Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
03/17/1981 - City Council Regular
E.".GAN CITY `:)UNC'1 «.,....e o.. ti �a0.�.u.. .hw• REGULAR MEET<NG EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL MARCH 17, 1981 6:30 P.M. E I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE I1. 6:33 - ADOPT AGENDA AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. 6:35 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS Q. A. Fire Department P•� C. Park Department Q•\ B. Police Department 7 D. Public Works Department Q' IV. 6:55 - CONSENT ITEMS [One (1) Motion Approves'All Items] f.9 A. Change Order #4, Contract 237 (Thomas Lake Road) e. 10 B. Change Order #1 , Contract 80-8 (Imre, Econ Lab, Ches Mar East 2nd & Duckwood Drive) P11 C. Change Order #1 , Contract 80-9 (James Refrigeration) e' 11 D. Final Pay Request /Acceptance, Contract 240A (Drexel Heights Streets) e, 11E. Final Pay Request/Acceptance, Contract 79-19 (Brittany, Lake Park, Thomas Lake Additions) 4 �2 F. Final Pay Request/Acceptance, Contract 79-21 (Lakeside Estates et al) e1Z G. Final Pay Request/Acceptance, Contract 79-23 (Slatter's Road) 11H. Grading Permit Application (Rauenhorst Corp) P1I. Execute Traffic Signal Agreement with MnDOT P3.i3 J. Approve Plans & Specifications/Authorize Bids-Sewer Cleaning Machine V,13 K. Approve Plans & Specifications, Contract 80-21 (Blackhawk Lake Outlet) cj+ L. Non-intoxicating Beer & Bingo License for St. John Neumann/ Knights of Columbus for 4-5-81 14 M. Project 327, Receive Report and Order Public Hearing for Joyce Addition Streets & Utilities V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS 05A. Project #324 (Safari at Eagan Streets & Utilities) t.37 B. Project #329 (Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition Streets & Utilities) SSC. I.R. Financing for Pilot Knob Shopping Center Sy D. Public Facilities Rezoning � S7 E. Assessment Hearing, Project #266 (Art Rahn 1st Addition) .ScIF. Amendment to Housing Assistance Plan (Dakota County) VI. OLD BUSINESS e•60 A. J.P.K. PARK Addition Final Plat eW.B. J.I. Case Co. for a Variance to Exceed the 35% Lot Coverage ' Requirement in Industrial Zoning District, located in the SW4 of NW4 of Section 2 Eagan City Council Agenda March 17, 1981 Page Two VII. NEW BUSINESS e.44.v A. Final Plat Approval for Mari Acres 2nd Addition p 6$ B. Final Plat Approval for Ches Mar East 4th Addition 1 70 C. James Basta for Transfer of Wine License & 3.2 Beer License for Q Italian Pie Shoppe p 70D. Blue Cross-Blue Shield for Rezoning of Approximately 122 acres 1 from A, Agricultural, to PD, Planned Development, located in Sections 16 and 17 (located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Coachman Road) q� E. Richard Parranto for an Amendment to the South Delaware Hills Planned Development to Allow Duplex and Quadrominiums and Single Family Homes and for a Revised Preliminary Plat (South Delaware Hills) , located in S� of Section 12 (located in the area of Burr Oak Drive) 100F. Zachman Homes, Inc. , for Waiver of Plat in Order to Split 3 P Duplex Lots for Single Ownership, located on Lots 1-3, Block 1, Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition, Section 30 10S'G. General Coatings, Inc. , for Conditional Use Permit for a Pylon Q Sign, located on Lot 1 , Block 1, Imre Addition, Section 2 C.11\H. Northwestern Bell for a Special Permit for a Carrier Building Site at the Northeast Corner of Rahn Road & County Road 30, Section 20 Q ��3 I. Establish Public Hearing for 4- 7-81 to consider Tax Exempt Financing for Safari Mall VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS �.\\IA. Conditional Use Permit Renewals for January & February D klh B. Lawsuit "Paul Taylor vs. City Council Members Smith, Parranto & Egan" Q.\JAC. Legislative Update IX. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) X. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: MARCH 13, 1981 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION MEMO After approval of the March 3, 1981 City Council minutes and approval of the March 17, 1971 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration: sm 31R2 IN FIRE DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department -- There are no items to be considered for the Fire Department at this time. POLICE DEPARTMENT B. Police Department -- There are no items to be considered for the Police Department at this time. PARK DEPARTMENT C. Park Department - Consultant Selection for Ridg ecliffe Park- The Park and Recreation Director has been working on the selection of a consultant to develop a master parks plan for Rid ecliffe Park at the direction of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee and City Council during the past several weeks . Initially, twenty- two (22 ) firms responded to an article placed in the monthly news- letter of the Minnesota Society of Landscape Architects. All responses were reviewed by the Director of Parks and Recreation, Carolyn Thurston, Advisory Park Committee member and the City Administrator. Ultimately, seven ( 7 ) firms were selected for inter- views by the committee. The Director of Parks and Recreation, prior to the interviews', supplied each of the seven ( 7 ) firms with background material relating to the proposed Ridgecliffe Park development. This was to allow the firms to prepare themselves and respond in the interview process in an informative manner. The interviews allowed the individuals to make a presentation on the capabilities of their firms. The selection committee, the aforementioned three ( 3 ) people, used questions that are found on pages Z_ through q- as the basis for the interview process. In order to assist in the `evaluation of the firms, a list of eighteen criteria was developed by the selection committee. Each criteria was weighed from one to three points based on its relative impor- tance. A copy of those criteria is enclosed on page - At the completion of the interviews, the selection committee ranked the top three firms on each of three questions. The composite Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Two score and ranking were generally consistent and identified the three top firms. The Parks and Recreation Director, along with Committee Member Thurston, did visit various parks in other communi- ties that were the result of design work by various firms that were interviewed. After completing the evaluation process, the committee is recommending that the City hire the firm of Brauer and Associates for this project. The firm has nearly twenty years of experience and has completed a variety of park projects for both large and small communities as well as for private firms . The individuals assigned to the project by Brauer and Associates have extensive background in parks planning and design. Mr. Fred Hoisington is a- principal of the firm, Mr. George Watson will be performing the design work. Brauer and Associates offer a complete range of services, master planning, construction documents, grading and planting plans as well as graphic design. The scope of services will be provided. by the consultant as a two phase approach: Phase One is a preliminary report phase in which data collection, analysis , program input and schematic solutions are made. This phase also includes a public meeting for neighborhood residents . Phase One is estimated at $3,700, In Phase Two, the consultant receives direction as to what the City has determined as to the most effective park design and the process of developing the master plan along with necessary grading plans , planting programs and the physical approach to development is accomplished. Fees for Phase Two of the plan are $2,500. A several page contract has been pre- pared by the consultant with the cooperation of the Director of Parks and Recreation for review by the City Attorney and City Administrator. The selection committee feels Mr. Hoisington and Mr. Watson and the firm of Brauer and Associates are the best quali- fied to meet the needs of the City for this project. Funding for this park plan will be taken from the park site acquisition and development fund which has an estimated fund balance projected for 1981 at $243,900. Enclosed on page 6 is a copy of a chart that was prepared by Bauer and Associates that illustrates the approach that has been' agreed upon by that firm and the City for proceeding with the phased development of a master plan for Ridge- cliffe Park. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee to hire Bauer and Associates to form a master plan for the future development of Ridgecliffe Park. a • e'�ruary `:l By: Ken .'raa Director of Parks & Recreation Questions For CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS Ridge Cliffe Park 1. Concern: Size of firm(capabilities) relative to this project. Ability to respond to increasing needs of park system. Will this project get "lost" by a larger firm. Question: How do you relate the capabilities of your firm to handle this and other possible park projects? Aren't you too big (small) to handle this park and give it the attention the City expects. 2. Concern: Ability of the firm to recognize their failures, and ability to identify the source of the failures in order to take corrective action. Question: You've shown us some excellent examples of your work, undoubtedly all of which are successes. But what of your failures? Do you have what you might consider to be a failure in any of these designs? If so how was it that it came about? What corrective action have you taken, or could be taken? 3. Concern: Ability to relate design into "optimum development dollar" costa Question: What is your philosophy or approach to insuring that park design does not become too expensive to implement; or that design of the park suffers because of a too conservative approach from a perceived lack of funds? 4. Concern: That long term, high maintenance care costs are not being designed into the park. Question: How do you approach and identify in your park design, long term maintenance cost items and rationalize its inclusion into the park design? S. Concern: Ability to meet with the public and how they would represent the park plans and the City to the residents. Question: Develop briefly a scenario on how you would conduct a meeting with the public, concerning the project? 6. Concern: Resolution of conflict between City/Firm. Question: How would you resolve a conflict in your design ideas with that of the City and City staffs design idea? Page 2 * • 7. Concern: Does the firm have a good perspective on the abilities/capabilities of a community like Eagan to meet the consultants needs for informa- tion, etc. or have they assumed that the City has the capabilities to respond like other communities might have. Question: What do you expect in the way of services, information, etc. from the City of Eagan/City staff during the design process? Note: Follow up questions should be asked as may seem appropriate. Each firm has been requested to discuss fee's, staffing arrangements, scope of services etc. Therefore, clarifying questions on these area's may be necessary. 4 i CONSULTANT SELECTION CRITERIA Rating Pt. Value Total 1 2 3 1. Qualifications of project manager: 3 Authority and responsibility to make final decision on behalf of consultant. Technical background. 2. Experiences of firm in working with this type project. 2 3. Experience of firm in working with smaller projects. 5 acre or less (this type) 1 4. Experience of firm in working with larger projects. 10 acre or more (this type) 2 1 5. Staff capabilities: 2 i.e. engineering capabilities, construction supervision. 6. Use of material (wood, plant material, etc) 1 7. Apparent concern for maintenance in designs. 3 8. Apparent concern for cost in construction. 2 9. Senstivity to existing site features. 2 10. Esthetic and design concerns. 1 11. Consultant fee; lump sum, cost +, hourly. 1 12. Client relationship: Rapport with Staff, Concil, Committee and Public 2 13. Presentation 2 14. Knowledge and ability to identify with recreation needs. 2 15. Imagination/ingenuity of firms appraisal to this project or similiar. 2 16. Capability of firm to handle a broad range of park design problems - ball fields, nature center, etc. 3 17. Availability of project manager/firm to devote sufficient time to the project. 1 18. Philosophy of park design. 1 5 U O `o ° `o c C r w a „� � • r : _ Oa o 0 qI = W (J F- CC to r L°oS A • — W A c O C c o At o °> i 2 2 W 0 7- wCAQ O cc orc cc IE •` . . . � ' e SO 4c 0 go o QIt 0 • CL �LL Q anmus O N < • C i V E a S n . u W W ZA e Y z • e 1 A6 s • w Z 4W • 0W6J W cc I C • CL Q 3 V CL rs loc a � Q g of � g r 2 0 Oct ; E IC o Y : _ o � 6 Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Three PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT D. Public Works Department -- Item #1 : Lot Size/City Improvement Cost Analysis -- At a recent Cit—council meeting, the staff was requested to perform an analysis pertaining to the cost of the necessary City utilties and streets taking into consideration dif- ferent sized lots widths and depths . The purpose of this study was to try and evaluate the financial impact pertaining to improve- ment costs for streets and utilities based upon various lot con- figurations. The consulting engineer, Bob Rosene, has completed the analysis taking into consideration several different typical development configurations and determining the average quantity required for sanitary sewer, water main, services, storm sewer laterals, street improvements and all related area assessments . This analysis was performed using estimated 1981 construction costs . Attached on page $ is a summary sheet showing the average per front foot costof-r streets and utilities along with the services and the typical trunk area assessment rates. These were calculated to compute the estimated total assessment cost per lot based on the matrix system using variable lot widths and depths . This infor- mation is being submitted for informational purposes and the Con- sulting Engineer and/or Director of Public Works will be happy to respond to any questions regarding the lot size/city improvement cost analysis. Il-T SIZE/C17COST A SIS (1980 FOOTAGE CHARGE Rate/Front Foot A. Sanitary Sewer $15.83 B. Water Main $13.85 C. Street $28.89 TOTAL FOOTAGE CHARGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $58.57/F.F. SERVICES Sanitary Sewer @ $6.00/lin. ft. @ 45 lin. ft. $ 270 1" Corporation @ $40.00/each 40 1" Curb box and stop @ $60.00/each 60 1" Copper @ $5.00/lin.ft. @ 45 lin.ft. 225 Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin. ft. @ 30 lin. ft. 30 Total $ 625 +31.25% Cont. , legal, engrng. , admin. b bond interest 195 TOTAL PROJECT $ 820 AREA CHARGE Rate/Sq.Ft. A. Storm Sewer Lateral - estimated at $0.05/sq.ft. $0.05 B. Sanitary Sewer Trunk - $770/Acre $0.0178 C. Water Main Trunk - $770/Acre $0.0178 D. Storm Sewer Trunk - Residential Rate $0.0374 TOTAL . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . $0.13/sq.ft. SUMMARY Footage Charge $58.57/F.F. Services $820.00/Unit Area Charge $0.13/S.F. FRONT FRONTAGE 75' 85' 100' 125' $6,432 $7,181 $8,302 Depth 135' $6,530 $7,291 $8,432 150' $6,676 $7,457 $8,626 U Agenda Information Memo March 13 , 1981 Page Four Item #2: Development Bond Requirements -- Currently, the City has a policy whereby it requires a developer to provide a financial guarantee (performance bond, letter of credit, cash escrow and the related) to insure the performance or payment thereof. of various items pertaining to a particular subdivision. The staff, upon reviewing these requirements and working with the development agree- ments and the posted financial guarantees, is recommending that several of these items be eliminated, expanded and/or revised to more accurately reflect the needs of a particular subdivision, keeping in mind the best interests of the City. A separate report regarding development bond requirements that deliniates those items presentlyrequiredand a recommended revised development bond proce- dure for new developments within the City will be included as a part of the Administrative Packet on Monday. The Director of Public Works would like an opportunity to review this report and have the City pass action officially adopting it as soon as possible. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To either table the item for further discussion or recommend its approval or disapproval as presented or with modifications. There are thirteen (13) items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one (1 ) motion by the City Council . If there is any item which the City . Council would like to discuss in further detail, that item should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Additional Items unless the discussion required is brief. This will allow the Mayor to proceed with the Public Hearings as legally noticed at 7 :00 p.m. CONTRACT 237 A. Change Order #4 for Contract 237 (Thomas Lake Road) -- During the constuction of Thomas Lake Road, easements had to be acquired from adjacent property owners . This change order provides payment to the contractor for work performed outside the scope of the con- tract to repair and restore adjacent landscaping and paint a newly installed fence. (Add $4,,728.12) . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve Change Order #4 for Contract 237 in the amount of $4,728.12 addition to MacNamara Vivant for Thomas Lake Road improvements. Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Five CONTRACT 80-8. B. Change Order #1 for Contract 80-8 (Econ Lab, Imre, Ches Mar East 2nd Additions and Duckwood Drive) -- Change Order #1 consists of the following four (4) parts : Part A: Econ Water Lab Watenmain Extension (Project 290) . Upon the request of the Public Works Department, the contractor installed addi- tional hydrant to an existing trunk watermain along Lone Oak Road. This was deemed necessary for additional fire protection and required continuous maintenance of this main trunk line. Costs for this will be paid for frau the utility fund (Add $2,820.00) . Part B: Imre Addition (Project 296) . This entails additional work required on the existing manhole and for additional clearing and grub- bing of existing brush and trees that was not anticipated at the time the contract was let. These costs were included in the final assess- ment amounts at the Assessment Hearing held in September of 1980. ($1,387.25) Part C: Ches Mar East 2nd Addition (Project 302) . During the con- struction of the utilities under this project, additional erosion control measures were deemed necessary due to develolanent site grading by the contractor as a part of the development grading in addition to clearing some existing brush and trees that were not accounted for in the original contract. This cost was included in the final assessment hearing held on Septenber of 1980. (Add $1,830.00) Part D: Duckwood Drive Watermain (Project 312) . This provided for a lowering of the newly-installed watenmain along the Duckwood Drive connection to Pilot Kncb Road to accommodate the future lower eleva- tion of this intersection. This cost will be absorbed by the water trunk fund. (Add, $1,250.00) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve Change Order #1 to Contract 80-8 (Econ Lab, Imre Addition, Ches Mar East 2nd and Duckwood Drive) in the amount of $7,287.25 to Fredrickson Exca- vating Company. Agenda Information Memo March 13 , 1981 Page Six CONTRACT 80-9 C. Change Order #1 for Contract 80-9 (James Refrigeration Utili- ties) -- After the award of this contract, the developer requested a change in alignment of utilities due to his delayed schedule for providing the City the necessary grading and to avoid distur- bance of existing woodland area. Therefore, the required revision and redesign of this project resulted in an additional cost of $561. 35. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve Change Order #1 to Contract 80-9 in the amount of $561 . 35 to Fredrickson Excava- ting Company (James Refrigeration Utilities ) CONTRACT 240A D. Final Pay Request/Acceptance for Contract 240A (Drexel Heights Streets) -- The City has received a request for final payment through the consulting engineering firm for installation of streets in the Drexel Heights subdivision Contract 240A. All costs asso- ciated with the final payment have been included in the final assessment hearing held in September of 1980. All inspections have been performed by the consultant and City personnel and they have certified that construction complies with the City approved plans and specifications. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve final pay request #7 to MacNamara Vivant Contracting Company in the amount of $26,820.96 and accept for perpetual maintenance.' CONTRACT 79-19 E. Final Pay Request/Acceptance, Contract 79-19 (Brittany Manor First, Lake Park, Thomas Lake Additions Streets) -- The City has received a final pay request through the consulting engineering firm along with a certification of compliance to the plans and specifications as approved by the City. This improvement has not yet , been assessed. Final construction costs are approximately 6. 2% under the contract amount. All inspections have been performed by the Consulting Engineer and certified by City personnel . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the seventh and final pay request for Contract 79-19 to MacNamara Vivant Con- tracting Company in the amount of $8 ,359.89 and accept those streets for perpetual maintenance. Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Seven CONTRACT 79-21 F. Final Pay Request/Acceptance for Contract 79-21 (Lakeside Estates Streets) -- The City has received a final payment request through the consulting engineering firm along with a certification of compliance for the plans and specifications as approved by the City.. All work required under this contract has been completed. All inspections have been performed' by the consultant and City personnel. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve final pay request for Contract 79-21 to MacNamara Vivant Contracting Company in the amount of $9,924.57 and accept Lakeside Estates Streets for per- petual maintenance. CONTRACT 79-23 G. Final Pay Request/Acceptance for Contract 79-23 (Slatter' s Road Watermain) -- The City has received a final pay request through the consulting engineering firm along with a certification of com- pliance to the plans and specifications as approved by the City. Final inspections have been performed by the consultant and main- tenance personnel and found acceptable. All costs included in this final payment have been assessed in September of 1980. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the second and final pay request to Contract 79-23 to Richard Knutson, Inc. , in the amount of $4,076.20 and accept Slatter' s Road Watermain for perpetual maintenance. GRADING PERMIT- RAUENHORST H. Grading Permit Application (Rauenhorst Corporation) -- The City has received an application to fill Lot 1 , Eagandale Center Indus- trial Center #2 , which is located on the north side of Lone Oak Road, west of the railroad overpass. Because the application re- quires fill to be placed under an existing trunk sanitary sewer line, the staff is requiring an additional bond in the amount of $3,000 for the required manhole adjustment and for financial protec- tion to any problem created to our existing utility. Adequate on-site ponding area has been provided by the grading plan with an existing storm sewer outlet provided under Lone Oak Road. Rauen- horst Corporation intends to use excess fill generated from the I-35E and I-494 interchange presently being constructed. All bonds, insurance certificates and grading permits have been submitted, reviewed and approved by staff. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the grading permit for Lot 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #2, to Rauen- horst Corporation. Z Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Eight TRAFFIC SIGNAL AGREEMENT #60309M I. Execute Traffic Signal Agreement #60309M with MnDOT - The City has received four (4) Copies of a proposed maintenance agree- ment betwen the State of Minnesota, Dakota County and the gCit of Eagan pertaining to the cost, maintenance and operation of the traffic signal installation at T.H. 55 at Lexington Avenue/Blue Gentian Road intersection. The maintenance agreement is in confor- mance with the City' s standard maintenance responsibilities for traffic signals. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER To approve MnDOT traffic signal agreement ##60309M and authorize the Mayor and City .Clerk to execute same. PLANS & SPECS-SEWER CLEANING MACHINE J. ApprovePlans & Specifications/Authorize Bids for Sewer Cleanin Machine -- Approved in the 1980 budget and provided for with g equipment certificates to be purchased in 1981, the Public Works Department has completed plans and specifications after field testing different models of sewer cleaning equipment. With this piece of equipment, the Public Works Department through its utility section intends to start a preventative maintenance program o cleaning all sewer lines within the Cit is ein conducted cooperatively with the current 1980 sewers ram televising program contract currently in effect. $ ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve thelans and specifications for a trailer mounted sewer cleaning machine and authorize the ' advertisement for bids with a bid opening scheduled on Thursday, April 16, 1981. CONTRACT 80-21 K. Approve Plans and Specifications, Contract 80-21 for Blackhawk Lake Storm Sewer Outlet - At the February 3, 1981 Cit Council meeting, the City reviewed plans and specifications and, in particu- lar, the status pertaining to the necessary easements to construct this improvement. At the time of that meeting, two remainingease- ments had still not been resolved. However, as of March 17) the City has formally initiated condemnation proceedings against t Ross Kramer property and the C Berry8 City a it take right of entry" authorization of property June l 15 for this property. During this 90 day period, the Citywill roceed negotiations with the property owners and all reuirements ne essarh to continue this condemnation action, should these negotiations not succeed. The specifications have been written such that the contractor is informed of the restricted starting date on this • • Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Nine property. However, there is a significant amount of other quanti- ties of work that can be initiated immediately on properties where easements and/or right of entry have already been acquired during the 90 day period. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the plans and specifications for Contract 80-21 (Blackhawk Lake Storm Sewer Out- let) and authorize an advertisement for bids with the bid opening set for April 1981. NON-INTOXICATING BEER/BINGO LICENSE FOR KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS L. Non-Intoxicating Beer and Bingo License for St. John Neumann/ Knights of Columbus for 4-5-81 -- Applications for a non-intoxi- cating 3.2 beer license and bingo for the Knights of Columbus for their Ham Bingo event scheduled for April 5, 1981 . The Ham Bingo is symbolic of the Easter Ham which is a spinoff of the Turkey Bingo that was held during November 1980, symbolic of Thanksgiving. The applications are signed by Roy Haas and the applications were reviewed by the Chief of Police and approved for consideration by the Council . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE 'MATTER: To approve the non-intoxi- cating 3. 2 beer and bingo license for St. John Neumann/Knights of Columbus for 4-5-81 . PROJECT 327 M. Project 327 to Receive Report and Order Public Hearing for Joyce Addition Streets and Utilities -- On January 6, 1981 , the City Council received a petition from the developer of the Joyce Addition. The City Council in accepting' the report also ordered the preparation of a feasibility report. The report has now been completed and is ready for review by the City Council . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To receive the feasibility report for Project 327 and order the Public Hearing to be held 4-7-81 . I i Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Ten PROJECT 324 A. Project 324 (Safari at Eagan Streets and Utilities) -- On Novem- ber 18 , 1980, the City Council received a petition from the developer of the Safari at Eagan plat requesting a feasibility report for installation of streets and utilities within the sub- division. The feasibility report was presented to the City Council at the February 17 meeting, with the public hearing scheduled for March 17 . This report has been reviewed in detail with the developer prior. to this public hearing. - The Consulting Engineer and Director of Public Works will conduct the public hearing and answer any questions the Council or developer may have. A copy of the feasibility report is enclosed on pages 1_ through for your reference. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To close -the public hearing and either approve or deny Project #324 for Safari at Eagan streets and utilities. 5� 4 B"_,t`__ R�� .4m4444 m A �� n Glenn R. Cook,P.E. � � 4Q,P,� a � J/{,(�. Keith A.Gordon,P.E. Ono G.Boncstroo,P.E. Thomas E.Noyes, P.E. O Robert W. Rosette,P.£. Richard W.Foster, P.E. Joseph C. A nderlik,P.E. Robert C.Schunicht,P.E. 2335 V. %+...A 36 Bradford A. Lemberg, P.E. Marvin L.Sorvala,P.E. Richard E. Turner,P.E. Donald C.Burgardb P.E. St. n..4 Miw«ruta 55113 James C.Olson. P.E. Jerry A.Bourdon,P.E. PA..-612-636-4600 �� Mark A.Hanson,P.E. Steven M. Ouincey Charles A.Erickson 1956 — th — 1981 Lea M. Pawelsky Harlan M.Olson David E.Olson ynnr versary' V Preliminary Report on Safari in Eagan � D Utility and Street Improvements Project 324 Eagan, Minnesota January 30, 1981 SCOPE: This project provides for the grading and street surfacing of Safari Boulevard located within the Safari in Eagan plat, Sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer improvements are also included in conjunction with grad- ing and surfacing of two parking lot entrances to the proposed Safari Mall Shopping Center. Not included in this report is the construction of decelera- tion, acceleration, and bypass lanes along Cliff Road. In the event this con- struction is required by Dakota County, it would be included as part of the plans and specifications and be assessed to the benefited property. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The project is feasible and is in accordance with the Master Utility and Street Plans of the City of Eagan. The project as outlined herein can best be carried out in two contracts. Contract I would include the grading of Safari Boulevard and the installation of utilities as outlined herein. Also included as part of Contract I construction would be the construction of an aggregate base. Contract II would include construction of the remaining street section for aggregate base an the bituminous surfacing with concrete curb and gutter. Page 1. 2584a �� DISCUSSION: CONTRACT I A. Safari Boulevard (Grading: Safari Boulevard is a proposed street with a 60 foot right-of-way located within Safari in Eagan. To construct the street to the design grade will require additional material located outside the street right-of-way. The additional material will be acquired from the proposed Safari Mall Shopping Center site located on Lot 3. Also included is muck excavation which is anticipated in the low areas located directly off Cliff Road and Thomas Lake Road. After installation of the utilities, a 6 inch aggregate base will be constructed. B. Parking Lot Entrances (Grading) : Included in this construction are the grading and placement of a 6 inch aggregate base for two parking lot entrances to the proposed Safari Mall Shopping Center. One entrance is located at Cliff Road and the other entrance is located at Thomas Lake Road as indicated on the drawing at the back of this report. C. Sanitary Sewer: An 8" sanitary sewer is proposed along the centerline of Safari Boulevard. An existing 27 inch trunk sanitary sewer is located approx- imately 25 feet below Thomas Lake Road. To connect the 8 inch sanitary sewer to the trunk sanitary sewer it is proposed to construct the 8" line to the north from Safari Boulevard 150 feet and then jack or auger the 8 inch line beneath Thomas Lake Road to an existing manhole. An inside drop would be con- structed in the manhole, thus eliminating the open cutting of Thomas Lake Road. This construction is recommended in lieu of constructing a manhole at the centerline of Safari Boulevard and the existing trunk sanitary sewer. Page 2. 2584a / 7 This construction is considerably more difficult due to the depth of the trunk sanitary sewer and the fact that the trunk water main would interfere because of its location west of the trunk sanitary sewer, The estimated cost for each construction is similar; however, the recommended procedure does not require the open cutting of Thomas Lake Road, D. Water Main: An 8 inch water main is proposed along Safari Boulevard from Thomas Lake Road to Cliff Road. During construction of the 12 inch trunk water main along Thomas Lake Road an 8 inch water main was stubbed to the property line at Safari Boulevard. It is proposed to utilize this stub in construction of the 8 inch water main along Safari Boulevard. The existing 24 inch water main along Cliff Road is located 40 feet south of centerline. To connect the proposed 8 inch water main to the existing 24 inch line will re- quire the jacking or augering of the proposed 8 inch line beneath Cliff Road. It is also proposed to construct an 8 inch water main east of Safari Boulevard along the south side of the shopping center as indicated on the drawing at the back of this report. This line would primarily serve for fire protection and would be a dead end line. It is proposed to assess this line only to Lot 3. E. Storm Sewer: Storm sewer presented herein provides for a pone (BP-13A) directly north of Cliff Road and west of Safari Boulevard. Storm sewer pipe sizes downstream of pond BP-13A are indicated on the drawing at the back of this report. Design criteria for Pond BP-13A is as follows: NWL HWL Pond NWL Area HWL Area Storage BP-13A 930 0.14 ac. 938 0.67 ac. 3.24 ac.-ft. Page 3. / 2584a The storm sewer as presented herein discharges to Pond BP-13 which is lo- cated approximatey 700 feet north of Safari Boulevard. The normal water ele- vation of Pond BP-13 is 921.4 which is also the centerline elevation of Safari Boulevard and Thomas Lake Road. It is therefore necessary to construct the trunk storm sewer to the north from Safari Boulevard approximately 400 feet west of Thomas Lake Road to provide adequate cover over the pipe. The con- struction of trunk storm sewer to the north line of Safari in Eagan is in- cluded in this report. In the event that this line is deleted due to uncer tainities in determining its final alignment, the storm sewer would discharge directly north of Safari Boulevard and overland drainage would be required to Pond BP-13. Lateral costs associated with this construction should not be neglected in preparing assessments if this line is deleted. CONTRACT II F. Safari Boulevard (Surfacing) : Street surfacing for Safari Boulevard in- cludes the construction of a 9 ton, 44 feet wide street with B618 concrete curb and gutter. Contract II construction proposes completing the aggregate base and the bituminous surface. The proposed typical section for Safari Boulevard including Contract I and Contract II construction is as follows: 1-1/2" 2341 Bituminous Wear Course Contract II 1-1/2" 2341 Bituminous Base Course Contract II 2" Class 5 Aggregate Base Contract II 6" Class 5, Aggregate Base (100% crushed) Contract I The construction of proposed parking lot entrances and street entrances from Safari Boulevard to the right-of-way line is aso included as part of the street surfacing. Page 4. 2584a �9 G. Parking Lot Entrances (surfacing) :_ As indicated in Part B two parking lot entrances, one at Thomas Lake Road and the other at Cliff Road are to be graded to the right-of-way line to the proposed Safari Mall Shopping Center. This construction proposes completing the bituminous surfacing in conjunction with concrete curb and gutter. The proposed width for the entrance at Cliff Road is 33 feet with a concrete curb and gutter center island. Dakota County is presently proposing the future upgrading of Cliff Road to include a 52 feet wide street with a center island. Dakota County has indicated they would not allow a center island cut at this entrance. The proposed upgrading of Cliff Road is tentatively scheduled for 1985-1986. The proposed width for the entrance at Thomas Lake Road is also 33 feet with a concrete curb and gutter center island. AREA TO BE INCLUDED: Assessment Area Construction Area SE 1/4 - SW 1/4 Section 28 SE 1/4 - SW 1/4 Section 28 010-53 010-53 012-52 012-52 011-52 COST ESTIMATE: Detailed cost estimates are presented at the back of this report. A summary of these costs are as follows: CONTRACT I Sanitary Sewer $ 63,530 Water Main 79,580 Storm Sewer 91,070 Street (Grading) 85,010 Parking Lot Entrances (Grading) 5,970 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $325,160 Page 5. 2584a �O CONTRACT II Street (Surfacing) $ 82,950 Parking Lot Entrances (Grading) 4,540 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 87,490 TOTAL CONTRACT I AND II . . . . . . . $412,650 The total estimated cost of the project as outlined herein including con- tingencies and all related overhead is $412,650. Overhead costs are estimated at 25% and include legal, engineering, administration and bond interest. EASEMENTS: Easements are required for street and utility construction in Safari in Eagan. These easements are listed as follows: 1. A permanent easement is required to construct the sanitary sewer 150 feet north of Safari Boulevard. 2. A temporary easement is required to construct the water main directly south of the proposed Safari Mall Shopping Center. However, if the City wishes to maintain this line a permanent easement should be acquired. 3. A ponding easement is required as indicated on the drawing for Pond BP-13A. 4. A permanent easement is required across Lot 4 to construct the proposed storm sewer to the existing catch basin. 5. A permanent easement is required to construct the trunk storm sewer from, Safari Boulevard to the north line of the plat. In the event this alignment cannot be determined, a temporary ease- ment through the plat to Pond BP-13 providing overland drainage from the discharge point will be required. Page 6. 2584a 45;?/ 6. It is recommended the proposed storm sewer constructed within Safari Mall Shopping Center by the developer not be maintained by the City and therefore no easement is required. 7. Slope easements along Safari Boulevard and temporary easements necessary to acquire borrow material to construct Safari boule- vard will be required. It is anticipated, however, that this can be accomplished through an agreement with the developer. The above easements are anticipated to be acquired in conjunction with final approval of the plat. It is assumed no cost will be required for their acquisition. The only easement required outside the plat is a temporary easement to provide overland drainage from the north line of the plat to pond BP-13. This easement is located on Parcel 011-52 which is owned by Fortune Enterprise and Blackhawk Park, Inc. who also are present owners of Safari in Eagan. It is anticipated this easement can be acquired with final approval of the plat at no additional cost. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited property located within Safari in Eagan. A preliminary assessment roll is in- cluded at the back of this report. Two parcels are located within the Safari of Eagan plat which are presently owned by the same owner. The preliminary assessment roll indicates assessed costs for the proposed lots and outlot A within the Safari in Eagan plat. Assessment rates for construction of lateral facilities will be determined by final improvement costs and be assessed to each benefitted property. Lateral costs associated with storm sewer construc- tion assume that pipes larger than 24 inch in diameter would be assessed at the proposed 24 inch equivalent rate as presented in this report. Page 7. 2584a Trunk sanitary sewer and trunk water main have been assessed. Trunk storm sewer has not and is proposed to be assessed as part of this project. Base rates in effect at the time of this report for trunk storm sewer are as follows: Trunk Storm Sewer - Single Family $0.0374/sq.ft. - Multi-Family $0.0468/sq.ft. - Comm.-Ind. $0.0561/sq.ft. It is proposed all costs associated with construction of Safari Boulevard and the parking lot entrances at Cliff Road and Thomas Lake Road be assessed directly to the benefited property. REVENUE SOURCES: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are listed as follows: SANITARY SEWER Project Cost Revenue Balance Laterals $ 63,530 Lateral Assessment $ 63,530 TOTAL $ 63,530 $ 63,530 - 0 - WATER MAIN Lateral $ 79,580 Lateral Assessment $ 79,580 TOTAL $ 79,580 $ 79,580 - 0 - STORM SEWER Lateral $ 81,690 Lateral Assessment $ 81,690 Trunk 9,380 Trunk Assessment 62,082 TOTAL $ 91,070 $143,772 +$ 52,702 Page 8. 2584a C--f73 Project Cost Revenue Balance STREET Safari Blvd. (Grading) $ 85,010 Safari Blvd. (Surfacing) 82,950 Safari Blvd. Assessment $167,960 TOTAL $167,960 $167,960 - 0 - PARKING LOT ENTRANCES Grading $ 5,970 Surfacing 4,540 Assessment $ 10,510 TOTAL $ 10,510 $ 10,510 - 0 - The only portion which projects a positive project balance is storm sewer. The projected project balance for storm sewer is +$52,702. No revenue is proposed from City trunk funds for sanitary sewer, water main, or street construction. PROJECT SCHEDULE CONTRACT I CONSTRUCTION Present Feasibility Report February 17, 1981 Public Hearing March 17, 1981 Approve Plans and Specifications April 21, 1981 Open Bids May 15, 1981 Award Contract May 19, 1981 Construction Completion August 31, 1981 Assessment Hearing September, 1981 First Payment due with Real Estate Taxes May, 1982 Page 9. 2584a I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minne ota. � r Mark A. Hanson Date: January 30, 1981 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by: za y.c �• ,�fes ; omas Colbert, P.E. Director/of /Public Works Date: Page 10. 2584a ~� APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE SAFARI IN EAGAN PROJECT 324 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING I. SANITARY SEWER 1,465 Lin. ft. 8" PVC Sanitary sewer, 12'-14' in pl. @ $12.00/lin. ft. $ 17,580 330 Lin.ft. 8" PVC Sanitary sewer, 14'-16' in pl. @ $14.00/lin.ft. 4,620 50 Lin. ft. Jack or auger 8" PVC Sanitary sewer @ $100.00/lin. ft. 5,000 11 Each Std. MH w/cstg. @ $900.00/each 9,900 60 Lin. ft. MH depth greater than 8' dp. @ $80.00/lin. ft. 4,800 10 Each 8"x6" Wye branch @ $50.00/each 500 300 Lin. ft. 6" CISP Service @ $8.00/lin. ft. 2,400 150 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/ton 1,500 2,095 Lin. ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin. ft. 2,095 Total Estimated Construction $ 48,395 +5% Contingency 2,425 $ 50,820 +25% Legal, Engrng, , Admin. , & Bond Interest 12,710 TOTAL SANITARY SEWER $ 63,530 II, WATER MAIN 2,130 Lin, ft, 8" DIP Water main @ $14,00/lin. ft, $ 29,820 540 Lin,ft, 6" DIP Water main @ $12,00/lin.ft, 6,480 50 Lin. ft. Jack or auger 8" DIP water main @ $100,00/lin,ft, 5,000 6 Each Hydrants @ $800,00/each 4,800 3 Each 8" gate valve and box @ $450.00/each 1,350 8 Each 6" gate valve and box @ $350,00/each 2,800 6,000 Lbs, Fittings @ $1,00/lb, 6,000 1 Each Cut into existing 8" plug @ $200.00/each 200 1 Each Cut into existing 24" water main @ $500,00/each 500 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10,00/ton 1,000 2,670 Lin, ft, Mechanical trench compaction @ $1,00/lin,ft, 2,670 Total Estimated Construction $ 60,620 +5% Contingency 3,040 $ 63,660 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin, , & Bond Interest 15 ,920 TOTAL WATER MAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 79,580 A-1 �k� III. STORM SEWER 420 Lin,ft, 36" RCP Storm sewer @ $40,00/lin,ft, $ 16,800 350 Lin,ft, 30" RCP Storm sewer @ $34,00/lin,ft. 11,900 125 Lin, ft, 24" RCP Storm sewer @ $28,00/lin, ft, 3,500 240 Lin,ft. 21" RCP Storm sewer @ $24,00/lin,ft, 5 ,760 600 Lin, ft, 18" RCP Storm sewer @ $20,00/lin,ft, 12,000 180 Lin,ft, 12" RCP Storm sewer @ $14,00/lin,ft, 2,520 2 Each Std, MH w/cstg, @ $1,300,00/each 2,600 7 Each Std, CBMH w/cstg, @ $900,00/each 6,300 3 Each Catch basin w/cstg, @ $700,00/each 2,100 1 Each 36" RCP flared end w/trash guard @ $1,200,00/each 1,200 1 Each 18" RCP flared end w/trash guard @ $600,00/each 600 1 Each Remove & relay 21" RCP flared end @ $200,00/each 200 1 Each Cut into existing catch basin @ $400,00/each 400 3 Each Connect to existing storm sewer pipe @ $200,00/each 600 1,5 Acres Seed with mulch @ $1,000,00/Ac. 1,500 1,400 Lin,ft, Mechanical trench compaction @ $1,00/lin,ft. 1,400 Total Estimated Construction $ 69,380 +5% Contingency 3,470 $ 72,850 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin, , & Bond Interest 18,220 TOTAL STORM SEWER $ 91,070 IV. STREET (Grading) 15,000 Cu.yds, Common excavation @ $1.20/cu.yd, $ 18,000 2,000 Cu.yds, Muck excavation @ $2.50/cu.yd. 5,000 8,000 Cu.yds. Borrow excavation @ $2.50/cu,yd, 20,000 3,100 Ton Class 5, aggregate base (100% crushed) @ $6.00/ton 18 ,600 85 Lin. ft. Remove existing concrete curb & gutter @ $2.00/lin.ft. 170 3.0 Acres Seeding w/mulch @ $1,000.00/Ac. 3,000 Total Estimated Construction $ 64,770 +5% Contingency 3,240 $ 68,010 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , & Bond Interest 17,000 TOTAL STREET (GRADING) $ 85,010 A-2 V. PARKING LOT ENTRANCES (Grading 200 Cu.yds. Common excavation @ $2.00/cu.yd, $ 400 1,000 Cu.yds. Borrow excavation @ $2.50/cu.yd. 2,500 250 Ton Class 5, aggregate base (100% crushed) @ $6.00/ton 1,500 70 Lin.ft. Remove existing concrete curb & gutter @ $2.00/lin.ft. 140 Total Estimated Construction $ 4,540 +5% Contingency 230 $ 4,770 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , & Bond Interest 1,200 TOTAL PARKING LOT ENTRANCES (GRADING) . .. ...... ... $ 5,970 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING I. Sanitary Sewer $ 63,530 II. Water Main 79,580 III. Storm Sewer 91,070 IV. Street (Grading) 85,010 V. Parking Lot Entrances (Grading) 5,970 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT CONTRACT I .. ..... $325,160 CONTRACT II STREET SURFACING I. STREET 1,100 Ton Class 5, aggregate base @ $5.50/ton $ 6,050 690 Ton 2341 Bituminous base course @ $14.00/ton 9,660 690 Ton 2341 Bituminous wear course @ $16.00/ton 11,040 70 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $190.00/ton 13,300 2,900 Lin.ft. B618 concrete curb & gutter @ $6.00/lin. ft. 17,400 21 Each Adjust manhole and catch basin @ $150.00/each 3,150 11 Each Adjust gate valve box @ $100.00/each 1,100 1.5 Acres Seeding w/mulch @ $1,000.00/Ac. 1,500 Total Estimated Construction $ 63,200 +5% Contingency 3,160 $ 66,360 +25% Legal, Engrng, Admin. , & Bond Interest 16,590 TOTAL STREET (SURFACING) . ....... ................. $ 82,950 A-3 � SRA II, PARKING LOT ENTRANCES (Surfacing) 50 Ton Class 5 aggregate base @ $5.50/ton $ 275 40 Ton 2341 Bituminous base course @ $18,00/ton 720 40 Ton 2341 Bituminous wear course @ $20,00/ton 800 4 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $190,00/ton 760 150 Lin, ft, B618 concrete curb & gutter @ $6.00/lin,ft, 900 Total Estimated Construction $ 3,455 +5% Contingency 175 $ 3,630 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , & Bond Interest 910 TOTAL PARKING LOT ENTRANCE (SURFACING) . .. ....... . $ 4,540 CONTRACT II STREET SURFACING I. Street (Surfacing) $ 82,950 II. Parking Lot Entrances (Surfacing) 5,540 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT CONTRACT II $ 87,490 A-4 2584a APPENDIX B PROJECTED ASSESSMENTS EAGAN, MINNESOTA PROJECT 324 SAFARI IN EAGAN January 30, 1981 Parcels included within Safari in Eagan Plat Owner 010-53 Blackhawk Park, Inc. - Fortune Enterprise 012-52 Fortune Enterprise - Blackhawk Park, Inc. Sanitary Sewer Lateral Assessment F.F. Rate/F.F. Total Lot 1 344 $22.85 $ 7,861 Lot 2 226 22.85 5,165 Lot 3 539 22.85 12,318 Lot 4 264 22.85 6,033 Outlot A 1,407 22.85 32,153 TOTAL 2,780 $63,530 Water Main Lateral Assessment F.F. Rate/F.F. Total Lot 1 344 $22.87 $ 7,867 Lot 2 226 22.87 5,169 Lot 3 539 22.87 12,327 Lot 3 (Fire protection line) 655 24.43 16,000 Lot 4 264 22.87 6,038 Outlot A 1,407 22.87 32,179 TOTAL 3,435 $79,580 Storm Sewer Lateral Assessment Area (Sq.ft. Rate/Sq.Ft. Total Lot 1 28,360 $.0738 $ 2,094 Lot 2 42,940 .0738 3,170 Lot 3 368,464 .0738 27,199 Lot 4 27,955 .0738 2,064 Outlot A 638,918 .0738 47,163 TOTAL 1,106,637 $ 81,690 B-1 2584a 30 Trunk Assessment Area Comm,/Ind. (Sq.ft, Rate/Sq.Ft. Total Lot 1 28,360 $.0561 $ 1,591 Lot 2 42,940 .0561 2,409 Lot 3 368,464 .0561 20,671 Lot 4 27,955 .0561 1,568 Outlot A 638,918 .0561 35,843 TOTAL 1,106,637 $ 62,082 Street F.F. Rate/F.F. Total Lot 1 344 $60.41 $ 20,784 Lot 2 226 60.41 13,654 Lot 3 539 60,41 32,565 Lot 4 264 60.41 15,950 Outlot A 1,407 60.41 85,007 TOTAL . . . ....... ....... 2,780 $167,960 Parking Lot Entrances Lump Sum Total Lot 3 $10,510 $10,510 B-2 2584a rn � ') c o C. � N ro U) i Z cv NN Z x � —J a 3Ad"1 SdWOHI ISIZIZI Py N 31 C � o a CD LE LL / 133HIS---- 77772 cV CO, � Z 1 � a 3I � i CY M 1` zz o T 1 i 0 —-- —JOVOU 3XVI SVWOHl x3 co a� w 6 3 j o I c Q J r. Q I .,, LL io Ll LL N 133M1 Oil 1• 1-7777- c Y.) 3N1�3dld S3�d� 0 a\ 3 ) � I \\ J )10 to cci -AMU 3Hd-1 SVWOHl ZvI � wl y In „ W / _ J w' � Q mar • 'k . 0 U) I m ILL Cq �d S3Hdl lb'3 l� m y y , W y � U 3 � I 0 y \ N N UJ Cj i/ Ol ' Z z io) — -J01�Oa 3Hd'1 SVWOHJL w a / Cr m Z N I t/ w N ol or) J J IQ L F- p w w a cn � I 133a-1S_---_ N. ----__ 0 , GM�1 3NIl3did S3�It/'i —- � N Q I � U V I � I i r THOMAS I—AKE oil �� •� •/�. ., 1 . =w Agenda Information Memo March 13 , 1981 Page Eleven PROJECT 329 B. Project 329 (Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition Streets & Utilities) -- On January 20, 1981 , the City Council received a petition from the developer of Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition requesting the instal- lation of streets and utilities. The feasibility report was pre- sented to the City Council at the February 17 meeting with the public hearing scheduled for March 17. The report has been reviewed with the developer prior to the public hearings . The Consulting Engineer and Director of Public Works will conduct the public hearing and be available to answer any questions presented by the developer or the Council . Enclosed on pages '35 through 5S4 is a copy of the preliminary report as prepare y the' Consul ting Engineer. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To close the public hearing and either approve or deny Project 329 (Cedar Cliff, 2nd Addition streets and utilities ) . 3"7 R. GlennCook,P.E. � Keith A. Gordon,P.E. Otto G.Boncstroo,P.E. Thomas E.Noyes,P.E. Ci O Robert W. Rosen,P.E. Richard W.Foster,P.E. Joseph C. A nderlik,P.E. Robert G.Schunicht,P.E. 2836 W. -1.4J! 36 Bradford A.Lemberg,P.E. Marvin L.Sorvala,P.E. °1t Richard E.Turner,P.E. Donald C.Burgardt,P.E. St. earl, Af..sala 661/3 James C.Olson,P.E. Jerry A.Bourdon,P.E. naw.61.2-636-4600 c Mark A.Ranson,P.E. Steven M. Quincey Charles A.Erickson Of( 1956 — 25tt - 1981 Leo M. Pa Xarlan M.Olson OIJon C; nniversary' X0 David E.Olson Preliminary Report db Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition (Phase Him Streets and Utilities Improvement Project 329 Eagan, Minnesota February 5, 1981 SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of utilities and streets within Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition, Phase III. Also included is the construction of trunk storm sewer from pond AP-26 (as presented in the storm sewer master plan for the City of Eagan) to an existing storm sewer on Rahn Road. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The project is feasible and in accordance with the Master Utility and Street Plans of the City of Eagan. The project as outlined herein can best be carried out in two contracts. Contract I would include the construction of utilities and the placement of an aggregate base. Contract II would include constructing the remaining portion of the aggregate base and the bituminous surface in conjunction with concrete curb and gutter. DISCUSSION: CONTRACT I A) SANITARY SEWER: An 8 inch sanitary sewer is proposed along the centerline of Cliffview Drive. The sanitary sewer will connect to an existing 8 inch sanitary sewer stubbed approximately 150' north of Cliffhill Lane. The sani- tary sewer will provide service to 33 lots abutting Cliffview Drive. Page 1. 2741a B) WATER MAIN: A proposed 6 inch water main is to be constructed 10 feet west and north of the centerline of Cliffview Drive. The water main will con- nect to two existing 6 inch lines which are each stubbed approximately 150 feet north of Cliffhill Lane. C) STORM SEWER: Storm sewer servicing and within the Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition has been previously constructed under Project #295. Storm sewer proposed in this report provides for an outlet from pond AP-26 to an existing storm sewer located off Rahn Road. Two alternatives for this construction are presented herein. Alternate I proposes utilizing the existing 250 feet of 15 inch storm sewer which provides drainage from the parking area for Rahn Elementary School to Pond AP-26. This segment of storm sewer would provide the first link of the storm sewer line and be a submerged outlet. It is proposed as part of Alter- nate I to construct a 12 inch liner within the existing storm sewer to prevent seepage through joints. This procedure is recommended to insure that the ten- nis courts located directly above the existing line will not experience any adverse effects due to possible seepage. The remaining portion of the outfall line consisting of a 12 inch storm sewer would be constructed through an ex- isting drainage swale located on school property to the existing storm sewer on Rahn Road. Alternate II proposes constructing the outfall line around the tennis courts thus not utilizing the existing storm sewer. The remaining portion of the outfall line would be constructed in the same manner as Alternate I. De- sign criteria for pond AP-26 for both Alternate I and II is as follows: Pond NWL NWL Area HWL HWL Area Storage Outfall AP-26 884.2 1.4 ac. 888.5 3.2 ac. 10.3 ac.-ft. 2 cfs Page 2. 2741a D) SERVICES: This construction provides for the installation of sewer and water services to the property line for each of the individual dwelling units. Each sanitary sewer service is 4 inch and each water service is 1 inch. E) STREET (GRADING) : This construction provides the proper grading of the subgrade surface after installation of utilities on Cliffview Drive, Also included is the placement of a 4 inch aggregate base. CONTRACT II F) STREET (SURFACING) : This construction provides for the placement of the remaining portion of the aggregate base and bituminous surface in conjunction with concrete curb and gutter. Also included is the adjusting of manhole frames and gate valve boxes. AREA TO BE INCLUDED: Assessment Area Construction Area SES Section 30 SES Section 30 Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition Cedar Cliff 2nd Add. Parcel 010-75 Parcel 010-75 COST ESTIMATE: Detailed- cost estimates are presented at the back of this report and are summarized as follows: Page 3. 2741a /��f Alternate I Alternate II CONTRACT I Sanitary Sewer $ 30,420 $ 30,420 Water Main 28,620 28,620 Storm Sewer 34,690 40,270 Services 29,770 29,770 Street (grading) 14,180 14,180 Total Contract I $137,680 $143,260 CONTRACT II Street (Surfacing) $ 59,470 $ 59,470 Total Contract II $ 59,470 $ 59,470 Total Contract I and II $197,150 $202,730 The total estimated project cost for Contract I and II for Alternate I is $197,150 and for Alternate II is $202,730. These costs include 25% for legal, engineering, administration, bond interest, and all related overhead. EASEMENTS: An easement is required for construction of the proposed storm sewer along the existing drainage route located on school property. It is anticipated this easement can be acquired at no cost. Ponding limits required for pond AP-26 within Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition will be acquired through approval of the final plat. . ASSESSMENTS: Assessments for sanitary sewer, water main, services, and streets are proposed to be levied against the benefited property in Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition (Phase III) . A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this report. Final assessment rates for construction of lateral facilities will be determined by final improvement costs and be assessed to each benefited property. Page 4. 2741a The proposed outfall storm sewer for pond AP-26 is considered a trunk fa- cility and is proposed to be assessed as a trunk facility. Trunk storm sewer for the Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition has been previously assessed under Project #295. Therefore, the only parcel not previously assessed for trunk storm sewer in this vicinity is Parcel #010-75 (Ind. School Dist. #191). Trunk san- itary sewer and trunk water main in this area have been previously assessed under Projects #64 and 127A respectively. Base rates in effect at the time of this report for trunk storm sewer are as follows: Trunk Storm Sewer - Single Family $0.0374/sq.ft. Multi-Family $0.0468/sq.ft. Comm.-Ind. $0.056/sq.ft. Revenue Sources: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows: Project Cost Revenue Balance Sanitary Sewer Laterals . $ 30,420 Lateral Assessment $ 30,420 $ 30,420 $ 30,420 - 0 - Water Main Lateral $ 28,620 Lateral Assessment $28,620 $ 28,620 $28,620 - 0 - Page 5. 2741a N Project Cost Revenue Balance Storm Sewer (Alt. I) Trunk $ 34,690 Trunk Assessment $18,900 Trunk Fund 15,790 Total $ 34,690 $34,690 - 0 - Storm Sewer (Alt. II) Trunk $ 40,270 Trunk Assessment $18,900 Trunk Fund 21,370 Total $ 40,270 $40,270 - 0 - Services Lateral $ 29,770 Lateral Assessment $29,770 Total $ 29,770 $29,770 - 0 - Street Cliffview Dr. (Grading/Gravel Base) $ 14,180 Cliffview Drive (Surfacing) 59,470 Cliffview Drive Assessment 73,650 Total $ 73,650 $73,650 - 0 - Revenue from the City trunk fund for storm sewer as presented above is $15,790 for Alternate I and $21,370 for Alternate II. No revenue is required from City trunk fund for sanitary sewer, water main, or street. 2741a Page 6. 4=x..7 PROJECT SCHEDULE CONTRACT I Present Feasibility Report February 17, 1981 Public Hearing March 17, 1981 Approve Plans and Specifications April 7, 1981 Open Bids May 1, 1981 Award Contract May 5, 1981 Construction Completion August 31, 1981 Assessment Hearing September, 1981 First Payment due with Real Estate Taxes May, 1982 I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. MarIc A. Hanson Date: February 5, 1981 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by• /r7/g� Thomas Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works Page 7. 2741a APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE CEDAR CLIFF 2ND ADDITION (PHASE III) PROJECT 329 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING A. SANITARY SEWER 1,245 Lin. ft. 8" sanitary sewer, 8'-10' deep @ $10.00/lin.ft. $12,450.00 140 Lin.ft. 8" sanitary sewer, 10'-12' deep @ $12.00/lin.ft. $ 1 ,680.00 6 Each Standard manhole w/casting @ $800.00/each 4,800.00 33 Each 8" x 4" wye branch @ $50..00/each 1 ,650.00 1 Each Connect to existing sanitary sewer @ $200.00/each 200.00 1 ,385 Lin.ft. Trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 1,385.00 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5.00/ton 500.00 25 Cu.yds. Boulder excavation @ $20.00/cu.yd. 500.00 Total Estimated Construction $23,165.00 + 5% Contingency 1,165.00 $24,330.00 + 25% Legal, Eng. , Admin. , Bond Int. 6,090.00 Total Sanitary Sewer $30,420.00 B. WATER MAIN 1,500 Lin. ft. 6" water main @ $10.00/lin. ft. $15,000.00 3 Each Hydrant @ $750.00/each 2,250.00 1 Each 6" gate valve and box @ $250.00/each 250.00 1,000 Lbs. Fittings @ $1.00/lb. 1,000.00 2 Each Connect to existing 6" plug @ $400.00/each 800.00 1,500 Lin.ft. Trench compaction @ $1.00/each 1,500.00 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5.00/ton 500.00 25 Cu.yds. Boulder excavation @ $20.00/cu.yd. 500.00 Total Estimated Construction $21,800.00 + 5% Contingency 1,090.00 $22,890.00 + 25% Legal, Eng. , Admin. , & Bond Int. 5,730.00 Total Water Main $28,620.00 A-1 2741a �/�✓ APPENDIX A ,(CONT'D) C. STORM SEWER (ALTERNATE I) 1,220 Lin. ft. 12" storm sewer @ $14.00/lin.ft. $17,080.00 250 Lin.ft. 12" liner in exist. 15" storm sewer @ $11.00/lin.ft. 2,750.00 3 Each Standard manhole w/cstg. @ $750.00/each 2,250.00 1 Each Construct standard manhole with casting over existing storm sewer @ $400.00/each 400.00 1 Each Cut into exist. catch basin @ $200.00/each 200.00 2.5 Acres Seed with mulch @ $1,500.00/acre 3,750.00 Total Estimated Construction $26,430.00 + 5% Contingency 1,320.00 $27,750.00 + 25% Legal, Eng. , Admin. , & Bond Int. 6,940.00 Total Storm Sewer (Alt. I) $34,690.00 STORM SEWER (ALTERNATE II) 1,630 Lin. ft. 12" RCP storm sewer @ $14.00/lin.ft. $22,820.00 5 Each Standard manhole w/cstg. @ $750.00/each 3,750.00 1 Each 12" RCP flared end @ $400.00/each 400.00 1 Each Cut into exist. catch basin @ $200.00/each 200.00 LUMP SUM Clear and grub trees @ $500.00/L.S. 500.00 3.0 Acres Seed with mulch @ $1,000/acre 3,000.00 Total Estimated Construction $30,670.00 + 5% Contingency 1,540.00 $32,210.00 + 25% Legal, Eng. , Admin. & Bond Int. 8,060.00 Total Storm Sewer (Alt. II) $40,270.00 A-2 2741a �' APPENDIX A (CONT'D) D. SERVICES 33 Each 1" corporation stop @ $25.00/each $ 825.00 33 Each 1" curb stop and box @ $50.00/each $1 ,650.00 1,600 Lin. ft. 4" CISP @ $6.00/lin.ft. 9,600.00 1,600 Lin.ft. 1" copper Type "K" @ $5.00/lin.ft. 8,000.00 1,600 Lin. ft. Trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 1,600.00 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5.00/lin.ft. 500.00 25 Cu.yds. Boulder excavation @ $20.00/cu.yd. 500.00 Total Estimated Construction $22,675.00 + 5% Contingency 1,135.00 $23,810.00 + 25% Legal, Eng. , Admin. , & Bond Int. 5,960.00 Total Services $29,770.00 E. STREET (GRADING) 6,000 Sq.yds. Subgrade preparation @ $0.30/sq.yd. $ 1,800.00 1,500 Ton Cl. 2 crushed limestone @ $6.00/ton 9,000.00 Total Estimated Construction $10,800.00 + 5% Contingency 540.00 $11,340.00 + 257. Legal, Eng. , Admin. , & Bond Int. 2,840.00 Total Street (Grading) $14,180.00 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING I. SANITARY SEWER $30,420.00 II. WATER MAIN 28,620.00 III. STORM SEWER 31,090.00 IV. STREET (GRADING) 14,180.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT CONTRACT I $104,310.00 A-3 2741a APPENDIX A (CONT'D) CONTRACT II STREET SURFACING F. STREET 700 Ton Class 5, aggregate base @ $5.00/ton $3,500.00 450 Ton 2341 bituminous base course @ $16.00/ton 7,200.00 450 Ton 2341 bituminous wear course @ $18.00/ton 8,100.00 45 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $180.00/ton 8,100.00 3,100 Lin. ft. Surmountable concrete curb & gutter @ $5.50/lin.ft. 17,050.00 6 Each Adjust manhole and catch basin @ $200.00/each 1,200.00 1 Each Adjust gate valve and box @ $150.00/each 150.00 Total Estimated Construction $45,300.00 + 5% Contingency 2,270.00 $47,570.00 + 25% Legal, Eng. , Admin. , Bond Int. 11,900.00 Total Street (Surfacing) .$59,470.00 A-4 2741a �� pooh O cq w � a � o U Z C d N N N d IIID N T N U o E-1 W w i-q g Z O... OA1JG auo�souos CD cn N m � ae 3 44 a o� a At co 4 ti a �.7 W � m � � X n •r P004Y � p ON �1 M a z a o E y C_ N C Q E i r J w U ao 04 aAiap auo�spuos 44 04 o / II 7 PD04Y p� i cq` V M _ � W y d w � o � U � Z G� � ma w m � v•- w J a d v Q N ,C a^IJ6F auorspuos W w - 41A V' /0 z N LO 4 c6 F- co co -— \ l f I � X I; I 0 i _ roFri I i V e cq - PDO �� �\1 �� s/Oq-:Z/ l pDO& o i uyvy _ J- o� w v N_ _ w w w O: ah auo�spuvs n. p M fitq ._ a � � 04 4a b ' I � ZZ zill t ,ovoY SIOVIN APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL CEDAR CLIFF 2ND ADDITION (PHASE III) PROJECT 329 February 5, 1981 I. SANITARY SEWER (33 lots) Total Cost/lot Cedar Cliff 2nd Add. , Phase III $30,420.00 $922.00 II. WATER MAIN (33 lots) Cedar Cliff 2nd Add. , Phase III $28,620.00 $868.00 III. TRUNK STORM SEWER Parcel Area Rate/Sq.ft. Description Owner (Sq.ft.) Single Family Total 010-75 Rahn Elementary School Dist. #191 505,348 (1) $.0374 $18,900 (1) Parcel in which 20% deduction in area was applied for future right-of-way dedication. IV. SERVICES (33 lots) Total Cost/lot Cedar Cliff 2nd Add. , Phase III $29,770.00 $902.00 V. STREETS (33 lots) Total Cost/lot Cedar Cliff 2nd Add. , Phase III A. Grading/Gravel Base $14,180.00 $ 430.00 B. Surfacing 59,470.00 1,802.00 2741a . '. Mel P x. ►!���V�/111 : SO Ca it pleRassm ENE 1 : �Ji;;��� •, = 111111 %/III J♦��,�Ii Hall 11 11111.11■1�1■��■ 111..1■ . - •, • , :�i � � i • ice � i i • Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Thirteen I.R. NOTE - PILOT KNOB SHOPPING CENTER C. I.R. Financing for Pilot Knob Shopping Center in the Amount of $5,500,000 -- A public hearing is scheduled to consider an indus- trial revenue ( tax exempt financing) note for Pilot Knob Associates for the purpose of constructing a $104,948 square foot shopping center generally referred to as Pilot Knob Center. The shopping center will include a Super Value supermarket, Snyder Drug Store and Our Own Hardware, of which these three (3) tenants will occupy approximately 50,000 square feet of space. The remaining space is leased to various retail shops. The estimated payroll is $1 , 710,000, based on an estimated 114 new jobs. For information relative to this tax exempt financing request, please refer to the attached document prepared by Miller & Schroeder Municipals Inc. (No page numbers) . This tax exempt financing request is for approval of a preliminary resolution; and, therefore, the details regarding the placement of the mortgage note will be considered in the future when the final resolution is presented. to the City. Copies of financial statements are also included with each of the documents as provided by Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. The information provided is consistent with that presented on previous tax exempt financing applications. If there is any additional information required by the City' Council, please feel free to con- tact this office prior to the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the I.R. financing in the amount of $5,500,000 for Pilot Knob Associates for the purpose of constructing Pilot Knob Center. PUBLIC FACILITIES REZONING D. Public Facilities Rezoning -- At the February 17, 1981 City Council meeting, approximately twenty-nine parcels of property were zoned public facilities. All of these parcels were considered park land and do quality under the public facilities zoning classi- fication. The City Administrator stated at that meeting there were several other parcels of public property that qualified for public facility zoning that should also be considered formally for rezoning. Please refer to page 5-G for a list of nine (9) parcels that should be rezoned fromHeir present classifications to public facilities zoning. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To rezone the nine (9 ) parcels as described to public facilities zoning. S S • MEMO TO: CITY ATTORNEY HAUGE FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 1981 SUBJECT: PUBLIC FACILITIES REZONING/3-17-81 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Please prepare a Public Hearing Notice to consider the rezoning for additional properties under the Public Facilities zoning classi- fication for the March 17, 1981 regular City Council meeting. As you recall, approximately 29 parcels that are considered park land were rezoned to Public Facilities zoning at the 2-17-81 City Council meeting._ The parcels which should be considered for the 3-17-81 City Council meeting are as follows: REZONING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION I FROM I TO (APPROXIMATE LEGAL Police Station I Ag ! Pub FcINWk of NWk Sec 22 Firehall #2 ! LI I " " 1SEk of SWk Sec 2 Firehall #3 I R1 ! " " ISA of NWk Sec 27 Ground Res. #55 I LI ( " '' INWk of NWk Sec 13 I Elevated Res. #39 ! RD I " " ISEk of NEk Sec 9 Timberline Pump House I R1 I " " INWk of NEk Sec 9 Peridot Path Ponding Area I R1 I " " ISWk of NEk Sec 20 City Hall I Ag i " " ( SWC of SW's Sec 16 Old City Hall I Ag I " " INEk of NEk Sec 21 City A ministrator �b Agenda Information Memo March 13 , 1981 Page Fourteen PROJECT #266 E. Assessment Hearing,, Project #266 (Art Rahn First Addition) -- Legal notice was duly printed in the Dakota County Tribune and all affected property owners were given notice of the public hearing for the final assessment hearing regarding installation of streets and utilities in the Art Rahn First Addition scheduled for this meeting. All final assessment costs have been reviewed with the developer of this project prior to the final assessment hearing. Attached on page 5$ is an informational sheet pertaining to those improvements assessed under the project. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To close the final assess- ment hearing, finalize the assessment roll and direct the City Clerk to file the assessment roll with the Dakota County Auditor' s office. s7 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 266 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Art Rahn 1st Addition FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING: March 17, 1981 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: WATER SANITARY Area p Area �X Laterals ($912.59/lot) © Laterals ($2644.55/lot.) �X Service ($356.91/lot) n Service ($356.91/lot) Lat. Benefit/Trunk( /ff) ❑ Lat. Benefit/Trunk( /ff STORM STREETS 1:—X] Area($345.40/lot) 17 Grading/Gravel Base ($342.42/lot) CXJ Laterals ($933.53/lot) Surfacing ($1483.45/lot) Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED:I . 15 Parcels NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: S Years RATE OF INTEREST: 11 TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $104,047.73 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 80-14 & 80-27 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 18, 1979 5 Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Fifteen HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN AMENDMENT F. Amendment to Housing Assistance Plan -- At the January 6, 1981 City Council meeting, the Dakota County HRA appeared and presented the Dakota County Assistance update which consists of a three year housing assistance plan. Action was taken by the City Council to recommend that the number of units for new construction scattered site be increased from seven to ten for 1981 . Also action was taken to carry over twenty-five units of new construction for 1981 with twenty additional units to be spread out over the balance of the two year period for Section 8 new construction. The Dakota County HRA has held a public hearing since the January 6, 1981 meeting at the County level which is a requirement and felt that a public hearing at the local levelshould also be considered before action is taken. Carol Schultz, Director of the Dakota County HRA, will be present to answer any questions and assist in con- ducting the public hearing with the City Administrator. , ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve " or deny the City Council ' s action of January 6, 1981 regarding Section 8 new construction and the scattered site housing program that is the three year housing assistance plan for Dakota County HRA. C7 Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Sixteen • � ®® J.P.K. PARK - FINAL PLAT A. J.P.K. Park Addition Final Plat -- All the information regarding this final plat has not been received to date; and, therefore, it is the recommendation of the staff that this item be continued until the 4-7-81 City Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To authorize continuance of consideration for the final plat of J.P.K. Park Addition to the 4-7-81 City Council meeting. J.I. Case Company - Variance for Lot Coverage B. J.i. Case Co. for a Variance to Exceed the 35% Lot Coverage Requirement in Industrial Zoning District -- A public, hearing was held before the A.P.C. at their January 27, 1981 meeting to consider a variance application to exceed the 35% lot coverage . in a light industrial district as submitted by J. I. Case Company. Action was taken by the A.P.C. to recommend approval to the City Council for the variance. Enclosed on pages (off through b� is a copy of the City Planner' s Report regarding Uiis item. For additional information regarding the action taken by the A.P.C. , refer to a copy of the A.P.C. minutes found on page SbAs the City Council may recall , this item did appear on the February 17, 1981 Council agenda; however, at the request of J. I . Case Company, it was continued for 30 days . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the action taken by the A.P.C. to approve a variance for J. I . Case Company. y O CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: J. I. CASE - R. D. BERNSTEIN LOCATION: SWa OF THE Nei$;, SECTION 2 EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JANUARY 27, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: JANUARY 20, 1981 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SL IITTED An application has been submitted for variance to exceed the 35% lot coverage in a Light Industrial District. COB'Il` M J. I. Case presently has their many located in Eagan. The present facility contains approximately 69,700 square feet on a lot which is 5.3 acres for a lot coverage of 29%. When J. I. Case originally bought the property, the lot area was 6.8 acres. The State has purchased right-of-way to upgrade State Highway 55 and Lexington Avenue. This right-of-way acquisition reduced the lot or site to 5.3 acres. J. I. Case is proposiDg to build a 28,450 square foot addition to their present facility. This addition would be strictly warehouse and it is the City's under- standing that this add}tion would only add an additional four full-tire.employees to J. I. Case's present work force. Therefore, the staff does not see a problem with parking for this facility at this time. The problem which J. I. Case is facing is that this proposed expansion will create a lot coverage of 40.8%, which is in excess of the City's lot coverage requirements for an Industrial District. J. I. Case is going through the process to buy back right-of-way. The State will not need to upgrade these two roadways. There is approximately 1.2 acres which J. I. Case could re-aquire from the State. This would bring back J. I. Case's lot size to 6.5-6.8 acres, and the proposed expansion would then only create a 33% lot coverage which would be within the requirement for lot coverage within an Industrial District. In reviewing this application, one can juggle the lot coverage requirements around depending if J. I. Case owned the property or if the square footage in question would still remain in right-of-way or green area retained by the highway departTent. A point to be considered is that the land area is still there no matter who awns what property, and the intent of the ordinance to provide openess and green space within an industrial park is still 6l CITY OF EAGAN J. I. CASE JANUARY 27, 1981 PAGE TWO being met. Therefore, there is sore justification in granting the variance request. If approved, the variance should be subject to the following conditions: 1. Even though the intent of the Industrial District is being met, J. I. Case pursue the re-acquisition of the excess right-of-N,ray to meet the technical aspect of the zoning ordinance. 2. A site plan shall be approved by the City staff showing the parking ratio for the overall development of the site. 3. A landscape plan shall be submitted and approved by the Eagan City staff. DCR/jac h� Y i _ � ,. �•c "-icy t• _•� � ( d S ��' 'r � + •r� t e •'' 1 JI- Rj { �V J 1 p 63 r_ 16 ' A ` � ♦ �;\._rte`: ���', "��'•��=' ,: 17B \\ . `♦. ` 1 `` ;+' rJ ^': :��i:_ irl:,i. , �.,;. \'• :}; ,`/ LUE GENTIAN ROA ♦ ♦A , /�1 i tiaY �/ - disk- •r, / .. •' _ �'•� f .:ter. Jl• _ ti J � ' ^f/ 1•'•'`'4/'[K �"yam ,' ''�'i�I!/L _ _�D— ,• Q - /.• 'tip. ..• .y �r�, .tip{ ti \,' •' C •.:•r. 4.: _ f, '' /� r •,{�rr:r "!.•.kms .a}:' 1 At Ire ;<� i� � ���• `•:r r'r;`:r:•;��'�`fy:� 'r. .; i H w 1, 'f�,[y'';• !`.� ! :r•rJ;;�`�" !fes�;,• ' ~ / �� t. a'r.r• •r:' `L�..l,�r ''.;:.: :� ti tirl .! trJ. .J y mm 777�- ''' � •��•� til 1'.•i,��1'�tiF•.' t•:. t. l i:._ `C•�'•}',:S•'/.'. '. .'� ,'7�'Y ��YY'``` '�1.',r. f. .' �'}� S •�',���5,.'J'.{'4�,w`,S,'•, r r r'/ •. : 'f' 1. �ak'.'.l'J.4`'` d..'.'.r:'' '�%•%f•' •a`''%`f•.rl. �y ``'' :�.'..:. � ��.'.5.`.�,'r~.tii.S'�• 'l.`r:5.,.:4�'`'r'.'f/:' •� a,:' •'`.�. lrl.•:'.'/.':'.'.•:,5,.. A•. '.f; •,4: .1 r.�'.`.'''S�t.•,, ,:�f,'.1`,'.a y. .• .tr •t. '���Wil,' •'.Ltir'.S•.'.•.'j. .'.'.'.':' l. r:� :. r:�}t.•,h •.Trr:�•:•:•' •'f'f'•'•�:�• :�• rti�� `. y .K ri { 'yJf��:,r d J. I. CASE VARIANCE The Vice-Chairman next convened the public hearing for a variance from the ordinance requirement that building area not exceed 35% lot coverage within an I-1, Light Industrial District. The variance was requested by J. I. Case Company and R. D. Bernstein appeared for the applicant. Mr. Bernstein indicated that the existing J. I. Case facility contains approximately 69,700 square feet and has lot coverage of approximately 29% on their 5.3 acre parcel. The proposed expansion of the building would result in a 40.8% lot coverage. J.I. Case Company is presently negotiating the repurchase of prop- erty previously dedicated for highway use to the State of Minnesota and the purchase of the intended parcel would reduce the lot coverage to 36.7%. In the future, J.I. Case will also be reacquiring a second parcel which would reduce lot coverage to approximately 33%. City Planner Runkle discussed the two parcels which are to be reacquired and stated that the intent of the ordinance requirement is presently being complied with because these parcels exist as green area, whether owned by the State of Minnesota or by J. I. Case Company, but wherever possible, the technical requirements of the ordinance should be complied with. Upon further discussion, Gits moved, Krob seconded, and all members voted in favor, that it be recommended to the City Council that a variance from the 35% maximum lot coverage requirement be approved allowing an increase to 40.8% under the following conditions: 1. Even though the intent of the Industrial District is being met, J. I. Case should pursue the reacquisition of the excess right-of-way to meet the technical aspect of the zoning ordinance. 2. A site plan shall be approved by the City staff showing the parking ratio for the overall development of the site. 3. A landscape plan shall be submitted and approved by the Eagan City staff. 4. Compliance with all other ordinance requirements. 5. The owner shall enter into a recordable agreement with the City of Eagan stating that there shall be no change in the use of the property without prior City Council approval. 6� Agenda Information Memo March 13 , 1981 Page Seventeen MARI ACRES 2ND ADDITION- FINAL PLAT A. Final Plat Approval for Mari Acres 2nd Addition -- The final plat application, hardshell copy, development agreement and all other pertinent information regarding final plat consideration for Mari Acres 2nd Addition are in order for consideration. Enclosed on page &7 is a copy of the final plat for Mari Acres 2nd Addi- tion. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the final plat as presented for Mari Acres 2nd. Addition. Jr ia E o t X- Eil .1 uj� rou F« IS t,A A ID Av proU t V uu 3 I t t v Es9a E,so Z. x IN a_ > HT < uU O _j -j ... 3.Et,,00.0 N 1601E ix- 0 z -45 cc) - ----- C\j 12 isi j L - • . w"IF-77 V z C\j 6. 41( LO AA A --J L cm0i, NOZINOH g CC v 00 0, C\j w < z OD W tc) o W A 009os ��� {' L_—per �.�s0 1►lJ K1bT l�u�..� .v_.. �J • T. ■S •i ii - - j1 �' � t � r IIA 4,7 1 •77 y I .tMf• Tit+ .i-wa •�.w.,ea. -. ✓ i _ i =3 A 0 °I -�� • . - d i 3 is lit I ►� 3j ; 3, � - Q • tz •:_ ■ a _: A 7 ��K W tf'►w.✓w WIA IS �i -a; SAI as 21. 8-5 ja .•:�- /r � = f ii = _; �� =Via i _. i •�: :'i •_ - io is-_ : M i � J � I j .ews.�►a o sew. c�taa rnrnlis.'C - - a wwl •.o...l w°h 'MV '�.:�-' --aV aw w saam� -.�'.i.. . tcn:• -- - - ` +� sur ar+ rc�o.. 6-7 - • • Agenda Information Memo March 13 , 1981 Page Eighteen CHES MAR EAST 4TH ADDITION - FINAL PLAT B. Final Plat Approval for Ches Mar East 4th Addition -- The final plat application, hardshell copy, development agreement and all other pertinent information regarding final plat consideration for Ches Mar East 4 h Addition are in order for consideration. Enclosed on page is a copy of the final plat for Mari Acres 2nd Addition. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the final plat as presented for Ches Mar East 4th Addition. Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Nineteen WINE & BEER LICENSE FOR ITALIAN PIE SHOPPE C. James Basta for Transfer of Wine License and 3.2 Beer License for Italian Pie Shoppe -- The City has received an application from James Basta for a wine license and 3. 2 beer license for the Italian Pie Shoppe. Mr. Basta is a resident of St. Paul and has been involved in the restaurant and 3.2 bar business in Minneapolis . The necessary Police Department checks have been made on both Mr. & Mrs. Basta and there is no reason for the Police Department to deny the license. Enclosed in each City Councilmember' s packet is a copy of the personal information and general information for the applicant. . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the wine license and 3. 2 beer license for James Basta at the Italian Pie Shoppe. BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD - REZONING D. Blue Cross Blue Shield for Rezoning of Approximately 122 acres from A, Agricultural, to PD, Planned Development -- A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at the February 24, 1981 APC meeting to consider the rezoning from Agricultural to Planned Development of approximately 122 acres of land owned by Blue Cross Blue Shield. This item had originally appeared on the APC agenda at the December 23 , 1980 APC meeting. At that meeting, there was a recommendation made by the APC to the City Council to deny the application, advising the applicant to submit a new application with more specific information, more detail and more continuity to the plan to allow further consideration by the APC. That recommendation was never considered by the City Council due to the withdrawal of the application by Blue Cross Blue Shield Blue Cross Blue Shield did provide the additional information, detail and continuity and, as stated, appeared before the APC at their last regular meeting and it was the APC' s recommendation to the City Council that the rezoning from A to PD be approved per the conditions of their action. Enclosed on pages 7 f through $� is a rather detailed account and copy of a report regarding tt e—Blue Cross Blue Shield application as prepared by the City Planner. For additional information regarding the action that was taken by the APC, please refer to minutes found on pages through � . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve the rezoning as presented by Blue Cross Blue Shield. 70 TO: JOS HARRISON, CHAIRMIAN, AND THE ADVISORY PUNNING C -TAISSION FROM: DALE C. FdJNKLE, CITY PLS DA'L'E: FEBRUARY 18, 1981 SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THE BINE CROSS-BLUE SHIELD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL On December 23, 1980, the Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing for the Planned Development zoning application submitted by Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Minnesota. The proposed planned development consisted of approxi- mately 122 acres and have the following land uses: 32 acres of limited business, 45 acres of R-1 density housing, 0-3 dwelling units per acre, 32 acres of R-3 density housing, 6-12 dwelling units per acre, 12 acres f of parkland At the December 23, 1980 Advisory Planning Commission Meeting, the applicant was i.rdecisive as to the timing and who would develop the limited business por- tion of the Planned Development. At the present time, Blue Cross-Blue Shield has re-evaluated their needs and have resubmmi.tted an updated staging plan as to how and when the limited business portion of the property will develop. This staging plan reflects the most accurate thinking of Blue Cross-Blue Shield. This staging plan is enclosed for your review. At the December 23, 1980 Advisory Planning Commission Meeting, the Advisory Planning Commission recommended denial of the Planned Development because of the vagueness and uncertainty of the overall development plan. Hopefully, the revised staging plan will clarify many of the concerns that the Advisory Plan- ning Commission had. Another factor regarding the development proposal were questions brought forth by the public. The first question related to the planned development ordinance which had been interpreted by the public indicating that there had to be a developer contracted for the overall planned development pro- posal. According to the Planned Development ordinance, it only states that the proposed development has to be feasible for development and that a developer does not have to be contracted to develop the site. At the present time, Blue Cross- Blue Shield does not have a developer contracted to develop the site. The sta- ging plan indicates that development would not occur for another 2-3 years. A second question was brought up regarding a preliminary utilities' map as an exhibit to the planned development. Blue Cross-Blue Shield has submitted a pre- liminary utilities map for the 122 acres. This map is also enclosed for your review. The overall planned development has not changed since the original submittal of December 23, 1980. However, the staging plan has been altered to reflect Blue Cross-Blue Shield's needs. The planned development is still a concept plan or preliminary plan of how the overall property will develop. There are designated areas with land uses assigned and densities assigned. The detailed plans for the planned development have not been developed at this time and would not be developed until Blue Cross-Blue Shield is ready to have the property developed. At the time Blue Cross-Blue Shield is ready to have the property developed, new public hearings will be held with each phase of the proposed development. Hopefully this -7l Page two explains why the planned development is in the "blob" concept not showing each exact lot configuration and the exact alignment of the overall streets. These items will occur with the detailed plans in the future. The reason Blue Cross-Blue Shield's application is back before the Advisory Planning Commission is that Blue Cross-Blue Shield withdrew their application frau the City Council agenda since the Comprehensive Plan will be subutitted to the Metropolitan Council for review prior to Blue Cross receiving approval frau the City of Eagan. The time factor is not that pressing of an issue. Therefore, Blue Cross-Blue Shield have put together more specific plans as to how the pro- perty will develop and would like to present this information to the Advisory Planning Commission prior to going to the City Council for a decision on the over- all planned development. Therefore, Blue Cross-Blue Shield has been rescheduled for the February 24th Public Hearing before the Advisory Planning Commission. The City has re-noticed all the property owners within the 350' distance for the new public hearing on Blue Cross-Blue Shield's application. If anyone has any ques- tions regarding the application for the planned development, or would like addi- tional information, please feel free to contact me at the Eagan City Hall. Sincerely, Dale C. Runkle City Planner DCR/Jac Enclosed is a copy of the December 23, 1980 Staff Report and the minutes of the December 23 Advisory Planning Commission Meeting. APC Minutes Decembor 23, 1980 Page Three BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MI`NIESOTA REZONING The public hearing was ne xt opened regarding the application of Blue Cross- Blue Shield of Minnesota to rezone approximately 122 acres owned by Blue Cross in Section 16 south of Blue Cross Road from Agricultural to PD, Planned Development. Mr. Norm Storbakken of Blue Cross was present as was Mark Morrell of Architectural Alliance for the applicant. Mr. Storbakken and Mr. Morrell reviewed the proposed current comprehensive plan and the proposed concept plan. There were concerns by Planning Commission members about the excessive amount of Limited Business District sites and the increase in commercial zoning within the City. There were also questions about the location of the multiple family, the townhouse and the single family loca- tions and the fact that the plan was not sufficiently detailed. The exact location of roads and zoning were not specified. It was noted no access to Yankee Doodle Road was provided as recommended by City staff. There were questions about compliance with City park requirements as to location. The developer indicated the park land could be acquired by the City whenever the City requested dedication. There was discussion concerning time frame for development noting the possibility of sale and lease back of a portion of the Limited Business District property. The comprehensive plan indicates R-2 use on the entire parcel at the present time, and Blue Cross representatives indicated that they wanted to avoid later amendment of the City Comprehensive Plan through the Metropolitan Council and thus the reason to submit the Planned Development application at the present time even though the exact development is uncertain. They also noted that Blue Cross and Blue Shield expects to require the Limited Business area south of Blue Cross Road for Blue Cross use and ancillary purposes. Some neighboring property owners objected to the Limited Business on the south side of Blue Cross Road and Blue Cross representatives stated the uses would be compatible with the existing Blue Cross facility. They also stated that Blue Cross will use the LB district exclusively for its own purposes, and would not develop on a sale and lease back basis. There were objections by neighboring owners that the timing of development had now been moved up by Blue Cross representatives, objections to the change in the comprehensive plan of the City, that it is not in accordance with the requirements for general layout of utilities and that there is no developer of residential area determined at this point. Mr. Storbakken stated that the number of insurance-contracts in existence in 1980 had been reduced but that it was a cyclical change and expected an abrupt increase when the market changes. Chair- man Harrison opposed rezoning of additional land to LB unless there is a specific request for expansion of the Blue Cross facilities and not for rental or sale to out- side owners, developers, or lessees. Mr. Storbakken indicated that the LB area would be developed by the year 2000, and also agreed upon a maximum of 15 years for the Planned Development. Gits moved, Wilkins seconded a motion to recommend disapproval with the under- standing that the, applicant could submit a new application with more specific information, more detail, and more continuity in its plan for the consideration by the Planning Commission. Wilkins, Turnham, Krob and Gits voted yes. Harrison and Bohne voted no. There were concerns about revisions to the comprehensive plan and the difficulty in making changes and it was noted that the City Council may forward the comprehensive plan to the Metropolitan Council at the end of January, 1981. �3 4 c o Potential/Proposed \' Sanitary Sewer \�\ 00000 Existing Storm Sewer 0���� Potential/Proposed Storm Sewer ` `�� � � • -'�,,, " ;fit 0 00 O Q10 -, 1 'fto Q i Q O/i •so LIO 1 t ((� " ,•.,�� M�_ ,-=\`¢ {� __ _ � .fig- )�� /;f _/�' Proposed and Existing •.• Sanitary and Storm Sewer Locations -7+ o b ,00 Blue Cross ,.., Blue Shield s 3535 Blue Cross Road General& Long Distance (612)456-8000 P.O. Box 43560 Customer Service (612)456-5050 St. Paul, Minnesota 55164 February 6, 1981 Thomas Hedges , City Administrator City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Dear Tom: As you know, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota requested to have our Plan Development Zoning Application removed from the agenda of the last Eagan City Council meeting. Our pri- mary reason for that decision was that it is now our under- standing that the comprehensive plan once submitted to' the Metro Council will not supersede zoning done at the local level . For that reason, the sense of urgency which we felt was there on December 23 at the Advisory Planning Commission meeting was not as real . Consequently, since the Advisory Planning Com- mission orginally requested more specific information , we felt it more appropriate to appear before the Advisory Planning Commission with more specific information prior to taking the issue to the Eagan City Council . , By means of this letter, I would like to formally request that our Planned Development Zoning Application be placed on the agenda for the next Advisory Planning Commission meeting. Your assistance and the assistance of Dale Runkle and other City staff members during this process is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Y Norm Storbakken, Sr. Vice President Administrative Services NCS/j v C 1cut t L i I Blue Cross.,,,, -r, Blue Shield 1 CA hlmneSOtl 3535 Blue Cross Road General& Long Distance (612)456.5000 P.O. Box 43560 Customer Service (612)456.5050 St. Paul, Minnesota 55164 January 15, 1981 Tom Hedges, City Administrator City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55022 Dear Tom: The Advisory Planning Commission at the December 23, 1980 meeting indicated that they felt that our Planned Development Zoning Application ought to be more specific in terms of how Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota would be developing the property referred to in our application. Quite frankly, up to the Decem- ber 23, 1980 meeting, we were of the impression that the Planned Development Zoning Application was to be fairly general in nature, with the specifics being developed at the time the planned develop- ment agreement between the City of Eagan and ourselves would be finalized. We apologize for any problems which may have resulted because of the more general approach we took. Now realizing that it is desirable that we be more specific, I would like to offer the following: I . Site "A" Site "A" is currently zoned limited business and will be the first site we develop. It is expected that a facility of approximately 190, 000 square feet , housing approximately 700 employees will be constructed on this site between 1983 and 1985. II . Site "C" < Site "C" is also currently zoned limited business. At the present time, there are two softball fields on that site. Our intentions are to move the soccer field located on Site "A" to Site "C" at the time construction would start on Site "A" . A running track and tennis courts may also be constructed. Any actual building construction before the year 2000 would be in the form of a health club facility providing an indoor recreational alternative to Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota employees . Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota would intend to continue to make all outdoor facilities on Site "C" available to the City of Eagan for their use until such time as the proposed park included within the Planned Development Zoning Appli- cation is developed. -76 Tom Hedges January 15, 1981 Page 2 III . Site "D" Site "D" containing approximately. 18 acres is expected to be developed between 1985 and 1987. It is anticipated that this site will include a regional computer service center and a possible day care center and company store for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota employees. IV. Site "E" Site "E" contains approximately 15 acres, which is suffi- cient to construct a facility of approximately 140,000 square feet , which would house approximately 500 employees . It is expected that this site will be developed between 1990 and 1995 for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota employees as a result of planned growth. If additional space is needed after Site "E" has been developed , it is expected that Site "C" , which up to this. time has been used by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota employees for physical fitness activities , will be developed. This development would more than likely not occur until after the year 2000 . Development of the residential portion of Planned Development Zoning Application will probably begin between 1983 and 1985. The Eagan comprehensive plan currently has that land zoned R-II , which would allow for construction of between three to six units per acre. The number of units proposed in the residential por- tion of the Planned Development Zoning Application is within those parameters . At the Advisory Planning Commission meeting on December 23, it was suggested that a Planned Development Zoning Application should contain a utility plan. As a result , we will be submitting a utility elan to the City of Eagan prior to the January 20 Eagan City Council meeting. It was also suggested at the meeting that before a Planned Development Zoning Application can be approved, a contract with a developer would have to be signed. Dale Runkle' s January 7, 1981 letter to Mark Merrill of Architectural Alliance indicated that the Planned Development Zoning Ordinance does not state that a developer has to be contracted in order to get appro- val for a Planned Development Zoning Application . The Planned Development Ordinance only states that the development has to be feasible. Therefore, it is our interpretation that Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota would not be required at this time to have a developer contracted as a requirenent of getting the Planned Development Zoning Application approved. Tom Hedges January 15, 1981 Page 3 Again, I apologize for not understanding that more specific information would be required at the Advisory Planning Commission meeting. I trust the information provided in this letter will satisfy the specifics the Advisory Planning Commission and Eagan City Council will be requiring . If I have overlooked anything or if you have any questions, please call me at 456-8040. Sincerely, ''- 1 Y ` Norm Storbakken, Sr. Vice President Administrative Services NCS/jv -79 CITY OF EACAN SUBJECT: REZONI111G APPLICANT: BLUE CROSS-SLUE SHIELD CF ''.I'P.rE* ^TA LOCATION: +1 CF THE NVI SECTION 16 AND PART CF THE NE-1, SECTI"Id 17 EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: DECIE71BER 23, 1980 DATE OF REPORT: DEMIBER 17, 1980 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RU;JKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLTCATTJN SU_=.=_ ED An app'_icaticn has been submitted for rezoning of approximatelv 122 acres fro- A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development). C . . .1.5 As you recall, ear'ier this fall Btu Shield reque- ed to be raced -�n e Cross-31,1e r, ..� the Ad7isory Plan*:i,q Commission agenda for an informal revie,� -f their; site - e�r �`n� ad plan. At this time, there were several concerns re�7ardin� the proposed 7lan. Since this meetint. , the staff has worke:a wit'h Slue Cress-7lue S n solved t^:e concerns that were brc :gng ht up at that meets Shield and :as _ _- Bl-.,e Cress-= CI-Y CF EAG. "; BE RE.. .._ G�U1iSCS-__CE —. -D DE F'y Er 23, 198 Prr,E T;i� • In re;ie�rtrg the proposed land uce plan., Blue Cro3s-Flue Shield is showing the low density area c.ntainini; 3.4 dwelling units per acre, which .-.ould be in the claasi}'icatim of single family and/or duplex development. The P_3 land-use r:hi,r is being proposed has a density of 9.4 dwelling units per acre, which is mid-ran" between the 6-12 duelling units allowed in the R3 land use plan. The overall density proposed for the 77 acres of residential development is 466 dwelling units which is between the 330-660, which is currently allowed in the proposed Compre- hensive Guide Plan. The proposed land uses are compatible to the surrounding uses or development. The plan appears to be thought out ver;,: carefully as to traffic circulation for providing access through the sire. The applicant is also prcn_ osing tc provide the neighborhood nark, which is proposed in the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Enclosed is a site plan analysis prepared by Mark Merrill of Architec+ural Alliance for the Blue Cr^7s--1ue Shield P1 nned Development. Al,c, the staging 'an in which the applicant is requesting for the development terms of this pro.'�et is enclosed. If approved, the Planned Develoment should be subject to the follo:aing condi-ices: 1. Pefore the Planned _ _-velo rent zoning is granted, a planned devel.;_,^:ent a-r e- ...ent must be approved by the City of Eagan. 2. The lour; density area shown on the proposed site plan shall be developed as single fa.:.ily units, or n higher than duplex units L.less the ar^lica_t goes trrcug', the public hearing proces- to rotif. the surrounding pr^_perty owners. 3. Nc develops-ent can occur u:.-il the detailed platting process has been ccm- pleted far the first phase c_' development. 4. The overall density sh4il not exceed 466 dwelling units. 5. The detailed lard uses, or lard-use designation areas shall be determined at f the Planned t. e atti ! stage o Development. 6. The -_rm c_' the Planned Development Agreement shall extend fcr 11, years. 7. The h,-eh density area should be subject to the density requirements according to the zoning ordinance. In doing so, the developer would be developing the '< higher density -,L-.der the same density requirements as other developers in the City. DCR/j ac U " i • BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF MINNESOTA PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT 1 As a result of a Property Analysis done during the summer INTRODUCTION of 1980 for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota (BCBSM) , a decision was made to apply to the City of Eagan for planned development zoning for the undeveloped portion of the BCBSM Y property. 2 Of the approximate total of 178.5 acres contained within the PRESENT LAND BCBSM site, approximately 55.7 acres lying west of Blue Cross USE Road are presently zoned Limited Business and are not part of the property for which a change in zoning is being requested. The remaining 122.8 acres of undeveloped land east of Blue Cross Road are zoned Agricultural . The recently adopted Comprehensive Guide Plan for the City of Eagan proposes that the undeveloped land be allowed to be developed as low to medium density residential (3 to 6 dwelling units per acre) . It also proposes that an "active park" pf approximately 12 acres be located on the site as part of Eagan 's parks and trails system. The present intent of BCBSM is to reserve the approximately 55.1 acre Limited Business site, or that portion of the total BCBSM property between Highway 13 and Blue Cross Road, as the permanent building site. It is estimated that approximately 380,000 square feet of additional office building with associated parking can be accommodated on the existed Limited Business site. 3 BCBSM wishes to reserve a 33 acre portion of the 122.8 acre PROPOSED undeveloped site for development of Limited Business functions LAND although the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Eagan proposes USE that the total undeveloped Site be reserved only for Residential and Park use. The remaining 89.8 acres are proposed to be developed as 77.8 acres of housing and 12 acres of "active park" similar to that proposed by the Comprehensive Guide Plan. 3.1 Based on recent discussion between BCBSM and planners and Limited engineers representing the City of Eagan, there appears to Business be agreement that the desire by BCBSM to utilize 33 acres for Limited Business functions is reasonable. BCBSM originally purchased its property in order to provide for its potential future growth. It is felt that by allowing these 33 acres to be used for Limited Business development, the potential growth requirements of BCBSM can be accommodated well past the year 2000. An estimated office floor area of approximately 315,000 square feet together with required parking can potentially be accommodated on the two proposed Limited Business sites. The existing centrally located holding pond would be developed as a visual amenity for both the Limited Business and the Residential portions of the site. The BCBSM plan also indicates a BCBSM Service Center in Limited Business Site D. It would be used only by BCBSM employees and would potentially provide minor automobile servicing, health and/or exercise facilities and a day care center. 3.2 BCBSM proposes that a 12 acre active park be located in the Parks southwest corner of the undeveloped portion of the site, the same location proposed by the Comprehensive Guide Plan. According to Eagans' park dedication ordinance, ten (10) percent of any property developed for residential use must be donated by the developer to .the city for public park use. Thus 7.78 acres (ten percent of 77.8 acres) would be donated by BCBSM while the remaining 4.22 acres would need to be purchased by the City of Eagan from BCBSM 1 3.3 The portion of the site reserved for residential development Housing contains 77.8 acres which, if developed .with an average density of six (6) dwelling units per acre, would yield 466 units. Lower density housing (2 to 5 dwelling units per acre) is proposed for the south edge of the site adjacent to existing single family dwellings and for north facing slopes of some of the hilly portions of the site. Medium to high density cluster housing (6 to 10 dwelling units per acre) is proposed for the north and the east site, relating to adjacent existing or proposed similar density housing, and for much of the interior of the site, especially on south facing slopes of hills having solar access. 3.4 Access to the Residential portion of the site is proposed Roads from the west off Blue Cross Road, from the south via Birch Road and from the east via a planned road straddling the south property line of the site. This scheme is very similar to that proposed by the Comprehensive Guide Plan. An alternative or additional point of access might also be considered to the northeast corner of the site via a road through the Public Works site to the east (dashed line on Concept Plan) . Access to the Limited Business Site D is proposed from the internal road connecting Birch Pond Road to Blue Cross Road. The proposed access to Site E is from Blue Cross Road immediately across from the proposed future north access road to the existing BCBSM building site. A major loop extends through the residential site following contours as closely as possible. From this loop, minor loops are proposed (not shown) to provide vehicular access to the residential units. (F Z- -2- • • 3.5 Green spaces and pedestrian trails and paths intertwine Trails throughout the residential site providing pedestrian connections between green open spaces and housing clusters as well as helping to generate a pattern of trails as proposed by the Eagan Comprehensive Guide Plan. 4 Of primary concern to BCBSM is the maintenance or enhancement QUALITY of the physical and emotional amenities of the present site and facility, while at the same time providing for potential future space needs for itself. Great care will be necessary in the planning of the development of the site in order to insure that future Limited Business facilities are of a quality similar to that of the present office facility and that the hilly wooded portion of the site is maintained as much as possible. Existing vistas should also be maintained. Maintaining and expanding the existing quality will require much thought and creativity. g3 December 1 , 1980 BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF MINNESOTA SITE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTIONS LIMITED BUSINESS Acres Population G. Sq. Ft. Bldg. Site Al 15.4 700 190,000 Site B 24.9 1350 370,000 Site C 2 15.4 700 190,000 Site D 18 650 175,000 Site E 15 500 140,000 Subtotal 88.7 3900 1 ,065,000 RESIDENTIAL Acres Dwelling Units Single Family/R-I 34 100 Double/R-II 11 55 Townhouse/R-III 17 119 Multiple Dwelling/R-IV 15.8 192 Subtotal 77.8 466 Neighborhood Park 12 TOTAL ACRES 178.5 1 . Existing BCSSM building 2. Includes service center D � • •♦ ♦♦ �� A ♦♦% ,,. ♦ IND. ,�i� ���♦ ��� Industrial R-111 6.12 units acre `% A ParkLB s S limited +� �1 Business si.co mom N, �._ R- I - 0 3 units acre R-1 R-11 - g 0.3 units acre 3 6 units.acre R- IV Pw 1 ., Public W_ork_s__ 1 uru s acre LII" 4Y.! I -�7-M�0' R-II i ; NB �� P 3.6 units,acre , ! Park R & D t ! Comprehensive Plan • F��• 9 8S_ Architectural Alliance 55403 ie J2/87-5703 ACorporahon for Observing.Discovering.Creating,and Building Environments Mr. Dale Runkle ` City Planner City of Eagan /elopment a 795 Pilot Knob RoadE an, Minnesota 55122Decem r 8, 1980Re: Blue oss/Blue Shield Pl Dear Dale: I am writing to y in response to your request for a Staging Plan • for the Planned Dev opment ,¢roposal for the Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota ( BSM}/property development. As you know, BCBSM currently has no well feed plans for the development of the Property in question. How ver, a general idea as to the order in which the sites might be de eloped does exist. The 12 acre park site could be veloped when the City makes its decision to do so. / It is project *hat Site 0 containing 13 acres ,would be the firs Limited Business arcel to be developed, possibly as early as 198 -1985 or as late as 90. The low density residential site in the u.theast corner of the BCBSM property would probably be developed at ap oximately the sarr,e time gut would probable extend over a greater len th of time. The Tedium density residential site in red would probable be started following the start of development of the low density res ential site. -he development of all of the residential portion f the site is Foreseen to begin possibly as early as 1983 and ext nd over as long 3s ten to fifteen year's. At this time the development of Site E (Limited Busines is foreseen to take place at some time following development of Site Projecting even a range of dates for proposed development of that sit is difficult at this time but the most logical projection is for develop nt to occur sometime between the years of 1985 and 1995. It must be emphasized .that these dates are very rough estimates and it is possible that even the order of development could change. Do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. \ Sincerely, MARK MURRILL IY Cc: Jim Regnier, Norm S orbakkpn_ Rill Thnirnnenn 1-6- 11 .. __ o 4 Oo MEDAAM oENIITr IIAlTEO wanEss> RE 0-1E waft sag LfMITED BUS14ESS 11.A e 11.1.w« Rwwa11SM Oft 110 000 KR (� 1M An. 21.1.wN hop""klum 370AM 94, It som ,o Co c5 n n l LlwMT ED ss Mr Ar" I S.1 w« am am 190AM D (NESS A".""Ou. 115A00 4J! f MEMO ocros d co O d O o u .�4 �" - r` ==Kim Oft K R LOW DENSITY - 7r �:. , - . - LOW DENSITY a000 90 c3 -— -_-. � •'_ • . IUB � `u �� o tr 1C=3a ♦i+•.� �-'Y'� xi• _ LOG HIGH DENSITY U Ca RESL RE DENTIA FlALIC WORKS ;`O I IVIED _ I LOW DEN,SMY ti Ana a.w.. i / uw. O NEKAilONN000 PARK E 1 MEDNM DENSITY, 0 MASS o p Oi uw..a. a GO aE'b[i a� .D R, - � p � "low l e RESEARCH a DEVELOPMENT D q Concept Plan h ST }A RK o 'zr / CO 4- WQ •,• / � ` /�'r•� r+`; rte,,.. .•�. �� / ��:-�;��/.`J�,` of ix :�' •'� '••.•••�'••.•.:,•.•••,. .'�' � i%// � '�� rte'`• C� ��. . . . . . .-• ;f ago, AY iE1ihTS Q (ST 2y�} of = �� / / �{ ■\ i 'f^ '\R i DJFj ILI jou f: 1.t5. t ��, C _ �. ./ , R I PE Ra• T e R . . . . . y i T RR�L LJ j� `4` IT'� p Le 0 APC Minutes February 24, 1981 6. Cable TV Committee. Commission Members Krob and Harrison were ap- pointed as representatives from the Advisory Planning Commission to the Cable TV Committee. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD REZONING Chairman Harrison then convened the public hearing regarding the applica- tion of Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Minnesota to rezone approximately 122 acres from Agricultural to PD, Planned Development, located in Sections 16 and 17. Norm Storbakken of Blue Cross was present as was John Lacken of Architectural Alliance on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Storbakken indicated that Blue Cross had purchased the property in 1958 consisting of 180 acres and in 1970 a 180,000 square foot building was constructed and an approximately 190,000 square foot addition was constructed in 1975. The various phases for the 122 acre parcel were discussed including timing pursuant to Mr. Storbakken's letter of January 15, 1981. The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 23, 1980 concerning the PD and recommended denial because of the vagueness and uncertainty of the overall development plan. Staff indicated that additional information had now been submitted noting that about 80 acres was planned for residential purposes. City Consulting Planner John Voss explained the staff's position and there were no objections from sur- rounding property owners to the proposal. All of the area indicated for commercial zoning would be used for Blue Cross purposes and this information would be included in a Planned Development Agreement. It was noted there would be access to Yankee Doodle Road and according to Mr. Storbakken, the park requirements and utility requirements would be complied with by the Developer. Member Wilkins questioned whether the PD timing is premature in that some of the development is planned for the 1985 to 1990 period. No variances for height of buildings would be requested according to the devel- oper. After discussion, Krob moved, Gits seconded a motion to recommend approval of the application from Agricultural to PD, Planned Development, subject to the following conditions: 1. Before the Planned Development zoning is granted, a Planned Develop- ment Agreement shall be approved by the City of Eagan. 2. The low density area shown on the proposed site plan shall be devel- oped as single family units, or no higher than duplex units unless the appli- cant goes through the public hearing process to notify the surrounding property owners. 3. No development shall occur until the detailed platting process has been completed for the first phase of development. 4. The overall density shall not exceed 466 units. 5. The detailed land uses, or land use designation areas shall be deter- mined at the platting stage of the Planned Development. 6. The term of the Planned Development Agreement shall extend for 15 years. 2 APC Minutes February 24, 1981 7. The high density area shall be subject to the density requirements according to the zoning ordinance. In doing so, the developer shall develop the higher density under the same density requirements as other developers in the City. 8. That Limited Business zoning area be limited to the use of Blue Cross-Blue Shield only, but with the understanding that some portions of new buildings may be temporarily leased provided the long term use is for Blue Cross-Blue Shield purposes exclusively. 9. Compliance with all applicable City ordinances. All voted in favor except Hall who abstained. i • Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981' Page Twenty SOUTH DELAWARE HILLS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT E. Richard Parranto for an Amendment to the South Delaware Hills Planned Development to Allow Duplex and Quadrominiums and Single Family Homes and for a Revised Preliminary Plat of South Delaware Hills -- A public hearing was held at the February 24, 1981 APC meeting to consider an amendment to a planned development and revised preliminary plat entitled South Delaware Hills. This development presently consists of duplex and single family dwelling units. The applicant is requesting that the development change to single family units, duplexes and quadrominiums. The second application submitted is to revise the existing preliminary plat to include a revised South Delaware Hills Planned Development. The APC is recommending disapproval of the applications as pre- sented. A copy of the City Planner' s report is enclosed on pages �2 through . A copy of a colored preliminary plat that is more easily i entiied for Council review was sent to each member of the City Council by the developer. For a copy of the minutes pertaining to this item, please refer to page q cl If there is any additional information required on this-iterh, please feel free to contact the City Administrator at any time. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to disapprove the amendment to the planned development and the revised preliminary plat of South Delaware Hills. 1 � Y • E CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: AMENDME TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMID REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT SOUTH DELAWARE HILLS APPLICANT: RICFARD PARRANTO LOCATION: S64 OF SECTION 12 EXISTING ZONING: PD (PLANNED DEVEIIJPMENT DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: FEBRUARY 24, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: FEBRUARY 18, 1981 REPORTED BY: DALE C. R NIgZ, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The first application has been submitted to amend the South Delaware Hills Plan- ned Development which presently consists of duplex and single family dwelling units. The applicant wishes to have single family units, duplexes and quadri- miniums. The second application submitted is a request to revise the existing preliminary plat to include the revised South Delaware Hills Planned Development. CCNIENTS As you may recall, Mr. Richard Parranto appeared before the Advisory Planning Commission on January 27, 1981 for a public hearing on South Delaware Hills Planned Development to increase the density from the original 259 dwelling units to 402 dwelling units. The Advisory Planning Commission denied this request for the increase in density. After denial of the developer's request, the developer withdrew his application frau the City Council agenda. The developer has re-sub- mitted a new application for the Planned Development for the lower density than what was presented last month. This density reduction is from the proposed 402 to 316, or a net increase of 57 dwelling units. The City staff has processed this new application and has re-advertised the applicant's request for the new revision of the South Delaware Hills Planned Development. Therefore, all agenda items regarding the South Delaware Hills Planned Development are in order for the I Advisory Planning Qammissicn's consideration. Presently, the South Delaware Hills Planned Development1 consists of 120.4 acres and contains 82 duplex lots, or 164 dwelling units - 95 single family lots for a total of 259 dwelling units. Mr. Parranto has indicated that the feasibility and the marketing for the single family portion of this planned development is not feasible at this time and is requesting to revise the south and east portion of the planned development to a higher density to make the overall planned devel- opment marketably feasible. The proposed new planned development would consist of the following: 92 CITY OF EAGAN FEBRUARY 24, 1981 SOU'T'H DELAWARE HILLS PAGE TttiPO 42 single family dwelling units - 22 acres± 206 duplex - 54 acresf 68 quad units 13 acres+ 25 acres park 25 4 acres outlots 4 316 dwelling units 1-18 acre Net increase of 57 dwelling units The applicant is proposing to locate 17 quadrimi.nium buildings, or 68 dwelling units on the southside of Burr Oak Drive. This area would be abutting the in- dustrial-zoned area to the south. In the eastern portion of the proposed plan- ned developpnent_which presently contains the single family homes, the applicant is proposing to keep single family homes which abut the proposed park dedication and single family homes to the north end of the site plan and have the area which is internal and abutting Inver Grove Heights changed to duplex lots. In the overall plan, there would be a reduction of 53 single family units and an increase of 42 duplex units. In reviewing the site plan, the overall concept appears to be much more feasible than what the applicant had submitted at the January 27, 1981 Advisory Planning Commission Nbeting. The overall gross density of the development would contain approximately 2.6 dwelling units per acre. The net density of the project is 3.5 dwelling units per acre. Therefore, the net density is just a little higher than what would be allowed in a R-1 residential single zoning. If the Advisory Planning Conmission rends approval, it should be subject to the following conditions: 1. All the conditions that were originally agreed to with the South Delaware Hills preliminary plat. 2. That a planned development agreement should be drafted and initiated between the City of Eagan and the developer. 3. Grading, drainage and erosion control plans shall be approved by the City staff. DCR/jac 93 f �— -' � t it `• -•�� I ,7 * '•`••L �, .... fii /� i I S;i ` L.. cit � I _ j • Wo. - _ Q• .�/ 79 z - - .l f •.. �, 1 ,► � -. ANAol 40 42 At� lei. t Ih. t �' ! � •J1 a LM 16 Is *31` 4 f S3L 1S �,i V Flo; S ! ,�• I. .' ' q4 R. M. PARR A `TO CO., Itis. ✓CtlZ(ll J41 -^�!`!/IZIJI J(f SOCIETY OF REALTOR' // REALESTATE - AMRAfSERS 1803 UNIVERSITY AVENUE. ST. PALL. MINNESOTA 351(4 TELEPHONE: (81.2) 648-28319 February 6, 1981 Members of the Planning Commission City of Eagan, Minnesota Dear Members: We have requested permission to be placed on the agenda for the February meeting of the Eagan Planning Commission to submit a totally new modification of the South Delaware Hills PD. We have no intention of appealing to the . City Council. The original approved PD reflected the input of the Planning Commission to which it was presented previously. We trust the revised modification also reflects your input. The enclosed plan is the result of listening to the objections of the people attending the last meeting who reside in the City of Eagan. The original PD allowed 252 units. In January we asked approval of 437 units or an increase of 73% . The enclosed plan requests 316 units or an increase of 25%. The increases are shown more specifically as follows : No. of Units Acres Units Bldgs R3 _ _ Density Previously Approved 87. 2 252 173 0 158 94 2 . 89 Requested January 87. 2 437 141 324 106 7 5. 01 Present Plan 91. 2 316 162 68 206 42 3 . 46 This modification of the existing PD includes these features : 1) No change in use is requested on any land adjoining any Eagan residential property. C i • Members of the Planning Commission February 6, 1981 Page 2 2) The closest subdivision to a requested change of use is a twin lot which lies 780 feet southeast of the southeast corner of BurrView Acres Addition. The elevation of BurrView Acres southeast corner is 822 feet. The elevation of the nearest twin lot is 885 feet. Between the two points is a dense wood with peaks of 906 foot elevation. This is why we stated the changes cannot be seen from any other subdivision in Eagan. 3) The closest R3 land lies 2, 080 feet south of BurrView Subdivision, the closest residences. The land south of the R3 zone is now zoned industrial except for a strip planned for R3 development by its owners, Gopher Eagan Industrial Park. This strip lies on the north side of Yankee Doodle Road as proposed to be extended. 4) There is no plan to open Chapel Lane through the Sexton property. Sexton has shown no interest in co-developing or developing in any manner at this time. Chapel Lane will have a temporary cul-de-sac until the city opens Chapel Lane, if it ever opened. 5) The twin home lots requested all have at least 15, 000 square feet of land area. No variances are requested. These are zero lot lines specifically designed to fulfill both demand for single family dwellings and twin homes. Each lot will have two sewer and two water connections and individual natural gas lines. Individual families will be allowed to purchase half lots subject to a restriction that the home built upon the half lot purchased must adjoin the home erected on the other half lot. Every effort will be made to attract purchasers who will build individual homes adjoining individual homes rather than identical halves of a whole. 6) Population: If the gross acreage of the development were developed as single family homes, the density allowed by R1 zoning would be three per acre and the population would be calculated by multiplying by 110 acres less 5 percent park requirement or 313 units times 2 . 9 persons per average single family dwelling or a population of 908. 01 (� Members of the Planning Commission February 6, 1981 Page 3 Our request includes 316 units allowing 916 persons if Rl family sizes were to prevail in quadnaminiums and twin homes. Our experience indicates the population would be less due to purchase by singles, couples, or none family joint purchasers. I think the plan as modified meets the demands of the market, will fulfill the needs for single family residences in this area and that - the plan provides a subdivision of the quality demanded in Eagan. We will be making every effort to attract top price home buyers to this area. We plan to meet with any residents of the City of Eagan who will meet us at the City Hall some days prior to your meeting to save your time at our hoped to be final public hearing before you. We trust that the experts we have employed have reflected in this new modification all of the positive suggestions made at the past public hearing and that after meeting with them and presenting this to you, you will grant 'approval and recommend approval to the City Council. Respectfully submitted, Ricard M. efT t6, Developer RMP: tm / � �. � \ Z �Z� � � \`1,�. ^ Y \ t ll_....Zys'� � J ..J ✓ J j i i r \' �♦� �..p ERZ �� \ �:i� _' ��7�-�12 l�..rt.-�---�Z.......� 7 - \ '�i... 1 ' I _ \;\ c\ • Q pI-n�_ -`-�.s_�l t�'�\'Z � ti .r� X''..ti rte- .-, tai z •� I q{ \\♦ J�\\\:� � i OFA• � `�:.�Y �-�\�-{1/,:...��.}y`:. - .J��'}`� �_' _ � � I I ' Mu � �. _ per.� �t-��'" �` � � �•s_�s� .S� �'' a - �v t„ ,�, ; i I�� • `\� ,-s`. _ �t.:.��,.. �--�-``c��:`��Wil,jk'� 0(�`1�I r — +— t"\`=` = e� `L^ ♦ r7f `•J J'tf `,re {'j �j .` +CE! 1f } i�1 a R _ :_�•-+�Et.� \ O ``` � .�. 'Y�.4 �� Y `Ct� �j��yeE[.^�':^`^r`'•., � _ � aj 71 li� �11r7 M. +:::;:::•: ` ` \�T � �_ > : t-� f C F by I t, ✓ -75 ��?}��a.��^»'�.i:;Y+��?_�� Yi�� 4? 'arc `',\\•. � '=w .''r" t � 2. <\�\ �• ��.� '.J� _,'� ,,y 1� . r - --- E-� ��>u�,. 3 �;.F'?F t [3 i E 2 � \ :. � t <c\ .?�•�\rKi•. ,�•,• 1--- t--i-'-f' ♦?'�okay t't` ��`�O\ *':�= `-' r �-� S 3�.2 � - k f. .t f tS 0: I.-` ��o,L \-_. '' � �,� ` •,-� a . `..f sri s "i'� f' .`w\.• I �': IIIIII 1 1! AT3. r n �.t Ci +\� \\ � r �Y ��.�••''.�,,'� III. I I fiilllll 1 1 la..s�y� � � ~ . � � ♦"'��� ':• i-"""; VIII IIIIl1 'II �� I, I � � l.� I: � ��.. � .�. Y f j �f I,.,,...:.::j• I I I In I u111 I.I I� ! Iln'I'III it ' • I I 1 i I IIInIIIIIIII IIIIII ' ilgll I 1 i - ��t t;`?l9is' ? `' ♦ � a � �"'a :/. o I I I ! 1 II I I I c I L,C.: � 1 k���' � >o°� ,� � ` Y1 L{C>:��`�- ��` } ? ' III VIII�� 1 � III III lllli i li II� I' ^ I {d• � 1`a sy ' a� �\\' \ \J �?:. ` a?,. I•.I III it l'!11j III II Ijl lli II I,III��t il' � 1 • .c � � \ � •. I I II ! .II I� I Ill I,I "qII Ni R 1 1 .'c o` <'�, vi>y.°� e�'�� \��� 1 \\'� �� .}•' 'I'I III �Ill Ir,il� IIIIII I r\ I,;, I I I z o.;♦..+. J.,\a^ 4 J "3` \.-.,J. \\ �4?.:'• III IlI f II I� I Itllupl I'll�,u, III', 1 �I���!� 11 Il�:�.iii r-��� I z ` ch\ h� - .✓�. 'ted,� -�\. \ '<a:�\s:.?�. � >\ \Y,. I I I'I II 1 ( i,IIlII11 I III;I,. � MI ..IIII: I ('. ..t.. } \. ✓i .�: \a S to ,III I li I Ill 'IIII I I it I'll r IA v c J� 1 2 eii7. �� z I I I I III li III I I I ILII IIIIIIII ' •n•}, �\ Nr� IIII I jt I ! ..�- w fv ) • � � ? �---. � .;I III II II(Ii '� I I I�IIII I III :II /VIII I I J !ii, 1 f" '�''q < �.� '` } r'J .:\� �•',� g I III II I u I 1 1 I ��IIII I III II Lf�ir'I I I I I 11 II I j` s°f +� t`�t \ : � d �"I1 lil II II I f I I II I II I IIH plt.L• (III I I I I I,. 1 (� ''a ;r\ '. - III :I� � �.II III I I•� IZ a:`� f \i � \ �� y •du I I'pl '!I I I 1411 ! III p1' I I I 1 I III I �. .. �, 1 I I I '11 I III .,III VIII Ili, IIIIII HIII I�pII I Ilii. II IIIIII III, 1 1� ��. > ��� � � \+•♦\ .� �. � w I I r it I'Illh I n I lil III {, � 1 1 •:�. < �,,.� � a`��:�: �� .�w \�y/ O.'�� P.�IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIiIIIllllli1l II IIIIIIIII_In II 'lllt'II I��I,II l�J� �l I' � I ';;f� 3 n��} e ./r Q� �♦\�•"•'v'�T�A � b'...� C II�IIIII III�IIIII1114I' I UIIII IIIurI�iI IIIIIII�I�IIII lli IIIIIII III�� III II illllillul IIIA. I 1� ���� ♦:; �+ � }. _�:j�t .\�Y �\ -,. _ — `r.-tf Kf III it/' ,�.`�/�lV,� • zt f �� r �., \ �J.\ �o f ,fi' � ♦ � III IIIL� �� :•'o >w .�ti.\\•',\` .w�Y:riri•� :.� �� IIII II 1 .......... � � � � •'' III O _ HEIGHTS I �� 0 SOUTH DELAWARE HILLS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Chairman Harrison convened the public hearing regarding the application of Richard Parranto for approval of South Delaware Hills Planned Development as amended and preliminary plat to include the amended South Delaware Hills Planned Development. Mr. Parranto and Mr. Phillippi were present for the applicants. Mr. Parranto explained that a portion of the Gopher-Eagan Planned Development would be included within the South Delaware Hills PD at the very south and that land south of that to be used for quadraminium use. He indi- cated further that Chapel Lane could be extended westerly but it is not being requested at the present time and could connect to Trunk Highway #55 according to permit from MN/DOT. A large number of area property owners were present generally opposing the density. He stated the twin home lots could be sep- arate units or connected units with minimum of 15,000 square foot twin lots. The area residents objected and requested that no change take place in the original PD. Mr. Fox, an owner to the south in Eagan and Inver Grove Heights, objected because of the impact on the area elementary school. Other objec- tions included possible safety issues due to increased traffic on area high- ways and streets. Mr. Parranto indicated that development would commence from the west on Highway #149 and move easterly with a 1981 start, Phase II in 1982 and 1983 and the third phase duplexes on the north. There was also concern about the long cul-de-sac to the north but it was noted that the cul-de-sac was temporary only with potential outlet to the east in Inver Grove Heights. Mr. Parranto indicated he would develop and sell the lots and it was noted that the present plan increases the acreage from 87 acres to 91.2 acres which, in effect, would be 3.62 units per acre under the 87.2 acre. original proposal. He stated the First National Bank of St. Paul has refused to sign the former PUD Agreement but with the changes proposed by the applicant, if approved, the PUD Agreement would be executed by the developer and owner. Nearly all the traffic will enter and exit from Highway #149 and there was considerable discussion about the demand for single family housing in the general area. Member Gits suggested single family on the east side of Parkview Drive in Block 4 and possibly single family in Block 7 to the south to reduce the density. There were objections also concerning the view of the R-2 units across the lake from the north side and the increased density in that area. There were also questions about the timing of the completion of the PUD that had been approved by the Planning Commission and Council several years ago and it was noted that the recommendation is that if the PUD is approved and completed, that the underlying zoning would revert to Agricultural. After about one and a half hours, at 9:00 p.m., the hearing was closed. Wilkins moved, Haywood seconded a motion to recommend denial of the new appli- cation because of the substantial increase in density and that the PUD had been approved earlier with general approval of the neighboring owners, the increased impact of traffic on the neighboring highways and streets, and for other reasons mentioned during discussion. Member Krob suggested revising the plan to provide for single family in Blocks 4 and 7, and further that Chapel Lane be exited north to Highway #55. Those in favor of the motion were Haywood, Wilkins, Bohne, and Harrison. Those against were Hall, Krob and Gits. Harrison then moved, Bohne seconded the motion, to recommend denial of the revised preliminary plat. All voted in favor. Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Twenty-One WAIVER OF PLAT - CEDAR CLIFF SECOND ADDITION F. Zachman Homes, Inc. , for Waiver of Plat in Order to Split Three Duplex Lots for Single Ownership, located on Lots 1 through 3, Block 1, Cedar Cliff Second Addition -- A public hearing was held to consider waiver of plat to subdivide three duplex lots for single ownership as submitted by Zachman Homes , Inc. Action was taken by the APC to recommend approval of the waiver of plat to the City Council . For additional information on the matter, please refer to the City Planner' s report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages 161 through ) . For a copy of the minutes pertaining to this item, please reamer to page JC) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC recommending approval of the waiver of plat. ld� CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT APPLICANT: ZACFMAN HOMES INC. LOCATION: LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 1, CSAR CLIFF 2ND ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: PD (PLANNED DEVELOPME14T DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: FEBRUARY 24, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: FEBURARy 19, 1981 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RuNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted for a waiver of plat to subdivide 3 duplex lots for single ownership. COMMENTS In the past year, Zachman Hares Inc. has platted the Cedar Cliff 1st and 3rd Additions which consisted of 14 duplex lots. On these 14 lots, Zachman has requested a waiver of plat in order to subdivide these lots for owner-occupancy. Zachman has now made an application for a waiver of plat in order to subdivide the 3 remaining duplex lots within the Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition, and therefore complete the subdivision of the duplex lots at this time. The reason the waiver of plat is being requested is that once the catmon wall, or center line has been established, then boundary surveys can be described for each half of the pro- perty. To establish the center line, it is difficult to do in the platting process and is less likely to have mistakes if the waiver is granted once the center line is established. If approved, the waiver should be subject to the following conditions: 1. Each unit of the twinhane shall have individual utility services. 2. All other ordinance requirements and setbacks be met in accordance with the planned development agreement for Cedar Cliff Planned Devel ogrent. DCR/jac /oi CEDAR CLIFF SECOND ADDITION DENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH MONUMENT SET MARKED know all m BY REGISTRATION NO. 9053, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN. r " ' and Loan A -_ 4 Dakota, St THE WEST LINE OF THEW 1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 30 IS °' outl ASSUMED TO HAVE A BEARING OF NORTH 00 DEGREES, A Have for public _ } u 15 MINUTES, 31 SECONDS EAST. Shawn on ft slr� corporate s and Loan A *AW COfpOfatP S Dwxfts'"9w of*CCtisr — � ;�— do&CGW to ookofo Cowry l...•. nr.. r. Q by VICINITY MAP Ja f Sec.30,TMp.27, Rgs.23 SCALE IN FEET STATE OF h I 0 100 200 300 400 500 COUNTY OF James A. S2 I ""r* STATE OF -s.f-V - I COUNTY OF ups r v.: .ix 'rx i +)f i.� 1�rii _ I Arthur 0. e n sy,n•rf a United St fI 1 I 3 6� 5 _ ~ 6 7 8 i i 9 y tl� ' I' c,.. 1hereby o 2 �+ 4 •I is a correc �' ':* '•,w i ti 3 ti+a + ; 41 :� uments he 4i`• ,x ` that there sy -�'a•` -'.5-_'_ -'i•LFFvIEW .d •_ rr r.r •x I 5 y I,• 6 - --- —c RIVE 2 ��+ �f fI• fx T1 ,a , `;". ' 7 STATE OF 2 J �I I 1 >ar, s., COUNTY 0 _ 2 3 ;. 4 r I s a _ r „ , Vernon A. 3-1', t ,1f•v�f. 4 ;t efi�k' ••-�rq,y s.. F Z Ji. ` a a .•` This plat : �• W `f" lar meetill 9 .•rv.r. 00 Pursuant 12 —cay This plat \ 12 County Ce meeting of ,t• Dircynage 8 Utility Easements Shown Thus I ' I hereby c SO AODITIO� 3 0 0 I hereby c 198— at 9"50 feet.n mdth and odpo, q Wt Ines,and b" 100 fee n md!h and adpmmq sheet lines,as Mcated i an tiv Ylof. --- -------- 16 �� � �,: • ..�fit.:: s 3 z I I ., `fi• I I �a�� -.Y`•� .i. � iI Ifs• •1 f. h �� � n � - _n A S�I •�1I� I I �� I I•I sol I i RIVER TEST 11 0 �� N ;� ENTER = SIG NANT PD it / J SLAT :; �' I 1 1;. Z/ /� I .� =•• -.rte.•,,.) , r CEDAR CLIFF 2ND ADDITION WAIVER OF PLAT The public hearing regarding the application of Zachman Homes Inca for waiver of plat for Lots 1 through 3, Block 1, Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition, to subdivide three duplex lots for single ownership was next considered. Steve Ryan appeared for the applicant. Hall moved, Wilkins seconded_ a motion to recommend approval of the application subject to the following: 1. That each unit as a twin home have individual utility services. 2. That all of the ordinance requirements and setbacks shall be met according to the Planned Development Agreement of Cedar Cliff Planned Develop- ment. All voted yes. 5 � � i Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Twenty-Two GENERAL COATINGS - PYON SIGN G. General Coatings, Inc. , for a Conditional Use Permit for a Pylon Sign, located on Lot 1, Block 1 , Imre Addition -- A public hearing was held before the APC at their February 24, 1981 meeting to consider a conditional use permit for a pylon sign located on Lot 1 , Block 1 , Imre Addition. Action was taken by the APC to recommend approval of the pylon sign permit to the City Council . For additional information on the matter, please refer to the City Planner' s report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages 10( through 151 for your reference. For additional information regarding tt e `action taken. by the APC, refer to a copy of the minutes enclosed on page 11D ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the pylon sign for General Coatings, Inc. , as recommended for approval by the APC. 105` CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE FOR PYLON SIGN APPLICANT: GENERAL COATINGS INC. (JAMES rgpB) LOCATION: 10T 1, BLOCK 1, INVE ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: FEBRUARY 24, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: FEBRUARY 19, 1981 REPORTED BY: DAT C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been subFdtted for a conditional use permit for a pylon sign located on Lot 1, Block 1, Imre Addition. CONVUMS Staff has reviewed the area where the proposed sign is to be located. In this review, staff has found that there is already one existing pylon sign within this general vicinity. The new sign which General Coatings is pro- posing will advertise the new office building which General. Coatings has constructed, and the existing General Coatings industry. The sign would contain approximately 64 square feet of signage and would be a combined ad- vertising sign for the Triangle Office Park and General Coatings industry. The sign would be approximately 12 feet in height and meet all the require- ments of Ordinance 16. In reviewing the site plan for the location of the new pylon sign, staff has determined that the existing sign and the newly proposed sign do not meet the 300' spacing requirement. Therefore, the existing sign would either have to be removed or lowered to not exceed 7' in height in order to meet Ordinance 16 requirements for the 300' spacing requirement, or the new sign would have to be located further to the north than what is presently shown. If approved, the pylon sign should be subject to the following conditions: 1. That the sign not exceed the 27' height requirement and not contain more than the 125 square foot of signage. 2. That either the proposed new sign be relocated to provide for the 300' spacing requirement of Ordinance 16, or the existing pylon sign will have to be removed or lowered to not exceed 7' in height. 3. The sign meet all the setback requirements of Ordinance 16. DCP,/7 ac 10�o 1 I 1 DOD , /'�0� '!^ .•i`C i J r i y r fliyl�f■ 1 - 47 C �1 I ` ✓ 1 or " N�w S:�r• ao � , - 't°��IUro I � CG Leca��eM Ln — '14 { l Z T-- 27 -27 IOr7 � �I r lob --_'"_ ••��'" :1: :�• '};:;� %. �`�` BLUE -- . GENTIAN ROA00, --- -- �' : {fit,r �.•,..t •��i J r: —�_"��.� _ ----_ 44 AUDITOR'S- IV Hry •• ,'���.••"�•`^`•��•'•`'�. � ti`��' •': `r v .Cfi.r. �%. �t :f .r;,:`SCS;:••'.;%;..�;:. •' _ s •• .Lr APC Minutes February 24, 1981 GENERAL COATINGS INC. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PYLON SIGN The public hearing regarding the application of General Coatings, Inc., for conditional use permit for pylon sign on Lot 1, Block 1, Imre Addition, was next convened. James Imre, president of General Coatings, appeared at the meeting and explained the application. It was noted that one existing pylon sign was within 300 feet but in a location on Highway #149 that would even- tually move when Highway #149 is relocated. Mr. Imre asked for a waiver of the 300 foot spacing requirement and agreed that the existing sign would be moved at the time of relocation of Highway #149. He stated that the existing sign is being used by a tenant of the warehouse building existing on the property and asked that it continue during the three year lease period. The new sign will be approximately eight feet high and would otherwise comply with Ordinance No. 16. Hall moved, Haywood seconded the motion, to approve the conditional use permit including the waiver of the 300 foot spacing require- ment subject to the following conditions: 1. That the existing sign will be removed when Highway #149 is relocated or at the time of the expiration of the existing three year lease for the tenant in the warehouse building. 2. That the sign meet the setback requirements and other requirements required by Ordinance No. 16 other than the 300 foot spacing. All voted yes. i 1l� j Agenda Information Memo March 13 , 1981 Page Twenty-Three SPECIAL PERMIT FOR NORTHWESTERN BELL CARRIER BUILDING H. Northwestern Bell for a Special Permit for Carrier Building Site -- Northwestern Bell Telephone Company is requesting a special permit to allow the construction of a carrier building to be located immediately east of the Baptist Church located at the intersection of Rahn Road and Wildwood Lane (County Road 30) . Northwestern Bell is purchasing the property from the Baptist Church. This carrier building will be the fourth to be constructed of the original four proposed by Northwestern Bell last year. As you recall, approval was given previously for the first three carrier buildings which. are-either under construction or have been completed throughout the southern half of the community. This building will exactly the same as those three buildings. The City Staff has reviewed the application and finds it to be in order for considera- tion. Attached is a copy of a site plan on page 112- for the review of the Council. If members of the City CounciTUesire addi- tional information regarding the purpose of the carrier building that was discussed several months ago when the first three permits were allowed, please feel free to contact this office at any time. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the special permit for a carrier building as applied for by Northwestern Bell Telephone Company. � � Q o 8 , If 15 11 IrS 4u i� ir5 bo its— Al s ilk vu �S 1!S CAPNEL /AN ANE • J dd24 85 e5 e3 as as gS d5 as dS PS a5 gsS415 - u J + v gs r T N 3 ! •sz � ov I I� too + 9+z! Bs � 1 w !s � i L rr /o � 9 ; 8 I T 6 � S � 4 �►! 3 'h � � r —�" N B l O IC K L o s I „ K E B SOCK Z iz?99 •s EAGAN LOT ON THE 0 BLOCK 1 n GREENCILIFF P� \7 J L M �o NIGH SITE TE2RACE c •• / tsar ti S30y) J MINN7-50-rA RAPT, 5T GONr--f=--R NCt: s STE Lo"rt ojv S A ,e .•,S` 3O Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Twenty-Four SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR I.R. FINANCING - SAFARI MALL CENTER I. Establish a Public Hearing for 4-7-81 to Consider Tax Exempt Financing for Safari Mall -- A letter and new documents concerning industrial development revenue bond financing for the Safari Mall Shopping Center were received from Rothchild Financial Corporation4 The developers, represented by Rothchild Financial Corporation, are requesting a public hearing for the April 7 , 1981 City Council meeting. All information concerning the public hearing documents .and support data is in order for consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the establishment of a public hearing for the 4-7-81 City, Council meeting to consider tax exempt financing for Safari Mall. rr • CONDITIONAL PERMIT RENEWALS FOR JANUARY & FEBRUARY A. Conditional Use Permit Renewals for January and February -- There are four (4) conditional use permit renewals in order for consideration for the month of January that are as follows : Eppen Nursery School, 2057 Garnet Lane, for use as a nursery; Merlin Barfknecht, 835 Lone Oak Road, for tires and supplies storage; Mike Rammer, Mendota Skelly, 3165 Dodd Road, for car storage; Dr. Ethel Traxler, 1467 Highview Ave. , office in home. Those condi- tional use permits in order for consideration for the month of February are Dakota County Action Council, for the battered women shelter at 4750 Cedar Ave. So. ; General Coatings , Inc. , 2805 Dodd Road, for temporary trailer for office; and LaPepiniere Montessori, at the East Street Apartment on Siver Bell Road for a Montessori School. The City Administrator is reviewing all the conditional use permits and will make a recommendation regarding further consi- deration for renewal at the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDER81) ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the conditional use permits as presented. 113 • Agenda Information Memo March 13, 1981 Page Twenty-Five LAWSUIT - PAUL TAYLOR VS COUNCTLMEMBERS SMITH, PARRANTO & EGAN B. Lawsuit "Paul Taylor vs. City Council Members Smith, Parranto and Egan" -- This item is placed on the agenda at this meeting to report that the City's professional liability insurance carrier will provide legal defence for City Councilmembers Smith, Parranto and Egan in the lawsuit named against them by Paul Taylor. If there is other discussion pertaining to the lawsuit that requires decision making on the part of the City Council, the City Attorney or City Administrator will discuss the issue at that time. There is no action to be taken on this matter at this time. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE C. Legislative Update -- The City Administrator will provide a brief legislative update on bills that are presently being con- sidered by the Minnesota State Legislature that have a direct or indirect effect on the affairs of local government, specifically that of the City of Eagan. There is no action required on this matter. s/Thomas L. Hedges City A ministrator � I