advisory Planning Commission meeting, the ordinance amendment regarding flood plain regulations was passed unanimously by the commission. There was no public comment and it was noted that there are no buildable locations in Eagan located within the flood plain district. This ordinance amendment was mandated by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the draft of this ordinance has already been approved by that agency. If you would like additional information on this item, please contact me. . <t City Planner JS/mg S S Page 13/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 28, 1992 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CITY OF EAGAN Chairman Graves opened the last public hearing of the evening regarding an amendment to the City Code, Chapter 11 (Zoning) , regarding flood plain regulations. City Planner Sturm stated that this amendment is necessary so that the City would qualify for federal flood assistance if the need ever arose. He mentioned that all buildable areas in the City are outside the flood plain district. Voraoek moved, Miller seconded, the motion to approve the amendment to the City Code, Chapter 11 (Zoning) , regarding flood plain regulations. All present voted in favor. • • 4a ' FOR BOARD USE ONLY LG214 BASE# aI9u PP# ' a FEE Minnesota Lawful Gambling CHECK Premises Permit Application - Part 1 of 2 0 ITIALS r..r r .vA(-+..rA:rn fyr}}:?•}Y' i'+ ::O' ii}fi}Kilt%:}:i::'i::::i%::::::I:':i�:�itY l:.x.-y:n0>:v::.: r..://,..i/N!+,-Y/lfiS}f:...A .N.v,.t:•:+:!-::1.. .. !..- f `: : ... n.. n.r::'i.".v•r.!': y ,,Sy !:::I:!:.:l.+J:.�i.JO.::Yr:..:r..;?:r..}.:!>... g�aall .:}'v:•}:,}:. ..... ...--.. ma:.r,.?;1..........p...v:-:4.J,.l,..:v.. .............^p+..n,r./.:f.:......,.:r..•::•.NY:. ..v X..G...n :.ay+4�.A.t>v!Yi.�ii ..!.{.:. ;;'/.4 ':' .. �- iiYii .. ............ .K.........v...................... ................ ....n :..:.r r ..:...,.....:::::{i-ii>.-..v:.3'�•.!.+!G.-�. •:.v.,{�,`� ,vY•: .'.,•::::::::::.i........... ............... .... .......... .........,. r.. ....:..... .....R......... �.. .......>}Y.ti..Y../>..N. -•+ .::+. :.tti.::::ii:2�>i.`;:i:;:i;:iCiii:;i�?-;.,•:i?i:';:-::::-,- ::f:i?,h:;}4 ::yi'r.Y.vl.::.:'!!r!!•:S!:•i%/H..i:ii:!::?Y!!!•i'f.•ii:+!!:.iii:+:yi':1.�?..y.!ii'-i:-iii:-: jiy%�iw�-,:•'.?:p".i.}iy`::!{'iir�3:wiiii.`•s✓.'f.}.. > .C..ny::.um».•:/:aK?.. a:!3.•:.,. e:>o : Iica on>«:»<:a:} �>>:.,..�{:p$r}l�?:•F!f!}N{.N!.iinMY:3h�..�..�!:u. ,Y......flF'f^> P .f APP . � ........ ...... . - . ...�..t . .. Class of premises permit ® Renewal (check one) Organization base license number e2 2 z ❑ A($400) Pull-tabs,tipboards,paddlewheels.raffles,bingo Premises permit number B($250) Pull--tabs,tipboards,paddlewheels,raffles El New ❑ C($200) Bingo only ❑ D($150) Raffles only + .M v;•K4 -... .� ,r•: Y..r..:+.':i:.i... ;�°3..,.�:! .....!. ..... ..; "•:',i N �": »x% ' +/' ioy'r:' ' �''::»: �.CfrrY-i.4G'/„ �:..:r%%�i!:t:a�'.b",�:.,C,,,�:.,,,.--:is%.:;: .! -{r�:,.nY,...:uc,..rr,:••2>,}}.:•!.•• .!.�.'Y•;ra.!fh::.YA)a< !3,!;::i'•%•...-r,..•.r.::..�.�d'i'.. ,l' f�sr .+ q..tit:%!i i ::•.:,,, :. i!'.�.:..f/i..:! • }/+?FLAK;-�.5}1 v!O'•i:.:r..:. ,af:.'r::,T.:;!,-n":.1:.> Q.'�•Iwf/��'a :.V.�if L•.M.�V/.4 + 4.:y/r.•y�:!r /.!/yY?i.v..vrp•;{!!.>.4}iiii'!.vi::%}i:.Yi::iiiC::4!{i{::?•%...Cf �y:Y•:.}.:•:'/.vx.tV!.Mfy[H.tJri:G%%!>!-.!YM.Y.!�{.:',!fp'M`Y<C�4:4w••%; ..:::' :.:.; :.... :::.t?::::.::.:..:.�:::.::::.3.z?f.r.�s�..::....:...:.;.� rr .. : .::: •.- .. �:d4.. ••.�x^'�.. ::,..... w W...r.+..::-..: .-. Name of Organization ••• AL 4-G4N A. l o/y 5 siness Address of Organization-Street or P.O Box(Do not use the address of your gambling manager) 1-/A/A o Wt'AD.4F•C/yt^Sc if)()/4/ City State Zip Code County Daytime phone number E46'AN AIN S5/23 44-.00%- (bat W '-.yv7 Name of chief executive officer(cannot be your gambling manager) Tide Daytime phone number .174 t? n, (6, ) t 4r7- 0.57 Bingo Occasions If applying for a class A or C permit. fill in days and beginning&ending hours of bingo occasions: No more than seven bingo occasions may be conducted by your organization per week. Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning/Ending Hours to to to to to to to If bingo will not be conducted,check here jar :,. .. ..,N. .;;s}" 'r'z:�; 'w'-,,,ewrsa• ;+ A .c,y ambl#]'�. Y, Jq}fiy,edit ,ArJA �r�'�q.Y{Sa' :;{;}.:4} r r ..w: : r ";�'•' r•.3'.v s%: ":tt �'remistef� �nf 1�. /,irr:.r.,..:y,.,..:;.rr.::.c•>+i�.:ti:>..;, xs }.}:.+..,F'.!•y;:r"{' �!'•: tJame of establishment where gambing will be conducted Street Address(do not use a post office box number) CEO4PcJ,4A E /3o w ?83 e3 4cl Q'� z De. ...-.•••• C.44f i74! SS/2-2— Is the premises*bated within city imits? =Yes O No Uf no,is township lj organized E71 unorganized p unincorporated ' City and County where gambling premises is located OR Township and County where gambling premises is located if outside of city imits t'4 4N 774Xo TA— Name and address of legal owner of premises City State Zp Code P.c.)?. 4 .0.4.QTrrAoSNi'/0 iwgewee J L/4%S /`70, 3372_0 Does your organization own the budding where the gambling will be coned? p YES or NO If no.attach the following: • a copy of the lease(form LG202)with terms for at least one year. • a copy of a sketch of the floor plan with dimensions.showing what portion is being leased. A lease and sketch are not required for Class D applications. r..;;>:..>}x:.w,>;.}i4•.a}:•Kax�iea»>r•:;•:,:.nwa}}'r,......y»... `�'i ..'.?!?xM.?. ...37.at.;??w3:,wox vwcy Ys`�y T�o'u:?oP""gc•< vwa:,5<.!w;.y'.?ifs};!;;ftc;•Y•::;r,.gkn�o;,+.;w :»D::'<^•.?e;'S::' ..:.....:....+....................,.::.:::?Y•::.�::•::•'.i".f;";`.',r:.:.:R,...^."".Kaon. ......,. b . ......._..:. ......�.•.�{y.•3°•°%S'� .v:.::..{•...�•::..:...........t.............:::..:..;.,. ..:....,:.......::�:.,!:•:::.,•: ,,... ...,.......,... ...................:::...,. ::,° .�..... .. ,:.,.v.,..is r..:,.:.:.-rroZ}'-.�.�'•K•.. ,.:.:•}:::•::::.:::::,.,::•::::::::::::•::::::•::.:•::•::•»a•::-:::.:.::-i:;r:{•::;-::.{ b Addr.ess.:ofsto - .es • � c�>of�_ : .. . •;:. . .. eu�W?l�Y+i�tise i3°PO#pox � Address City State Zip --• s.4•/j,E Minnesota Lawful Gambling 1 Premise Permit Application - Part 2 of 2 GwnhIzn_q`Bank Account`7n:formation . .. ..: ..... Bank Name Bank Account Number j24X 0- :4 C?o%I#Il ( ..fi, /g4/kit- It iii Zd.e' Bank Address City State Zip Code 75 0 Se "444.e 41. /'79. ' F4' ,41/7-c "PA/ ) Siz- : ... <� @� S Aid�8 Of $1( .K:�dWC1"WITak • and C f W . y%(!%4 ,Uv r :' .. .: . :a ::-.. . ... atfeieiStniiiiiiiiiei...J'lolI W/1tiR Jl7[L ... Name Address Title 6. .G`. M4-eiCa ♦3 A?4.4'f/Aiviv AANA' E 01 A/40 ill 4 E G444,A1AAtli Aof'Nt NOR/4W 2 0 1 y RAaArc-r-;Ai '. 441.4,A $ 4i 40 if Ace->//e 04 V 4S#f.€ A.O. IYl5 T.rg.Jos c T G5:4440Y 1V. .. ......... ...... • . .........r.........-. ....... ... r............:r•::.:::{.;}•:•::�::...............:.......:...:...:r.......:::i):"?•)ii%4i)4i:!::%L'J%+l'r'i, iJi%�)i::lr)�:ii�i: i:-Y ::-.�:....:.........:..::::::::)i:::i::::::::::: . .......... ..........Y.F. .n .y n:..... .............. ........ ..r.............. ..r....::•f.: :....•.rr...:./. ..4r%.?.:(...�::}.:.:;.•.::;>!.iy:J:•:•-::-::.,i..•::.r::::.•:r•:r'l)::�iiiii)'!.:!:i:)i):iiY:IiG?:i%-i'!ryU.{•i:r:f.r.:vn:?•r•v::r. ..:/.•... .. . .......:.:w:: . :....... ......... :!•:v::.:.v:-.v: .. .. :rrr..:�ri.4 v:.:r.fi....:.rrrr:r.r{:?.,.:r...:.H.::!...!!.... ../.::r::::::::. -rJ-.:rr::......., . .... .....:. .. ..r......:!::.{!/,-•;:!•)-:'r<rrl�.'!!. ..!..{ ......1.:..t:l:n ...... x.....:....:.:,{:!:::r::.::r.r.. !•:r)'::.. r..!w:�??�i%v+iii:::?r .:r::: 4..-.:.:•:i?•:!.-:!.:�:ri•:::;r....�..::::. Y.::);.: :...:...: .:x rr:{{4'•)'i:!:r:ti�i�i::`•{4r.:.:y-lr�r .... -. ..,{.v:. . yyv:Y.n.!.....::•::::ryu:!rrr.:{.4 i):r Y.:::!y�.y:?yriY.':. r?.SA...?1°fr} .-. !¢Vf%:C)iji.Vi:%'{rir;:%y.)X:,>t::;v: . emenit<:.-.!.::::..:�.i:.::.�.r..r.v-.. r .. :.:.rr...... .r..r..:.............:.. .. . ....... ;;•i:):o:!;-;:•;•::•::::.�.;;:.:::):.•x.4!•r.•••x!?:••;/vJ/f 5:....3!r,.dK:..�.:a.':..3.::.•:.:.::r.,::.....:•::!::...:'..•ii:,. :.......... Gambling Site Authorization • am the chief executive officer of the organization; I hereby consent that local law enforcement officers,the •I assume full responsibility for the fairand lawful opera- board or agents of the board,or the commissioner of tion of all activities to be conducted; revenue or public safety,or agents of the commissioners, •1 will familiarize myself with the laws of Minnesota may enter the premises to enforce the law. governing lawful gambling and rules of the board and Bank Records Information agree,if licensed,to abide by those laws and rules, The board is authorized to inspect the bank records of the including amendments to them; gambling account whenever necessary to fulfill •any changes in application information will be submitted requirements of current gambling rules and law. to the board and local unit of government within 10 days Oath of the change;and I declare that: .1 understand that failure to provide required information •I have read this application and all information submitted or providing false or misleading information may result in to the board is true,accurate and complete; the denial or revocation of the license. •all of quired in mation has been fully disclosed; • Sig ture o chief e ealtiv: officer. Bate I /(.2-/ Z merzt.!:: i::ri::i : :i::i::..... :::.::.: ?.):):: ??:: {.,.... I,ocai Government Acknowledge::.:,: ):.,.:<:)):????�<.)):>N:{4-!.):>:::))>;.<.�!?:!:::.:::::.?)<::i.i)<):::::::::i::ii<:?<:i::%:i;::.:... .............. ... ................ 4. A coov of the local unit of government's resolution ao- 1. The city*must sign this application if the gambling pram- provina this aoolication must be ttached to this application, ises is located within city limits. 5. tf this application is denied by the local unit of government, 2. The county**AND township"must sign this application if k should not be submitted to the Gambling Control Board. the gambling premises is boated within a township. . 3. The local unit government(city or county)must pass a Township: By signature below,the township acknowledges resolution specifically approving or denying this application. that the organization is applying for a premises permit within township limits. City* or County** Township" City or County Name Township Name ,, ---.}'�,4/Z/ 7ature of'person irioeivin lication Signature of person receiving application The I Date ved Ti tle I Date Received•0 L p / Q 10 Refer to the instructions for required attachments. Mail to: Gambling Control Board • Rosewood Ptaa South,3rd Floor 1711 W.County Road B Roseville,MN 55113 LG214(Part 2) (a.rrnQs>) FOR BOARD USE ONLY 1 -1G214 =_ _ =a :_ ,- z= EASE c11 �_< = • T - pp* i • _ _ . - ..,-.> - '-r +G- `emu- _ '�- _� __ -sue. ' •t. _. . _ 1KTiTICSOtQ�I.QttlfllL Gambling Premises Permit Application - Part I. of 2 INiTiALS DATE_ T'_ ......:F?i•'•:r'f:J, ;:/ &"ajG 'i'f-%0 9�`<,'1....?�l•:.;+, !. f /i.,,. ....:..F. D`' .' 9'$`+G'i'wwJ%"��`.{.n�;.•...:: «:ic-z ' Y:'"•L'nv%:iii!.iii"1.::":.�.::::::i:,�Y:::...,%J iiJ-:;.v:f :r.!.-g...f:�.•J�.y/�:vii.. ',M.:- :J:::::.M!'�', H....:..:,.... � .. ... ...lf;.. ,:.:.: .ii>i.f�Jiii%iil�/�i�i?✓•ii'!i'!'/'�•ui.��',-':��i%/v�::'.•LiiYi�=':�•v'•�5.�-M'+r::%i%J.� ...�+' may, iC/..•YA' lbf • :r:Q ;' • •�LV.KiN./J�::::::::r.�✓:yar/�.:r!6,r.�;�y,:l'. •.>�..: .....�?-r�-:.n^^^%-•:,+ir?:if�.. »-. +,.:.: r• --- I -: :................»r.!,!..:r.<-:r..a�ti�w.)�,:!?,xa:::::.!<i..,.,?'aY.C•:./:e:::+.+:+,:4%<>.:yiriJ++.�`,»oo?"� fJ+LG %Af, :?Xv.::J:;::9;�/i.•.'�2:F...i,>.r...,«..`n>;_L,: Class Of premises permit Renewal premises --(chock ono) Organization base license number 4.2 2 -- ❑ A($400).Pull-tabs,tipboards,paddlewheels,raffles,bingo Premises permit number B($250) Pull-tabs,fipboards,paddlewheels,raffles 13--. New ❑ C($200) Bingo only ❑ D($150) Raffles only yy !!!,w.y..ya..::<.yr,,.. ,1;•.1,n'n:mr~Mr..'n'rf,..rewopw. <a?r'7J�7.'� r / �ppppp•/ .rs.° ,�9°F :°.°,H;rpy�y�/�pyq�w y^0j( or�c • •?; Y' :'• ... 1 .:.... i'.. :.. .:% ...: .. ti!i:+;.+J��.r�y. � 'i%.�:��i.:ir5 '�+'.>'�''.�"'....!�Klf. .:iW r�r!�f ��:'':.'•' ��'O ;::' �.-..�,J:K/�..:T...:�.•.::t i....�a*.,.��..c.,j.:•/T##..,� ��11 �y.�,. / � %C?Y. f Y I4 ! ! r : i> +i�'..f/'f.,•%".�k r.�•.,1••:.�'Y."%J. .S-{'k:.+,,:.i�Y'.-':.r J i:c-;!./.!:..-<•<i,C..4,`.:y�C.2.:)....>..:Y:.:.:.;.:.:_. Name of Organization 4 / At 4' A D&/ S Business Address of Organization-Street or P.O Box(Do not use the address of your gambling manager) 171 • D W�'�P •PN. 5S Iii City State Zip Code County Daytime phone number 04644/ 11 .SS/z3 IAA e) 95.9-2V4'7 Name of chief executive officer(cannot be your ling manager) Title Daytime phone number � 1fo/VS.w �iPd� (i/2) G P7— US7e In go Occasions If applying for a class A or C permit. fill in days and beginning& enriing hours of bingo occasions: No more than seven bingo occasions may be conducted by your oranization per week. Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning/Ending Hours to to to to to to to If bingo will not be conducted,check here Egi :.:•.v.,,,..v`.:<3. :c:!�rl ,„.•<C<C•;v svccr{�.•<. :::!:!S% / a.�r.+J,J.,�. ...,..,.:.- .:........::. :.;.::• .s�,s/yh. �' s�}i°t' "fir.•,.y'°"•-•,%3o-..•g,°.�.`?4't,SfJ�J.E!,'-'4ri^-.,Y°".,.•-'i�'`ST: •::.k.4/ rnv..S.i........i...l.�!v..%J:v/ar.JJ:::.<C?:F:i:'!!J .+�1.•:.:,;;: n ..J.. :-:J,.H.,.,.. ...a,,. ;S Yom".•,".'•,:',•.::«.. <�ambl �'rt�u�ses>�nforn�a� �: Name of stablishment where gambling will be conducted Street Address(do not use a post office box number) 0. /G./' I� b k K o Is the premises located within cit>4nits? }Yes O No If no,is township p organized p unorganized p unincorporated City and County where gambling premises is located OR Township and County where gambling premises is located if outside of city limits ,4 C4-A7 Name and address of legal owner of premises City State Zp Code .r M rovs qN4 ,Yr £44 4' M4( SSi.4 Does your organization own the budding where the gambling 1 be conducted? p YES Ekr NO If no,attach the following: • a copy of the lease(form LG202)with terms br ai least one year. • a copy of a sketch of the floor plan with dimensions,showing what portion is being leased. A lease and sketch are not required for Class D appications. i?:{:!i:<!•:J!K�:ti!^Y'NYn'.-..vx:"::<iq;%�M.h\ , '<{!i�%J:L:N:^�\,v,.'!^:4:hY�Jn Y. ...,,,;...:.:..... ..:.:... +.;.......... .. •• ::>..3ce^.?;:h.S.. ,.....:.... .....;,•,:;./. �ti:::J..;.>J:c..N».xy:.xn+H-.�++.+r;,,;,.:.w,yc,:+.,r.,++.rr.,,,.;•.;, .�... :..: ... 'gyp° °+ ..'.%....:,.::?.v.'.'•...'�:.. MP'JF Address of:<sto • r t � O t t •t t t �%:';�G tftff tf5�g�'0�7C�UrR�'.:. J:,.:. Address City State ZIP -•• ..C4Afe f Minnesota Lawful Gambling ■ Premise Permit Application - Part 2 of 2 miIl:r:gSank A Ga ccount'Tn . . Bank Name Bank Account Number f24x 'T'4 GOaH7Y ST. e.4NX 30 o iii zmo Bank Address City State z p Code 7CD so PA.4 zA 0 4 Alowoo!a N 7 ./tilt c$, o ?same,yes,� af s :w : rr ak � s. ::: <' .. ..: <. . .._.: ptgairsZeban'S 8'e85Etr8l:m3S'l7ot`lrandle 4atr►bSirlrfUtfds:. '... .. .:.. .. ,; .. Address Title Name � _� '4 E . r I, - L. • . Rag,* iva.f%o V ' o r&I ,9h 0.e simAro LAND F14 AW 0;kr c.Td; t: D4t/4$ A$A',', AD 1Yi3 edAzvoiscVt. .64414A1 /47,0.1.,i3.giP mete ... o S�/ . Y.J G fr. n....ov. a Ta P .E ... Awy, v;; r .. ......... ... .. ......... .... .............. . : r { fim: ? ..::......: . .. .. :: . .. ...... vo.... :::::..... ......... ....: : :::::: .:.:.:....^: :n :::.:. .. . r ,.... f .. ...J.......... i Gambling Site Authorization .1 am the chief executive officer of the organization; I hereby consent that local law enforcement officers,the . .1 assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful opera- board or agents of the board,or the commissioner of tion of all activities to be conducted; revenue or public safety,or agents of the commissioners, .1 will familiarize myself with the laws of Minnesota may enter the premises to enforce the law. governing lawful gambling and rules of the board and Bank Records Information agree, if licensed,to abide by those laws and rules, The board is authorized to inspect the bank records of the including amendments to them; gambling account whenever necessary to fulfill •any changes in application information will be submitted requirements of current gambling rules and law. to the board and local unit of government within 10 days Oath of the change;and I declare that: •1 understand that failure to provide required information •I have read this application and all information submitted or providing false or misleading information may result in to the board is true, accurate and complete; the denial or revocation of the license. •all other re ired information has been fully disclosed; Signature f chi f ex • officer ate /I/ e'Z ...:. .... .... .. .......... .... :......:... owled ment ::>:::::<::::::::<::::::::::: :: >`>>>>>>> <>> »:> :::::::>:<: >:»>> <>:<:>::::: :><>> :Local Goveirnment_Ackn:.:;::. rim.-.;: ...::.:::. .. .. .... .......... ...... .. . .:. ... .:.... .... .. ........... ....... .. ....... 4. A coov of the local unit ofgovernment's resolution ao- 1. The city'must sign this application if the gambling pram- provina this application must be attached to this apolication, ises is located within dry limits. 5. If this application is denied by the local unit of government, 2. The county"AND township"must sign this application if it should not be submitted to the Gambling Control Board. the gambling premises is located within a township. • 3. The local unit government(city or county)must pass a Township: By signature below,the township acknowledges resolution specifically approving or denying this application. that the organization is applying for a premises permit within township limits. City' or County" Township" City or County Name Township Name ‘.4C 4,c n lure f perso race' "ng Gcation . Signature of person receiving application \�QM•U��C Date Received The y�• L f ` I Date Received Tide Ttle Psvv4nce ),et Jr.r. (( r U - \ 4 - qa Refer to the instructions for required attachments. Mail to: Gambling Control Board Rosewood Plaza South,3rd Floor • 1711 W.County Road B LG214(Part 2) Roseville,MN 55113 (R1"7rz991) • • FOR BOARD USE ONLY FEE CHK LG220 Minnesota Lawful Gambling INIT DATE (Rev.11/14/90) Application for Exemption from Lawful Gambling License . Fill in the unshaded portions of this application for exemption and send it in at least 45 days before your gambling activity for processing. Name 0 4.4 .t ss r tknotxton Organization Name Current/previous license number Current/previous exempt number i E k /C/4N Lc=GjOJ'J pOS7' SQy /vo,t/e /0el/V.:71 Street City ' State Zip code County /979 N, 7•ftY'i3ER wcLV' EACAN Al A) j5 /t9-c- O.G'/ 071 Chief executive officer t Phone Treasurer Phone /ittrAELit', ii)iLCDX 45a- f3'I8) ERLz 5 • PAL- 1nEZ (6/; ) ii,=►Y- 0 $3 e of on-prnftt bileiitization Attach proof of nonprofit status which shows Check the box below which indicates your type of organization that your organization is nonprofit ❑ Fraternal ❑ Religious ig Veterans ❑ Other non-profit ❑ IRS designation 0 Certification of good standing from the Minnesota Secretary of State's office Affiliate of parent nonprofit organization(charter) ambling Site Name of site where activity will take place /'Rl ✓/ -rt ( • 5i0i":"A) CE. Street City Township State Zip code County 1t7? u. T/48Cr l cf-?11. 6. f/aAN, MN . ...:i7 ar5.. UA/1 'j'9 Date(s)of activity Ake N I0 1990 1 es of Games Financial Rep©rt Game Gross raotipts Eatparzsss,inCtadiii Net profit 44.44.st Value Cnsi of Prtiss'! cf!Ddres Bingo ❑ Raffles Paddlewheels ❑ Tipboards Q Pull-tabs ❑ rstr tutor trop whom gamb(trtg equipment was Pthased I declare all information submitted to the < f�istrllbutors lcer3se number Gambling Control Division is true, accurate, f abaars aX inJormadoir submitted to the amt n o/ and complete. r rs frue,accurate;and complete ////// ' J (.a�% /�/- 7"4� q I Chief executive officer's signature Date Chte€executiveonfficers signatute Date Local Goverrnmertt Acknotiiledgemen€ I have received a copy of this application.This application will be reviewed by the Gambling Control Division and will become effective 30 days from the date of receipt by the city or county,unless the local government passes a resolution to specifically prohibit the activity.A copy of that resolution must be received by the Gambling Control Division within 30 days of the date filled in below. Cities of the first class have 60 days in which to disallow the activity. City or County Township City or county name Township name . • C-l T Y c- ' EA c A n,' Signatu of p rson receivi5g application Signature of person receiving application Title�J Date received Title Date received AC trIin' 57-rafiVe �S$it /-.2/- 9 W,,,_B,aa Mail with $25 permit fee and copy.of proof of nonprofit status to: Pink--erg rtim Department of Gaming-Gambling Control Division Yallaw—Boca ranmc to Organization to complete shaded teat Rosewood Plaza South,3rd Floor Gold—Gy or County 1711 W. County Road B Roseville.MN 55113 s ? FOR BOARD USE ONLY LG214 BASE# przavl) PP# i, FEE Minnesota Lawful Gambling CHECK - Premises Permit Application - Part 1 of 2 p ITIALS ATE 30•M ..:>:r.e>:->: n.: : }s:.3!'!:}SY.t:.ln,0.v:.r v.;:. ...a-:/.rar:.l.a!: .!.• .! ,:;.r...• a>r<.•- :u--•rr.Jr::J :.3::+ •-?.r!r}}'!.,; ::u.•;x-:: .:rr^l.'• .......l;rp,.........uvrc..S.'. ......::. � n}�,.:......r,r.,....'ncs:.a :•.,� •!a;•.a..3?!:, .2•°a- r'a....3+.•`.?!.. �.:a. {:.1+.:-::.i::: rt%{: -...�.....:...: :...... :. .......:........J:.....!�'.'l.. ........ %.J3... i0iik.. is r�;::• .�%::;.:�- ..r.;.......... 6......v::..:v:4:r.:r: .........r::... :.:.,:.:... ::::!.::::::n::i::>:::::!;.:...:::!•::n�v:::v:n.................... :.. " 1 ......'4'!. :s.: ;::rii r?'ii v':::�lA:viii ?iMr %}�!�i!::}:i:l•'n' n..yY�^''v. O wi'.S-:- ;M1?-iiY::�'}u}..\!J: n'�>iJ• Y.}S-w».4..l+i:i:� ;vA.?::,+.• ® Class of premises permit (chock Renewal Organization base license number AR 2 Z se- ❑ A($400) Puff-tabs,tipboards,paddlewheels,raffles,bingo Premises permit number Qj B($250) Pull-tabs,bpboards,paddlewheels,raffles ❑ New ❑ C($200) Bingo only ❑ D($150) Raffles only ...........,...s. _..... i. .,v:•.i s:.cin:.rf r,r :•i''s:w;a> i " '?•' r>• wu.• �}� ':{:f F r..::ry.•.;. .. r. .i f�.�y� /7TT.!..Hr.,..::r.;::.:. ..!'�-::;x;v;c ti: :;•a �•i;•!.f'•,{:'::+:.';::• ri••:,�.-'F,}r:>:• •,r7�:'4f�ci•' a///. :siyK f >.sJ: �>'.•.)•::.\?::;;;; QILIfi.CLtLOR; .: ..r .. r. :;o..,•.:.: ...:.... 3^.^•::zs+ s...:7ri' >.. :�� ,. . .................:..... ...................:...... -v: �..:rrrrywr +:!Ka;/i�!vw--vi.•V$iiii:i;:/:r � y; l{.•- xi!+J,.!�!iK-H-..�...�!..!!!T%l �1�4a .. Name of Organization 46.4A' 4- 10N5 srness Address of Organization-Street or P.O Box(Do not use the address of your gambling manager) yYA C WA D./eNt-ss AJ.st City State Zip Code County Daytime phone number A--;4&4N /(?N 5 5 1 2 3 4 4-#C 0/7)- (bat 4 '-A yy 7 Name of thief executive officer(cannot be your gambling manager) Title Daytime phone number ,94 S (La) t GP'7- 0.57Y Bingo Occasions If applying for a class A or C permit. fill in days and beginning&ending hours of bingo occasions: No more than seven bingo occasions may be conducted by your organization per week. Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning/Ending Hours to to to to to to to If bingo will not be conducted,check here ."'?.!�!afgko.u.?��x.:.eo:n ;raw- :. ::z'y::?.;,,,;..a& 3 :vrca�. .y:s,-. .�•:v<. 's�,,,as m�C�..'3 `- > :+i:.r.! r.:!1.d'•. >r;.'hSiF.%i{:•,.';'`''i;4:4 a}i?.}!ni$ri,�,+T,i:!;?ff.•:..'•i:; :..1.. :rnnr!;t' !!L+ W::".§S ck Y'`--i Q fir.•.: - /�{♦:. .. �� ....��•r%iN r>��•,. rJ:�i ,{a, }.. �4rY�>iN:r{Ar.;y,:rrr:>%!v}:}ir::;i}iv3>-sia.•:>v,;i::I7.; ?yy r ::ia•:KyI. ..•a��.!}J{y.-J•.;:�••:n Name of establishment where gambling will be oonducte� Street Address(do not use a post office box number) C -4i'c'4AE Bowl. 38'8'3 8,4c& Q r C.47/ ■ ti -TS/za - Is the premises located within city imits? $LYes O No If no,is township ED organized p unorganized p unincorporated • City and County where gambling premises is located OR Township and County where gambling premises is located if outside of city knits ',4`c,44( 724Xc TA— Name and address of legal owner of premises City State Zp Code Q.G re, 4 47 /rA0 1'' fixer/y.407 ¢ thrs /7/Y, .S.S/.Zc) Does your organization own the budding where the gambling wit be coed? Q YES ga- NO If no,attach the following: • a copy of the lease(form LG202)with terms for at least one year. • a Dopy of a sketch of the floor plan with dimensions,showing what portion is being leased. A lease and sketch are not required for Class D applications_ �'•:!.J;ri;.:.r.«:;>:•!aJywoca�ea}}v.,>::a-rA.vx.+yp!cx;.�.ex;:.i?e::r:-.........-: ..........- ...+:?3�:xJYY�'aaav>.. ...... 7�+.ha;»e;;:::y,E<�.vs�!,a�• crocxe?�S�}»:w5.^.:�'{:;..eb�»;t{v,�c;�9c3...^-.!e!ti5^ „,.:..:... ._..........._.,!..::...,,J:-.3�,.,:r:'%>:?{i:ii:':;c::?:,>}:::�>;»{;::::�'%�i'i:{2:':':::>5'•s::g�?a�:•3ii:::iY:i::i2::;::`:':: :: Address:.of::sto .= -e:s• Co'::of- ..b to• • •' ent?' 'OG Address City State Zip -•• Minnesota Lawful Gambling + 1 Premise Permit Application - Part 2 of 2 :-,,,,,w:r/,,,,v 1x;•!N..?yy!!SK'.}oo-H;!A.:�!n.z1;':i!:.:>.;... ni.A?il,'C : ,✓i:r °'l' //r :'-!Y ,Cyr •' f / li Garr btzng`Bank Accoant;T>- ormatwn Bank Name Bank Account Number p44 t,4 C?d!1NTY .f: /444', - Soo /1, Zd4 nk Address City State Zip Code 750 Se ,444.4r /)A'. /'7Z1r4//Jd l/1- T MAY SS/Z'0 �..... .....,r,. , y; �dT8,. BSSArid�9 OfpBSAR St�lOZ6�f5�1. and nhdi�s , > : r :: . . : < ..: :.....:..:.OrQihfiabGYT'SB.8SArGllayiOLiiBhdlE¢31T)bfiiiiXlS Name Address Title .... re, .L. '14-eft-C. J3 M44.4y 4ww AANE EPA,Al Sd,`L 4E G4-.40 R1iii11AtN 6s° 1?O 6 r Ar N 0 R%A Y 2 a i if /RA % Si a w .L 4w! .0.46.4 Al ,D.,;,acr lr 04-V4- 4.c# ', tr A.O. I S//5 T.rg 1141 S C J - 4 C 4/Y /alt 4,1-..r' oev e-�1! . '`/j ,44/:..,44, TQ., • r.:. !Q.:. .:. • G ,Nn >:.!4;>:J e..6Y, C....4e.4.. ....... ...... ... .n.........r .n ....:.....n:,rr....... .. .r...................:... .:..n�: ..... . ... .. n...r••.Fi:?:vn... ..r. `�;5:^iiii'riii��f�:i�J i:i: . . ..... . .::: ,*;:.�......... ,.....w.:::: :•nv:!,ggl...:... .. . ........::A:::i:: .r:: g :.:...rv...: .... ::::j .....4....:i:!vii.;�l::i%+M......... :.... . ..... . ....r.....: r.... :..........r...r./.:r.....r».... nom.- {iiirrii"•rn r /.:�r!!ri!.i:i:f�:!/.:v.K:!tiy{?:i.4i:•ii ii:•s:�'�:. . .:...... .. ...... ......... .. ...... ... ..... r: »:r,r::/rn4 vxr:r.::iiiiii:•iiiii:•:v,: .,v,?H:•:r;:r.Miii�:?;ryi:}•..r ...r...r�/!.... /.nN n!/r C...... ry, ?:-Y;,:;r•riR:Y:. .v:i:::/.:!!r�r.a.:;:{r:::A4v::.;:;:v:�:�.'�t:'X'v:.: :-:. : i;::: ./.v.:r!?: ii:•rM":',..:.;....:-:Y.-:•i :.•`ii :..... ......rr::::::i:C•i<ii:4:•i:'•4.i::r::::C.r ...l. r?o-r.n .r•,:a{.. rC.c{: .;:w.:.r ?•:w:�.hn ,;:c. n•,pfp{ .Y.�Sf+'i%il:CYi S: :i:'r.4.r.S.r.'!>l.�d:%i:{4 xv.Kw:::v:v.�.iv:.v:•}?-: i.r..fir r .. r ./�/............... r:, r .r... -r::r - ri.: rv.r. cknowl ement?rii:.:!.i:?r.: :.rw!?r;!_x , rs:x�,<�:.,,:!.�.{:;:::„:>:?i.::r:.:{{;<!!w>:>:::::i:�.,!?.<!.i?�!.�:!.:.�:w�.:<:•.i>::rr..:.:;,,..>....:..:.............:... .. Gambling Site Authorization • am the chief executive officer of the organization; I hereby consent that local law enforcement officers,the •1 assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful opera- board or agents of the board,or the commissioner of Lion of all activities to be conducted; revenue or public safety,or agents of the commissioners, •1 will familiarize myself with the laws of Minnesota may enter the premises to enforce the law. governing lawful gambling and rules of the board and Bank Records Information agree, if licensed,to abide by those laws and rules, The board is authorized to inspect the bank records of the including amendments to them; gambling account whenever necessary to fulfill •any changes in application information will be submitted requirements of current gambling rules and law. to the board and local unit of government within 10 days Oath - of the change;and I declare that: •I understand that failure to provide required information •I have read this application and all information submitted or providing false or misleading information may result in to the board is true,accurate and complete; the denial or revocation of the license. salt of uired in = mation has been fully disclosed; Sig ture o chief e ectltiv: officer. �� rate'(?' C ..........................................::..::::•::::::.........................::.�::::.•.:.�::�is?r.�.�:n•:.,i:-i:•ii:i ifs:i:•r•:ci:;::i::::;•i:ii:•ii:•ii:�i:.;•::::.:::::::. .;.:. _; ,:.: <+. ..;.?,..;..:,y...:.i::::::•iii:-i:;{c>o-r?:::.:�-i::::;.i-::!:.i >:.:5:.>ar::'to::4:{{.>r!•i:!•:i:=:-is?.>:ni>i::???::::•:;c........n...................,.... ,: ..:-.?-:�->::-:•.;::.::�:::::�:::�iiist:::<??•:•i:::::::�::`:�:�:`;:is ii:•-.'.<:::::'t:;`::::::�:::{r;�?�:;:2�:� :�:�::::::::::i::�:�:i y:;::�<:::;`.�:�<:::'E:; _... d men>�{?.i>:.:i:>.�:::;.:?.iii:.;:?.::::;ii::4<:::::::ii<;i:?.i<:4i:?•:::;;ii: aT ...Governor ............................ 9e.:::.:::::.,.::.::.�::::::::::.i.«:.:4�!-:.i:??.�<?<?,,:<.::{.;:.�::<.;:>�::{.:::.; :..:i:.::n.::::.::{.;:.:;:.::.::!,.::..::..:::. :..::. .<:r:,.::.?.ii:. 4. A coov of the local unit of government's resolution ari- l. The city`must sign this application if the gambling prem- proving this application must be attached to this application, ises is located within city limits. 5. tf this application is denied by the local unit of government, 2. The county**AND township”must sign this application if it should not be submitted to the Gambling Control Board. the gambling premises is located within a township. 3. The local unit government(city or county)must pass a Township: By signature below,the township acknowledges resolution specifically approving or denying this application. that the organization is applying for a premises permit within township limits. City` or County" Township** City or County Name Township Name EA 4/1/ çature \orperson/()N� V ivin Gcation Signature of person receiving application Title tie' Date eive I� Title I Date Received T .N2.....{ ) rJ-a, /(. tie'- 1.—PS (0 Refer to the instructions for required attachments. Mail to: Gambling Control Board Rosewood Plaza South,3rd Floor 1711 W.County Road B Roseville,MN 55113 LG214(Part 2) (R.v7/2e,1) • . .•:. - • . ' 6 - FOR BOARD USE ONLY 7,- aG21 4 EASE ; - -_(712191) "".r.t •-•- _ - . - • - scita Liavful Gambling _ . . . Premises Permit Application - Partl of 2 -DINAMALTE--S7 " • . • - - _.11RPWCZSFZIWnitcz ; -• '•J.. acaniontkWa4*--gt-e- Class of premises permit • Renewal —(cheek one) - • Organization base license number 4.2 2 - - D A($400)-Pull-tabs,tipboards,paddkrwhaels,rattlesr_bingo c: • -— Premises permit number B($250) Pull-tabs,tipboards,paddlewheels,raffles Et, . New C($ OO) Bingo only D($150) Raffles only rtryn Name of Organization 4'1/ A icA/3 Business Address of Organization-Street or P.O Box(Do not use the address of your gambling manager) Afirgga IV/ Al/V City State Zip Code County Daytime phone number cfA 3 of e)%At (6,4) 445-4/ LAI Name of chief executive officer(cannot be your gambling manager) Tide Daytime phone number Bingo iro/v so-A, (i/2) ingo Occasions If applying for a class A or C permit, fifl in days and beginning&ending hours of bingo occasions: No more than seven bingo occasions may be conducted by your organization per week. Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning/Ending Hours Day Beginning/Ending Hours to to • to to to to to Ubingo will not be conducted,check here 2E1 MOM:::.M:MMOTOMPRIENEM: Name offestablishment where gambling Will be conducted Street Address(de not use a post office box number) V ck. LC) ■14.pi Is the premises Iodated within dtAnits? J;Ek-Yes f=No If no,is township j organized ED unorganized (=I unincorporated City and County where gambling premises is located OR Township and County where gambling premises is located if outside of city limits A`PA C 4-A/ Name and address of legal owner of premises City State Zip Code J-171 revs; c3NAN7- .4,4( 0Y/A 2-- Does your organization own the building where the gamilin4gWe conducted? 1=1 YES ckr NO • If no,attach the folloving: • a copy of the lease(form LG202)with terms for at least one year. • a copy of a sketch of the floor plan with dimensions,showing what portion is being leased. A lease and sketch are not required for Class D applcatians. Aaaress-,br.:::sto •cs • ceium.'• gi V • • 4k a .* Address City • State Zip -• C14 49e. y • J • •, Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit Application - Part 2 of 2 i GamilfingBank Account Ill . . attort . :. Bank Name Bank Account Number 0.4xoTA Goa'i y ST. /94mc 3eo ,,, 2.Ca0 Bank Address City State Zip Code 7 $o so P/4424 0R MEwoorA ti i TW $$' o .:: � ..:•n:::A...:a. tame,edafess,arrde ofarsarss beaks arxi=maiie mss and►K rrts. < >:Orgairaabarr's 6easiet+naynot;handte gamb6n9irmds .r..... -.... <;. Name Address Tide (.."..0.1,04/I.Ca 15 )14# pANn AANe doeNStl/44E 6AmRAi/v3 PUN A1re 1?dB/%1/ 1vo#%0Ar -to ,ii t91. Ve sr 6Ato iAN4 g o"Rr �Tt: d o w r y' A SA'fi$AD 17 i 3 7 7 e. .&4-4 14 A/ /4l0Ar.3.t.Psssilf o Sort/ y.SG .5.. :..l�..... R.:......::.::. . ............... ........r.........�v::::•:::1L;:i:::::::::.::�:::::::::::: :::::::::.:...�S.iiiiii:-i:•ii�.:.,.: :....:r:.:ii:'•i': :::.,..,.:.:.%-is-:::: Gambling Site Authorization .1 am the chief executive officer of the organization; I hereby consent that local law enforcement officers,the .1 assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful opera- board or agents of the board,or the commissioner of tion of all activities to be conducted; . revenue or public safety,or agents of the commissioners, .1 will familiarize myself with the laws of Minnesota may enter the premises to enforce the law. governing lawful gambling and rules of the board and Bank Records Information agree, if licensed,to abide by those laws and rules, The board is authorized to inspect the bank records of the including amendments to them; gambling account whenever necessary to fulfill •any changes in application information will be submitted requirements of current gambling rules and law. to the board and local unit of government within 10 days Oath of the change;and I declare that: •I understand that failure to provide required information .1 have read this application and all information submitted or providing false or misleading information may result in to the board is true,accurate and complete; the denial or revocation of the license. •all other re fired information has been fully disclosed; Signature f chi f ex ' nit officer ("1 ( , )7\ -46-)\ -t7` . / tate Z led rnent :>::`::!>::>:::: >::::::<;: >> > >>>`> > =<' <>` `> < >`�> > <` <<`>>` ``_> `<>>> : >Locat Gover-nmera Acknow 3 '' .:::. 4. A coov of the local unit of government's resolution ao- 1. The city*must sign this application if the gambling prem- proving this application must be attached to this •ootication, ises is located within city limits. 5. If this application is denied by the local unit of government, 2. The county AND township"must sign this application if it should not be submitted to the Gambling Control Board. the gambling premises is located within a township. 3. The local unit government(city or county)must pass a Township: By signature below,the township acknowledges resolution specifically approving or denying this application. that the organization is applying for a premises permit within township limits. City' or County** Township" City or County Name Township Name .w ‘AfG A n luof prso re ation Signature of person receiving application (Tilde I Date Received TitleTitleI Date Received • F'01. l• nn Ce V,✓i rICA-3QAe' , �d9 - S Refer to the instructions for required attachments. Mail to: Gambling Control Board • Rosewood Plaza South,3rd Floor 1711 W.County Road B Roseville,MN 55113 LG214(Part 2) • (R.v72991) FOR BOARD USE ONLY FEE CHK LG220 Minnesota Lawful Gambling INIT DATE (Re.11"490' Application for Exemption from ' Lawful Gambling License Fill in the unshaded portions of this application for exemption and send it in at least 45 days before your gambling activity for processing. l.�i' a'arxd > < . . >.::: ><:::.:: : >: > :: organization Name Current/previous license number Current/previous exempt number / /'e k /C ^fI Le C/OIJ pos7 Sp y /van,e /1/el/v� Street City State Zip code County 1979 ill, 7/1413ER u. -c EACAN Arl t) j5 /0-0- 0A/f 07'A Chief executive officer G l 3-— Phone Treasurer Phone illiett'A51, Ft, uliLCnx, 451- Y-3'/$) ERLE 5 . PFf1- fnER (6/c h'=►y" g ape taf y'on proo >t Orgca nb ition Attach proof of nonprofit status which shows Check the box below which indicates your type of organization that your organization is nonprofit ❑ Fraternal ❑ Religious Veterans ❑ Other non-profit ❑ IRS designation ❑ Certification of good standing from the Minnesota Secretary of State's office . :...::.,.:...........:.. ........................ .......�.Affiliate of parent nonprofit organization(charter) Guiftititt� Site Name of site where activity will take place /'Ri ✓x7t f2ESt Ds LACE" Street City Township State Zip code County f7;'7 u. /�; t r-rf. i1 / &1 MN , s� L5 OAf! -r'f Date(s)of activity ,AAC4 io , iV94- peS OofGa13e5 la'iittta racial Report Game Gross rsutpfs ;Expenses matudi sg Net proft M o..ki t Value ; ..tOSt'of Pr32e&;' :; s;: : cf:Prtzas € Bingo ❑ Raffles *. ; s< Paddlewheels ❑ Tipboards ❑ Pull-tabs ❑ flisttit utcr iron whore 0ambiaxi Oqurpment was pt chased I declare all information submitted to the Ctrs l cease number Gambling Control Division is true, accurate, and complete. I I ifInrmaoon submrasd ti,Q t�amb g o rs truer:accurate,and complete ////J/ ', I/(2/r /q- -I Chief executive officer's signature Date Citiief executive:officers;;signatue ..Date .ocatl Gtfuimrrirnent Aicknowledg+i enit I have received a copy of this application.This application will be reviewed by the Gambling Control Division and will become effective 30 days from the date of receipt by the city or county,unless the local government passes a resolution to specifically prohibit the activity.A copy of that resolution must be received by the Gambling Control Division within 30 days of the date filled in below.Cities of the first class have 60 days in which to disallow the activity. City or County Township City or county name Township name . C_/7" Y cf• EACAn,' Signatu of person receive application Signature of person receiving application tL^„iiY'-G/- /�% Title a' Date received Title Date received Ad►'0 in.rsTrc7Lrve /4-SS'7- /-_,2/- 9.2 Mail with $25 permit fee and copy.of proof of nonprofit status to: Whits-Board Pink--agatim Department of Gaming-Gambling Control Division Yellow-Baud`iMns to Orguiration b Rosewood Plaza South,3rd Floor complete shaded moos Gold—City``County 1711 W.County Road B Roseville.MN 55113 f - • • MINUTES OF': ;:R'EGU) 3 tING OF THE Eis1 A1`t etr coUNC ::Eagan,Minnesota .... ::.January 21, 1992 • M• A regular meeting of the Eagan City' ou ail: res::bC n Tuesday, January 21, 1992, at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Egan and:114041,41theinbers Wachter,Awada, McCrea,and Pawlenty. Also present were City Administrator Hedges, Community Development Director Dale Runkle, Director of Public Works Tom Colbert, and City Attorney James Sheldon. AVOW City Administrator Hedges asked that tiiiitlieniVoiiiiii.:.4inmittee be added to the Organizational Business portion of the agenda. Wachter moved,McCrea seconded, a motip to approve:the agenda for the January 21, 1992, regular City Council meeting as amended. Aye: 5::Nay;:::Q::::i Pawlenty moved,Wachter seconded, a motion to approve the minutes for the January 7, 1992,regular City Council meeting as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 DEPARTME TF,..HEAD BUSINESS GENERAL ADMINISTRA'$ION/SURCHARGE Mayor Egan introduced this item as con$%deratiOn::of*.ir'erosion control and street cleaning surcharge. City Administrator Hedges said that considerate n if:t the surcharge was first broached in late 1990 but further study was indicated because of concerns surroim< ng the addition of another fee. Study of the issue has resulted in a stalemate with staff divided as to whether a surcharge should be added to the cost of development or subsidized through the General Fund. In addition,if the surcharge is approved,when should it be assessed: with platting of the lots, with the grading permit, or with the building permit. Councilmember Pawlenty then raisad;Ehe;.gpegion:,as.to.whether costs associated with erosion control• •and street sweeping weren't covered by the:Stoi Water Vt ity Fund. Director of Public Works Colbert said that a limited amount of funds were provided by that fund to cover.street sweeping for water quality purposes. The streetcleaning and sweeping in question, however;:.*those prompted by construction. He said residents call expecting an immediate response to the removal of:dirt in the•ttreets after a rain or building construction and the City has not been able to keep up. He said the?surcharge,would allow staff to contract for clean-up services without putting a burden on the General Fund. • • Councilmember McCrea noted she is still interested in seeing the results of a survey of other municipalities and how the City compares in the collection of fees associated with development. She also suggested that the burden be placed back on those causing the problem by billing them for the clean-up. City Administrator Hedges said that staff has attempted to do just that but have had difficulty collecting. Because the City holds financial guarantees for developers but not for:builders, there are no alternate methods of collection. Councilmember Wachter said that:: t.swdtaxg;:world not go very far and builders may find it cheaper to allow the City to clean up erosiaiii:pilxni+s:titr :incur the expense of doing it themselves. , After further discussion, Pawlenty moved, Wachter seconded, a motion to continue indefinitely the implementation of the erosion control and street cleaning surcharge pending completion of an overall study of the issue including a review of ordinances already in place and a comparison of the City's development fees with those of other municipalities. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 ■ Page 2/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MIND'i i, January 21, 1992 GENERAL ADMINISTRATION/CITX;:MAP PROJECT After introduction by Mayor Egan,City'A4n mst aWr:'l edges said that the City is experiencing difficulty in finding advertisers to fund the annual City map project : Te said the Lions Club has used this as a fundraising project and in the past has received all advertising funds above those used to cover the cost of printing. This year,however,advertising dollars fell approximately$1,800 short and the City Administrator asked that Council consider allocating the remainder of the funds. It was recommended that staff contact the ons:Clu and any other organization that might be willing to underwrite the cost of the map and if unsuccessful,the ssue•could:be returned to the City Council for further consideration. Councilmember Pawlenty mentioned that.while it vva' d not apply to the current year,that once the City's population and development stabilized, an:::every other.:year printing could be considered. He recommended that the maps continue to be delivered:ft4.with tlte`Eagan phone books but that a nominal fee• be charged (such as$.50) for those given out:over::the'countei':::::'those funds could then be used the following year to off-set printing costs. Wachter moved,McCrea seconded,a motion to empower the City Administrator to contact charitable organizations regarding their willingness to underwrite the remainder of the costs for the 1992 Eagan City Map project and if unsuccessful to return to the City Council for further consideration. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 EXCELLENCE:IN::F;INANCIAL REPORTING Mayor Egan noted that Director of Finance, E: Page 3/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL January 21, 1992 Item 7. Submission of Pay Equity Inq$ementation Reporkto the Department of Employee Relations--It was recommended that the report be apprai l:a presented ans t f directed to fulfill the requirements of the pay equity legislation. • Item 8. Reclassification of Certain "Independent Contractors" to Temporary or Seasonal Employee Status--It was recommended that the Recycling Coordinator be reclassified to temporary full-time employee status,the Cable Television Technicians to temporary part-time employee status,the Contract Building Inspectors to seasonal employee status, the Fire Inspector•to temporary full-time employee status, the Sign Inspector to temporary part-time employee status and tlte;:substitute Dispi trdini to temporary part-time employee status. Item 9. Compensation Adjustment/Police Liainants/Deputy Chief/Chief--It was recommended that the compensation adjustment for 1991 for the lieutets and a compensation rate adjustmetn for 1992 for the lieutenants, deputy chief, and chief be approved. Item 10. Seasonal Equipment Maintenance Worker=-lrt was recommended that the hiring of John VanDiver as a seasonal equipment maintenance worker be approved. B. Plumbers Licenses It was recommended that the plumbers licenses be approved as presented in Exhibit A. C. License. On-Sale Beer.James EzieIl.rierglc's:41t4 Pilot ,ob Road It was recommended that the on-sale beer license for:,James Ezzell,Piccolo's, 4162 Pilot Knob Road be approved. D. License.Tree Contractor.A.Ctrie• • It was recommended that the tree contractor license for A. C.Tree be approved. E. Application. Recycling Program. Dakota County Special Assistance Grant, It was recommended that the City's;E iiii4 ty S� ssistance Grant application for the recycling •program be approved. F. Request. Minnesota_D • _iwent of Natural:Resour Funding for 1992 Deer.Survey It was recommended that a cooperative agreement with thitMinnesota Department of Natural resources for the 1992 Minnesota Valley deer survey be approved in the budgeted amount of$450. G. Purchase. Police Department. 1992 Squad Cars It was recommended that the purchase of five,police vexes be approved as budgeted. H. Amendment. 1992 Tax Increm eUt.l caa:• ey:,: It was recommended that the 1992 update of the.City's:tax increment financing policy be approved. Page 4/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL January 21, 1992 I. Disposition of Surplus Property.Flip Department It was recommended that the dispositi 'of:.stt'is property by the Fire Department be approved. J. Project 625.Authorize Feasibility RepQJt(Lexington Pointe Parkway- Streets & U ''ties) It was recommended that the feasibility report for Project 625(Lexington Pointe Parkway-streets and utilities) be authorized. K. Retirement. Police Department K-9 It was recommended that the retirement of tlze::Police Department K-9,Smokey,be approved. L. Contract 91-11, Approve PlansJ ii0Oiize•AdvertWement for Bids (Well #16 - Pumphouse & Pumping Facilities) It was recommended that the plans for Contract 91-11 (Well#16-Pumphouse & Pumping Facilities) be approved and an advertisement for bids be authorized for 11:00 a.m., February 14, 1992. M. Designation of Regulatory Autholtty,Wetland. Conservation Act Enforcement It was recommended that the City of Eagaii:be:designated as being the responsible local governmental unit (LGU) for the implementation and enforcement of tl e::l991 Wetland Conservation Act. N. Project 591 Set Public Hearing an&Jtuthori Ke:Notice for Reassessment. Paul & Nancy Brooks (Wilmus Addition - Lift Station & Storm Sewl r):: It was recommended that the public hearing be set for February 4,1992,and the notice for reassessment authorized for the subject project under Project 592. Pawlenty moved, Awada seconded, a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay 0 PRELIMINARY PLAT E ?ENSION/STRYKER ADDITION City Administrator Hedges suggested that consideration Ora preliminary plat extension for the Stryker Addition take place at this time as the developer was present and the City Attorney had recommended it for continuance. A representative for the developer asked if the preliminary plat and their application for a waiver of plat could be split so they could move ahead with the preliminary plat. City Attorney Sheldon said that the financial concerns raised relate to both issues and expected it to.b :resolved within the next two weeks. Awada moved,Wachter seconded,a motion to continue ifa'the February 18, 1992,regular City Council meeting, consideration of the extension of t e :**'1*i y pla:for the Stryker Addition, located at the intersection of Beau de Rue Drive and Rahi Ii<d :' ►ge: '' }:=0 • Page 5/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL January 21, 1992 Prior to beginning the appointments to' g :cissons,City Administrator Hedges added Item F. which provides for the selection of members to tlie:: gn Review Committee for the ice arena/outdoor swimming pool project. A, ADVISORY COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS: Advi$i •P#papsslon The following members were appointed to tliiiiiiidvisory Planning Commission: 1. Three-Year Terms Io :;Gorman:: <:• ::Ron Voracek Mark Miller 2. Two-Year Term John Griggs (remainder of unexpired term) 3. One-Year Alternate Term Shawn Hunter Airport'Rel*t ons::Commission The following members were appointed*the Airport./elation Commission: 1. Three-Year Terms Miriek :Dustin Lois Monson Jane Vanderpoel 2. One-Year Alternate Terms Robert J. Cooper Patricia Todd Economic De414a :to ssion McCrea moved, Pawlenty seconded, a motion to adiil:>an additional member to the Economic Development Commission representing the Small Business Sectorr•':::Aye: S Nay 0 The following members were appointed to the Economic Development Commission for three-year terms: 1. Development Sector Patrick Grinde Public Sector Roger Hughes Small Business Sector Tom Pederson.,.... Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commis Commission The following members were aged iii: th. Ioiiit: urnsvlle/Eagan Cable Communications Commission: 1. One-Year Alternate Term Michael A. (#tinncheon • Page 6/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MINUIES January 21, 1992 -:•:•:•:. •:-:•:• ......... ••••••••• Advisory Parks, Reel'Otion &Natural Re*burces Commission .....:.:.:.::.' The following members were appoinfed.::**he:::Adry Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission: • 1. Three-Year Term Theodore Billy Jack Johnson Mooridian 2. One-Year Term Ionathiti:Widem • (remainder of unexpired term) •:•:•:-:• 3. One Year Alternate Term . JCewin Knight Solid Waste Abatemeit Commission The following members were appointed to the Solid Waste Abatement Commission: 1. Residents: • Three Year Term • . Terry Davis Two Year Terms ••::: Ken Ische •• .Floyd Hiar One Year Term ••PP.10i[5•Seiz .•::::::::::•:: • 2. Business: ::::::::•::::::•:••• :•• Three-Year Term Terry Jacobs Two-Year Term Patrick Frater 3. Hauler: ......... ......••.••.••.•.•.•.•.•.• ••.• . ::::::.::::•:::•:•::•:•:•: • Two-Year Term ::•:•:.: One-Year Term .•.•.•. ••• Craig:S.Om -:•:•:•: :•:•:.: :::•:•:. An additional one-year term for a resident miiiiii?er and*One-year alternate term remain to be filled. Mayor Egan recommended that staff readvertise these-Vicancies*generate additional applications. B. GUN CLUB LAKE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION: Wachter moved,Awada seconded,a motion to appoint Rich Brasch,Water Resources Coordinator,to a full-time, indefinite term and Tom Colbert,Director of Public Works,to the alternate term on the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 C. ACTING MAYOR: Mayor Egan appointed Councilmember Pawlenty as the:Acting Mayor. -:::•:•:. :-:-:•:•: Page 7/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL January 21, 1992 D. LEGAL NEWSPAPER: • Egan moved,McCrea seconded,a motion fai'sptove retaining the Dakota County Tribune(This Week Newspapers) as the City of Eagan's official legal newspaper. Aye: 5 Nay 0 E. CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS: McCrea moved,Awada seconded,a•:ini tion;(ili gs gnete.the first and third Tuesdays of each month at 6:30 p.m.for the official City Council meetings,and dated the:Following alternate dates for those meetings with scheduling conflicts: Thursday, March 5, 1992,f&the Marcia meeting;Thursday,April 9, 1992, for the April 7 meeting;Thursday, May 21, 1992,for the May ,19:meetuz Thursday,October 8, 1992,for the October 6 meeting; and Thursday, November 5, 1992,,,for. the:November 1:meeting. F. STANDING COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS: '•• Mayor Egan appointed Councilmembers to serve on the various standing committees as follows: 1. Finance Committee: McCrea (Chair) and Pawlenty 2. Public Works Committee: Wach*tr:.(Chair) and Egan 3. Personnel Committee: Awada C1hai4:and:McCrea • Pawlenty moved, McCrea seconded, a motion to ratify•the:appointments to the standing committees. Aye: 5 Nay 0 G. DESIGN REVIEW COMMI'CI ':.? • Pawlenty moved,Wachter seconded,a motion to appoint the existing Architectural Selection Committee to the newly formed Design Review Committee for the proposed ice arena/outdoor swimming pool project and authorized staff to solicit applications from other interest groups for two additional positions on this committee. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 • SENECA DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT Mayor Egan introduced this item as a review aid discussitm:of the proposed amendment to the Seneca development agreement. After a brief explanation of the amendment, Mayor Egan asked residents in the audience whether they were in agreement and all indicated they were. Mr. Harold Voth of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission was present to answer any questions. John Westley praised the use of the N-Viro technology at::the Seneca plant but said it was only to be used to dispose of 40% of the waste treated at the plant. He urged the City to take a pro-active approach and push for the wider use of the N-Viro process with the eventual'd`iseontinuance of incineration as a means of disposal. It was the consensus of the City Council that the proposed amendment to the Seneca Development Agreement concerning odor control equipment would be vievred:favc rably by the City Council. • Page 8/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 3,1! January 21, 1992 .•...•.•. ...•...•. :.:•:•:•. 1992 CD:14:RECONSIDE**TION ••••••••••••• • Mayor Egan introduced this item as reconsiiiiiittkii:4the project designation for the 1992 Block Grant Funds. City Administrator Hedges provided background on the item and noted that at the January 7, 1992, regular City Council meeting, Councilmember McCrea had asked whether the provision of open space for the densely populated Wescott Square development was an appropriate use of the CDBG funds. Staff was not certain at that time whether funds could be expencle51:0A44.1AP.T.Mer..and the City Council subsequently approved another use for the grant funds. Mr.HedgeS:Siia:iiiiffiiiis:iii.2444ked with the Dakota County Homing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) and find that it maybe possible to use the funds for such a purpose. Director of Parks& Recreation Vraa said th$:several yegs:ago consideration was given to providing some open space or park area for the development. 14e. staff eOuld review the area again with a focus on the age range of the children who live in Wili0iiiediat :424::::.tommunity Development Director Runkle suggested that easements be obtained and than CDBG funds applied to any improvements. He said in addition to an easement from the property owner, it may be possible to obtain another acre of property nearby. McCrea moved,Wachter seconded,a motion to reconsider Council action of January 7,1992,regarding the designation of Community Development Block Grant Funds for housing rehabilitation. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 McCrea moved,Awada seconded, ie222.00622:0.2thorizing staff to explore the possibility of obtaining 1+ ....... •••• " acres of potential parkland in the Wescott Square area Witktire..:242.derstanding that if this project does not qualify for CDBG funding, the grant designation will revert back.i6:iliel2ousing rehabilitation project as originally •.••.• approved. •. .•••• Councilmember Pawlenty recompOrlek:.:thai ownership or dedication of property within the development be researched to maximize theiiie.of the grant funds for improvements. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PRELIMINARY PLAT EXTENSION/STRYKER ADDITION This item was addressed immediatibCfollOivingiOnsiileratitin of the Consent Agenda. •••••... SELECTION OF ARCHITECT/ICE ARESAISWIMMING POOL •.•.•.•. . Mayor Egan introduced this item as the selection of an 42242.itect for the proposed ice arena/outdoor swimming pool project. Discussion centered around the Architecti.eview Committee and the process involved in their recommendation. McCrea moved,Awada seconded, a motion to approve the firm of Ankeny, Kell, and Richter (AKR) for phase I of the proposed ice arena/outdoor swimming pool project with the understanding that AKR will change their pool consultant without altering their bid and,if that is possible, a contract for service will be offered to firm of BRW at the same$18,000 Aye:. 5 Nay...P. :•:-:•:•:• VARIANCE/EAGAN ROY4E Mayor Egan introduced this item as a variance for Doug Pietsch/Pietsch Builders, Inc., of 10' to the Required 30' Setback from public right-of-way for Lot 22, Block 2, Eagan Royale, located in the southeast • •• Page 9/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL •:•:•: January 21, 1992 .•...•.• ......••• quarter of Section 31. Director of Community:Development Runkle said the variance was prompted by the builder's desire to preserve a large oak tree citi:Oc.property. He said setbacks could be met;however,it would result in the removal of this tree. • Doug Pietsch was present and indicated the tree is in excellent condition and worth saving. McCrea moved, Wachter seconded, a motion to approve a 10 foot variance from the 30 foot setback from public right-of-way for Pietsch Builders, Inc., for Lot 22, Block 2, Eagan Royale and conditioned upon ............. meeting all other City Code requirements VARIANCE/BEACON H114100AD Mayor Egan introduced this item as a varitfii4...for Them Yehle, of 3' to the required 10' sideyard setback for 4722 Beacon Hill Road, Lot::.:14:;::$144 4:::***:Hill Addition. Director of Community Development Runkle pointed out that the *kik is proposing to add living space above his existing garage. The garage exceeds the five-foot setback by two feet,however,dwelling space requires a 10'setback. Mr.Runkle said the applicant had considered all other options and because of the existing drainage route, pool and patio, believes this to be the only realistic approach. The applicant was present as well a,s.:one of the adjacent property owners who said he did not object to the improvement. •• ••:•. : • Wachter moved,Awada seconded,a motion to approve:a variance application for Thom Yehle of 4722 Beacon Hill Road and conditioned upon meeting all other City Code requirements. Aye: 5 Nay 0 flMS .• EHW PROPERTIES SETTLEMENT/JOHNNY CAKE RIDGE ROAD Mayor Egan introduced this item as a stipulation of settlement/EHW Properties,Project 524 (Johnny Cake Ridge Road Assessments). •.•:•::::•:•::•:•:•:•:•-•.••:•••••• Egan moved,McCrea seconded,a 0010:ta:titi.01*** .itiOulation of settlement for EHW Properties relative to Project 524 (Johnny Cake Ridge Road) as preientid. Aye: 5 Nay 0 :•:•:•:. .•.•.•.• .•.•.• Page 10/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL January 21, 1992 IWILIMEMIBICAgegstvw James Williams of 4172 Reading approai`: : ':City Council about the parking problems that are occurring in his neighborhood as a result of School District 196's decision to charge for student parking. Mr. Williams outlined his contacts with the Superintendent of Schools, the School Board and other school district officials who have all indicated the fee is intended to be a revenue source for the district. Mr.Williams noted that the Post Office was threatening to stop delivering his mail because of vehicles parked in front of his mailbox as well as general concerns regarding safety:::Miry:S!i il#iaams ::ttne:of the school district's suggestions was to restrict parking in the neighborhood;however,Mr:Wi ams'said• h restrictions would infringe upon his and his guests' ability to park in front of his home. Members of the City Council then discussed l':the history::behind the issue of parking at Eagan High School. They noted their frustration in attempting to..find:a::woi able solution as well as their perception that in getting a revenue source, the school district lied shifted a *king and safety problem to the City. Because the Eagan High School parking lot was designed to accommodate student parking,it was generally agreed that a strong message should be sent to the school district. Wachter moved,McCrea seconded,a motion directing the City Administrator to send a strong message to the Board of Education of Independent:.School District #196 in care of the Superintendent of Schools, requesting that the student parking permit:pigi i:.be.abolished to alleviate the on-street parking congestion that is occurring in the adjacent resident neighborhood;.:. Ye ...5 Nay 0 :::DICE#:; t < . ..,r...$....�....` SPECIA,L:CITY COUNCIL MEETING McCrea moved,Pawlenty seconded,a motion to set a special meeting of the City Council for February 3 at 5:00 p.m., for the purpose of reviewing ice arena facilities and discussion of related issues. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Wachter moved, Egan seconded, a motion to:-.approve ie checklist dated January 20, 1991, in the amount of$324,51490,the checklist dated January 21,19.9Z in the amount of$170,811.14 and the checklist dated January 7, 1992, in the amount of$348,823.63 Aye: 5:?Nay: 0 EXECUTIVE SESSION/ADJOURNMENT The City Council adjourned the regular meeting to an executive session to consider results of collective bargaining negotiations at 9:35 p.m. Those in attendance were Mayor Egan,Councilmembers Awada,McCrea, Pawlenty and Wachter,and City Administrator Hedges. The exeaCiifjve session was adjourned at approximately 10:00 p.m. E.J.VanOverbeke City Clerk 4 ski PLUMBERS TO BE APPROVED JANE . ..•.•... •:•:•:•:. 1. Blaylock Plumbing 2 . Boedeker Plumbing & 1140..ng 3 . Bruckmueller Plumbing 4 . Dakota Plumbing & 5. Elander Plumbing Co. , Inc. 6. Five Star Plumbing Inc. 7 . GR Mechanical 8 . Raymond E. Haeg . •• 9 . Harris Mechanical Cori**00W0.4: : 10 . Jerry's Plumbing 11 . Lakeside Plumbing & Heating4.*Inc. 12 . Major Mechanical, Inc. 13 . Matthew Daniels .•. 11 . McDonald Plumbing 15 . Dick Motz Plumbing 16 . Neu Plumbing 17 . Nybc-Peterson Company Inc. 18 . Larry R. Olson 19 . Peine Plumbing & Heating, Inc. 20 . R. C. Plumbing 21 . Dale Sorensen Company 22 . Spiess Plumbing 23 . Star Plumbing & Excavating 24 . State Mechanical, Inc. 25 . Thorpson Plumbing Corp. 26 . Welter & Blaylock, Inc • 27 . Wenzel Plumbing & He*ti , Inc. ............ ... • 1 M E M O R A N D U M To: Jim Sheldon From: Annette Margarit Date: January 20, 1992 Re: City of Apple Valley v. Werner Lembke, etal. Court File No. : C9-91-9011 The City's Motion seeking a Temporary Injunction in the above-referenced matter was heard by the Honorable William F. Thuet on January 14, 1992 . Mr. Werner Lembke and his attorney, Jerome Ritter of St. Paul, were present at the hearing. While in court, I served Mr. Lembke with the Summons and Complaint initiating the civil action against him and also with the criminal summons and formal complaint against him and also his wife. His appearance and our service alleviates any notice problems we would have encountered due to our inability to find him. Mr. Lembke had contacted his attorney only the day or so prior to the hearing but his attorney hastily brought a counterclaim that the City's revocation of Mr. Lembke's conditional use permits was illegal. Mr. Lembke's position is based upon his statement in his affidavit that he does not receive mail at his residence, 7000 70th Street, Cottage Grove, nor at his business address, 545 Wescott Road, Eagan. Mr. Lembke states that he receives his mail at P.O. Box 225, Cottage Grove, Minnesota 55016. Mr. Lembke states that mail addressed to either the residence or business will not be delivered to such address. I do not believe his defense will be successful. Mr. Lembke's residence is the address that appears in the telephone book and the address to which the City of Eagan sends his tax statements. No mail we have sent there has been returned to us. The June, 1991, Notice of Deficiencies and the September, 1991, notice of the upcoming City Council public hearing were mailed to the Lembke Trucking address and neither item was returned. The City file indicates that nearly 100% of the 1980 - 1985 City communications with Mr. Lembke regarding his trucking company went to the 545 Wescott Road address. Further, a corporation (Lembke Trucking Company, Inc. ) must have a business street address and not a post office box. Judge Thuet did not grant the City's Motion for Temporary Injunction. Judge Thuet, however, did look at the pictures we had of the site and was very familiar with the predicament in which the City finds itself. Judge Thuet wanted to "keep the fire lit under this guy" and recommended to his attorney that Mr. Lembke completely clean-up his site and begin the process of obtaining a new conditional use permit. Judge Thuet set a pre-trial date for February 21, 1992 , and a trial date on the permanent injunction for March 5, 1992 , both to be heard by him. Mr. Lembke has been notified of both of these dates so there need be no further notice. AMM:kd , nEVERSON, WILCOX& SHELDON, P A • • A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW LARRY S.SEVERSON* JAMES F.SHELDON KENNETH R.HALL J. PATRICK WILCOX* 600 MIDWAY NATIONAL BANK BUILDING ***SCOTT D.JOHNSTON MICHAEL G. DOUGHERTY 7300 WEST 147TH STREET LOREN M.SOLFEST MICHAEL E. MOLENDA** APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124 CHRISTINE M. SCOTILLO (612) 432-3136 ANNETTE M. MARGARIT DANIEL M. SHERIDAN TELEFAX NUMBER 432-3780 SHARON K.HILLS MARK D.STENBECK *ALSO LICENSED IN IOWA **ALSO LICENSED IN WISCONSIN ***ALSO LICENSED IN NEBRASKA OF COUNSEL: JOHN E.VUKELICH February 7, 1992 The Honorable Mayor, City Counsel and City Administrator City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P.O. Box 21199 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 RE: J.P. Norex, Inc. v. Derrick Companies and the City of Eagan Dear Mayor Egan, Counsel Members. and Administrator Hedges: I am pleased to advise you that the City has won the above referenced litigation which we tried at the Dakota County District Court on January 13, 1992. In summation, the District Court awarded Norex none of the monetary damages it was seeking against the City and further ordered that the City is entitled to judgment against the Derrick Companies for all of our litigation expenses incurred in the defense of this matter. As you may recall, this litigation arose because the Derrick Companies failed and refused to pay Norex for certain sewer repair work Norex did on the storm sewer in the Fairway Hills Addition. As to the City of Eagan, Norex initially claimed that we were liable as the City had not procured statutory payment and performance bonds for the project. Once we convinced Norex and its attorney that such bonds were not required by statute, Norex then commenced this action in the District Court in Hennepin County claiming that the City was responsible for its unpaid charges (approximately $12,500.00) as, Norex claimed, the City had made various representations to it that it would be paid via the Derrick letter of credit. As Hennepin County clearly was the improper venue for an action against a Dakota County Municipality, we attempted to have Norex voluntarily transfer the case to Dakota County but it refused to do so. Accordingly, we had to bring the matter on before the Chief Judge of Hennepin County and only then was the action transferred to the proper venue of Dakota County. Page 2 February 7, 1992 Mayor Egan, Counsel Members and Administrator Hedges At the recent trial, Norex's main theory of recovery is that the City, through its consulting engineer's office, had advised Norex and its subcontractor that the Derrick letter of credit was in place and that they would be paid through this letter of credit if Derrick refused payment_ The City claimed that the only statement that was made was that there was, in fact, an existing letter of credit on the job. Moreover, we specifically denied that the City had made any promise or representation to Norex that it would be paid from the Derrick letter of credit and also argued that there was no legal ground to award judgment against the City under the facts and circumstances of the case. The City additionally claimed that it was entitled to recoup all of the costs, expenses and fees incurred in the defense of this matter and that in the event any judgment was entered against the City, that the City receive a corresponding judgment against the Derrick Companies for contribution and indemnity. In the Court's Order, copy enclosed for your reference, the Court basically held that the City was not liable to Norex for any of its claimed damages and losses, that Norex was, of course, entitled to judgment against the Derrick Companies for the amount of the nonpayment, and that the City of Eagan was entitled to judgment against the Derrick Companies for all of the cost and expenses incurred in this litigation. In regard to these expenses and fees, it is my understanding that the City has been deducting our ongoing costs, expenses and attorney fees incurred in the litigation from Derrick's existing cash deposit with the City, pursuant to the term of the Fairway Hill's Development Contract. If this cash deposit becomes depleted before all of these litigation expenses are reimbursed to the City, we will need to have a supplemental judgment entered against the Derrick Companies (by authority of the enclosed Order) and then pursue these amounts, and also all cost of collection, from the Derrick Companies via normal collection procedures. I will contact Gene VanOverbeke and Tom Colbert in the next few days to determine if we do have sufficient funds remaining in the cash escrow to cover the litigation expenses and, if not, we will prepare the necessary papers for a supplemental judgment against Derrick. In closing, I wish to call to your attention all of the assistance which we received from City Staff and, especially, that of Tom Colbert and Craig Larson (incorrectly identified as "Scott Larson" in the enclosed Court Order) of the Bonestroo Firm. Both Tom and Craig rendered invaluable assistance in both trial preparation and in acting as the City's witnesses at trial and our victory would not have been possible without their invaluable input and assistance. Page 3 February 7, 1992 Mayor Egan, Counsel Members and Administrator Hedges As always, we have enjoyed working with the City on this challenging litigation and greatly appreciate your allowing us to represent you. If you have any questions regarding the enclosed Order or the underlying litigation, please call me directly at your convenience. Very truly yours, SEVE ON, ILC X & HEL N, P.A. J.Patrick Wilcox JPW/jhz Enc. cc: Thomas Colbert Craig Larson James Sheldon ' 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF DAKOTA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT F?ePns t'L t7 19 J.P Norex, 4 .� Inc Inc , Rc:_a w. :.,a, COUrt Ail^.r.:1:ator Plaintiff, By ( /��y J File #:C8-90-8440 v. Derrick Companies, a Minnesota FINDINGS OF FACT, Corporation, and the City of Eagan CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, Defendants. ORDER The above-entitled matter came on for trial without jury before the undersigned Judge of the District Court on January 22, 1992, at the Dakota County Judicial Center, Hastings, Minnesota. Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff was Ronald L. Snelling, Esq. Appearing on behalf of Defendant City of Eagan was J. Patrick Wilcox, Esq. Derrick Companies made no appearance. J. P. Norex, Inc. (hereinafter "Norex") filed a complaint against Derrick Companies (hereinafter "Derrick") and the City of Eagan (hereinafter "the City") . The City answered and filed a crossclaim against Derrick and a counterclaim against Norex. Derrick did not answer or otherwise appear in this matter. Now, therefore, the Court being fully advised makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Defendant Derrick Companies is the developer of a subdivision, Fairway Hills, within the defendant City of Eagan's city limits. 2 . Defendant Derrick signed a "Development Contract" with the City which required Derrick to file a Letter of Credit in favor of the City in the event Derrick defaulted on its agreement and the City was forced to complete work on the project. 1 3 . Derrick had not been declared in default by the City under the Development Contract at any time relevant to this case. 4. Early in 1990, a storm sewer in Fairway Hills that was Derrick' s responsibility to repair sheared off. 5. Norex was contacted by Scott Larson (hereinafter "Larson") , a member of the City' s consulting engineers, Boonestroo and Associates, with regard to repairing the sewer. Larson suggested Norex contact Derrick to contract for the work. 6. On February 21, 1990, Norex sent a letter to Derrick setting forth the terms of a contract for the repair work. 7 . The letter-contract included a set price of $9, 000. 00 for special excavation and casing work to be completed by a sub- contractor, Tri-State, Inc. The balance of the final contract price was to be Norex' s fee as determined on an hourly basis. 8 . On February 28, 1990, Roger Derrick signed his acceptance of the contract. 9 . A short time before the work was begun, there was a meeting at the site of the broken sewer. Attending that meeting were Don Patten of Derrick, Pat Minger (hereinafter "Minger") of Norex, Larson, and Eugene Berthiaume (hereinafter "Berthiaume") of Tri-State. 10. At this meeting there was a conversation between Larson and Minger regarding the Letter of Credit that was required per the Development Contract between the City and Derrick. 9 . On March 5, 6 and 7, 1990, Norex and Tri-State satisfactorily completed the work specified in the contract with Derrick. 10. The final cost was $12,440.53 . ($9, 000 for Tri-State's work plus $3 ,440. 53 of hourly work by Norex) . 11. Derrick has not paid Norex. 12 . On April 25, 1990, Norex, through its attorney, Ronald L. Snelling, sent the City a demand letter. The letter did not mention the Letter of Credit but instead indicated Norex' s belief that a bond posted by Derrick secured the payment. Now, based on the findings of fact, the record and arguments of counsel, the Court being duly advised of the premises, the Court makes the following CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Plaintiff is granted judgment against defendant Derrick Companies in the sum of twelve thousand four hundred forty and 53/100 ($12,440. 53) . 2 . Plaintiff is denied judgment against the City of Eagan. 3 . Defendant City of Eagan is granted judgment against co- defendant Derrick companies for all litigation expenses incurred by the City in defense of this lawsuit. 4 . The memorandum hereto attached is incorporated herein. BY THE COURT Date: � /� -� 4 • m Tho s urpi Judge JUDGMENT I hereby certify that the Conclusions of Law contained in this document shall constitute the Judgment of this Court. Date: Roger Sames Court Administrator By: Deputy Clerk MEMORANDUM At trial, Norex made a vaguely stated claim that one of the purposes of the Letter of Credit was to protect contractors who had not been paid by developers. The City had no contractual obligation to act as surety with regard to the repair of the broken sewer in the Derrick Company development known as Fairway Hills. The Development Contract provided that the purpose of the Letter of • Credit was to ensure that the City would not be left to foot the bill should Derrick default and the City were forced to finish the project. Derrick had not been declared in default at the time the work was performed. There is no doubt that Derrick has a legal obligation to pay Norex for repairing the storm sewer under the contract-letter dated February 21, 1990, and accepted by Derrick on February 28, 1990. There is no doubt that Norex deserves the Court' s sympathy. However, sympathy for Norex as the victim of Derrick' s breach of contract does not require an equitable remedy from the City. Although flexible, equitable remedies have parameters. At trial, Norex relied on the equitable remedy of promissory estoppel which provides that a promise is binding when: a. a promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance on the part of the promisee, b. the promise does induce such action or forbearance, c. and injustice can only be avoided by enforcement of the promise. In this case, whether a promise was made at the meeting site is unclear. At trial, Minger stated he asked Larson if the City had a Letter of Credit as he had not worked for Derrick before and wanted to be certain funds were available for payment and that Larson answered in the affirmative. In deposition, Berthiaume testified that Minger asked Larson how he would be paid and that Larson responded by stating, "There is no problem, there is a letter of credit. " Larson testified that all he said was there was a Letter of Credit in place. All agree that there was no discussion as to the amount or duration of the Letter of Credit which would be an essential part of substantive promise in this situation. • Larson had no reason to reasonably believe Norex was relying on whatever he said in making the decision to undertake the work. Larson was a consulting engineer who was speaking to a contractor who had worked with the City for ten years on twelve projects, half of which were on private property as in this case. Moreover, Norex had never been paid on the basis of a Letter of Credit. Nor had any contractor ever been paid in this manner in the memory of Thomas Colbert, Eagan' s Director of Public Works. It is questionable if Norex actually relied, whether justifiably or not, on Larson's comments. The format of the contract-letter of February 21, 1990, suggests that it was sent to Derrick, already signed by Minger. Roger Derrick signed the acceptance on February 28, 1990. Norex testified that both parties signed the contract at the on site meeting after Larson' s comments. It could not have been signed by both parties at the meeting as Roger Derrick was not present. Two years have elapsed and details have been forgotten and it is likely that Norex committed to the contract before Larson's comments were made. Also, the demand letter sent to the City about two months after the work was done did not mention reliance on the Letter of Credit as the basis of liability. Instead the letter based its demand on the payment bond required for a contractor' s work contracted by a city for work on municipal property. The Court holds that the above facts do not support a remedy in promissory estoppel. 7: 1 T.M.M. j // SEVERSON,WILCOX& SHELDON, P.A. A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW KENNETH R.HALL LARRY S.SEVERSON* ***SCOTT D.JOHNSTON JAMES F.SHELDON 600 MIDWAY NATIONAL BANK BUILDING LOREN M.SOLFEST J. PATRICK WILCOX* 7300 WEST 147TH STREET CHRISTINE M. SCOTILLO MICHAEL G. DOUGHERTY APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124 ANNETTE M. MARGARIT MICHAEL E. MOLENDA** (612) 432-3136 DANIEL M. SHERIDAN SHARON K.HILLS TELEFAX NUMBER 432-3780 MARK D.STENBECK *ALSO LICENSED IN IOWA **ALSO LICENSED IN WISCONSIN OF COUNSEL: ***ALSO LICENSED IN NEBRASKA LITIGATION WORK PRODUCT JOHN E.VUKELICH PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL February 11, 1992 The Honorable Mayor, City Council and City Administrator City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P.O. Box 21199 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 RE: Eagan v. Meritor et. al. Dear Mayor Egan, Council Members and Administrator Hedges: As you will recall, Meritor, Enebak Construction Company and Suburban Engineering have asserted various Motions against the City in the above referenced litigation. While these Motions were somewhat duplicative, the most salient claims raised by the Defendants through these Motions are as follows: 1. That the Defendants be awarded Summary Judgment against the City ruling that the City was entitled to no damages from any of the Defendants on the Lexington Square Project. The Defendants' main grounds for requesting this Summary Judgment include the following: A. The City approved the Lexington Square Plans. B. The City inspected, or should have inspected, the work in Lexington Square as it progressed and, at least tacitly, it approved the construction. C. The City accepted the Lexington Square improvements. D. The City Council accepted the Lexington Square drainage system. E. The City Council agreed to settle and resolve the matter in all respects for $30,000.00. F. Any flooding which occurred was an "Act of God" for which the Defendants are not legally liable. LITIGATION WORK PRODUCT Page 2 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL February 11, 1992 Mayor Egan, Council Members & Administrator Hedges 2. That the Court should rule as a matter of law that the City is not entitled to any of its administrative, engineering and legal fees and expenses it has incurred in this litigation. 3. That the Defendants should be allowed to serve Third Party Complaints against the Bonestroo Firm, said complaints basically stating that if the Defendants are found liable to the City, then Bonestroo should be, in turn, liable to the Defendants. 4. That Meritor Savings, Meritor Development and Meritor Mortgage Companies should all be dismissed from this Action as none of them were involved with the development of the Lexington Square First Addition. 5. Additionally, the currently named Defendants brought a number of Motions against each other asking the Court to make various rulings on the respective legal relationships among them. All of these Motions were heard by Judge Mansur on January 13, 1992 and we are happy to advise you that the Court denied all the Defendants' Motions with the single exception that it did allow the Defendants to assert Third Party Complaints against Bonestroo. I am enclosing a copy of the Court's Order for your review and consideration. Based upon this Order, the status of our upcoming trial against the Defendants is as follows: 1. We can attempt recovery against the Defendants for all of the damages incurred by the City, specifically including our legal, engineering and administrative expenses incurred in the resolution of the project and this litigation. 2. All of the "Meritor Companies" which we initially named as Defendants. to the Action will remain as Defendants. 3. As the Court has allowed the Defendants to bring direct Third Party Complaints against Bonestroo, we will not be able to use the Bonestroo Firm as our expert witness in this case and we will have to consider retaining a new engineering expert witness. I LITIGATION WORK PRODUCT Page 3 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL February 11, 1992 Major Egan, Council Members and Administrator Hedges With the exception of the ruling regarding Bonestroo, we are very pleased with the outcome of these Motions. As to Bonestroo, I do not believe that its attorneys have finalized their position yet, but it is possible that Bonestroo may attempt to appeal the Court's decision regarding the Third Party Complaints against Bonestroo to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. In all candor, I do not believe that there is any Minnesota law or case decision which would allow a Third Party Complaint to be served on Bonestroo at this late stage in the proceedings--more than two years after the Action was commenced! Due to the confidential and privileged nature of these matters, the foregoing is only a very brief summary and if you would like us to discuss these issues in greater detail with you at Executive Session, we will, of course, be happy to do so. Very truly yours, SEV�WI COX & SHELDON, P.A. ' r J.Patrick Wilcox JPW/jhz Enc. cc: James Sheldon STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF DAKOTA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT City of Eagan, File No. C7-89-7516A/B Plaintiff, FINDINGS OF FACT. vs. ORDER, AND MEMORANDUM Meritor Development Corporation, a foreign corporation, Meritor Mortgage Corporation Central, a/k/a Meritor Mortgage Corporation, a Minnesota Corporation, Meritor Savings Bank, f/k/a The Philadelphia Savings Fund Society, a foreign corporation and Suburban Engineering, Filed this " day Inc. , a Minnesota corporation, of ‘ a-" 9� ROGER W.SAMES,Couct •.•u istrator Defendants, Alikek4-591/1- and / pin, Meritor Development Corporation and ' Knutson Mortgage Corporation, f/k/a Meritor Mortgage Corporation Central, f/k/a Northland Mortgage Company, Defendants and Third Party Plaintiffs, vs. Enebak Construction Company, and Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. , Third Party Defendant. The above-entitled motion came on for hearing on the Special Term calendar at 1: 30 p.m. on January 13 , 1992 at the Dakota County Judicial Center in Hastings, Minnesota before the undersigned judge of district court. J. Patrick Wilcox and Kenneth R. Hall, Attorneys at Law, appeared on behalf of Plaintiff City of Eagan. Mark Bloomquist, Attorney at Law, 1 appeared on behalf of Defendant Suburban Engineering, Inc. Larry B. Guthrie appeared on behalf of Defendants and Third Party Plaintiffs Meritor. Scott R. West, Attorney at Law, appeared on behalf of Third-Party Defendant Enebak Construction Company. Based on the arguments, the memoranda, affidavits and the file, the Court FINDS 1. That there are genuine issues of material fact as to Defendants ' negligence and/or breach of contract with Plaintiff. 2 . That in the interest of justice and judicial economy, Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. is an appropriate party against which Meritor, Knutson and Suburban may file third-party complaints. 3 . That as a party and as a contract employee of Plaintiff, employees of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. are precluded from acting as expert witnesses in this matter. 4 . That there are genuine issues of material fact as to the liability of Defendants Suburban and Enebak to Third-Party Plaintiffs Meritor. 5. That no party has presented Rule 11 violations which would give rise to the award of fees or costs. ORDERS 1. That Defendants ' motions for summary judgment be and the same are hereby denied. 2 . That Meritor ' s, Knutson' s and Suburban' s motions to add 2 • third-party complaints for contribution and indemnity against Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. be and the same are hereby granted. 3 . That all other motions not specifically granted be and the same are hereby denied. 4 . That Third-Party Defendant Bonestroo and its employees be and the same are hereby precluded from acting as expert witnesses in this matter. 5 . The following Memorandum is hereby incorporated by reference. 6 . That the Court Administrator shall enter judgment forthwith. DATED: February 4 , 1992 BY THE COURT: , i 41 `, �r • __—__._ TIN J, • : e udge of Dis rict Court MEMORANDUM Defendants' Summary Judgment against Plaintiff. . These parties ' motions were based primarily upon theories and allegations that because the City had inspected and/or approved the work for which it now holds Defendants accountable, Defendants are relieved of liability. The facts presented tend to support Defendants but for the following reasons. The contract between Meritor and Plaintiff contained Meritor ' s guaranty for "poor material and faulty workmanship" extending for 3 two years beyond the date the City accepted the work in writing. This guaranty suggests that the parties contemplated the question of liability above and beyond the City' s inspection and approval process. The guaranty further presents questions as to whether the defects giving rise to this suit are due to poor material or faulty workmanship, particularly regarding over-land drainage. There are further questions of fact, given the parties ' disagreement over the extent of the flooding after the two July, 1987 storms, as to the City ' s requirements for 5-year or 100-year storms, and as to which designs and work-product the City inspected and approved, as well as other tangential issues . While the Court is therefore precluded from granting summary judgment at this juncture, the resolution of these factual issues could result in a directed verdict. New Third-Party Complaint Just as Meritor' s design and construction contractors/agents are appropriate parties, so too are the City ' s design engineers. Bonestroo 's participation in the design of the City's plans and its continued participation as inspector and advisor to the City appear to be integral to this action. Its liability should therefore be decided within the instant suit. Expert Witnesses The effectiveness of Bonestroo ' s employees as unbiased experts is clouded by its agency status for Plaintiff. That effectiveness is further tarnished now that Bonestroo is a party to this action. 4