The URL can be used to link to this page

04/07/1981 - City Council Regular p� ..at.. ♦ q.y Magi 1.,,,Ntr•..4...M t ' f AGENDA +« EACAN CITY COUNCILS REGULAR MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA 1 CITY .HALL APRIL 7, 1981 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:33 - ADOPT AGENDA AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. 6:35 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS f P• A. Fire Department PA C. Park Department Q• 2, B. Police Department P•9 D. Public Works Department IV. 6:55 - CONSENT ITEMS [One (1) Motion Approves All Items] f. IoA. Larry Duvick for a temporary 3.2 non-intoxicating malt liquor license for Blue Gold Softball Assn. for 5-16-81 C.10 B. Gary A. Skinn for a temporary 3.2 non-intoxicating malt liquor license for Valley Lounge Softball Team for 6-20-81 e•10 C. Service Station Renewals r 1% D. Health Insurance - Call for Bids V, 11E. Change Order #1, Contract 221B (Hilltop/Duckwood Estates - Streets) i P12.F. Change Order #2, Contract 221B (Hilltop Estates Streets) .i2 G. Change Order #3, Contract 225 (Wescott Road - Streets) z P12 H. Change Order #1, Contract 80-17 (Quarry Lane - Streets) f P.13I. Change Order #1 , Contract 231 A (St. Francis Woods, etc. - Streets) '3J. Contract #79-1 , Final Payment/Acceptance (Beacon Hill Utilities) f,14 K. Contract #79-2, Final Payment/Acceptance (Beacon Hill Streets) tv% E. Contract #79-7, Final Payment/Acceptance (Wilderness Run Road Grading) Contract #79-10, Final Payment/Acceptance (-Cedar Ave. Trunk Utilities) N. Contract #79-12,Final Payment/Acceptance (Dodd Rd. Streets) P ISO. Contract #79-18,Final Payment/Acceptance (Brittany Lake Park, Thomas Lake Utilities) r15 P. Contract #80-8, Final Payment/Acceptance (Ches Mar East 2nd & 3rd, et al, Utilities) • .. P 16 Q. Contract #80-13, Final Payment/Acceptance (Ches Mar East 1st Streets) P. 16R. Contract #221B, Final Payment/Acceptance(Hilltop Estates - Streets) S. Contract #231A, Final Payment/Acceptance (St. Francis Woods, et al , - Streets) I� T. Project #331 , Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Galaxie Park Addition) 11 U. Project #332, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Over- hill Farm Addition) EAGAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA APRIL 7, 1981 PACE TWO IV. CONSENT ITEMS (Cont.) P \� V. Project 333, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Pilot Knob Center) l� W Project #334, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Pilot Knob P Rd. Services) . �$ X County Contract #31-05, Approve Bids (Pilot Knob Road Streets & Utilities) Y. County Contract #31-05, Approve MnDOT Bikeway Grant Application P 11 Z. Public Works Maintenance Equipment, Approve Plans and Specifications/ Advertise for Bids (Backhoe) P.1q AA. Public Works Maintenance Equipment, Approve Plans and Specifications/ Advertise for Bids (Dump Truck) BB. Contract 225, Final Payment/Acceptance (Wescott Road) V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS 'LOA. Project 316 - Galaxie Avenue Streets & Utilities ?,49 B. Project 323 - Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Streets & Utilities e ,64C. Project 325 - Timberline Addition Street Lights (continued from the 3-3-81 City Council meeting) P 01). Project 327 - Joyce:Addition Streets & Utilities P 13E. Project 328 - Ches Mar East 4th Streets & Utilities VI. OLD BUSINESS e.16 3 A. JPK Park Addition Final Plat V. 10TB. Thomas W. Heiberg for Rezoning from A, Agricultural, to P.D. , Planned Development District, and Preliminary Plat Approval of Galaxie Park Addition, located in the E� of the NWk of Section 32, located south of Cliff Road and west of Galaxie Avenue Comprehensive Guide Plan - Final Approval :1 '# EAGAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA APRIL 7, 1981 PAGE THREE �F t VII. NEW BUSINESS A. Zachman Homes, Inc. , for Rezoning from A, Agricultural, to P.D. , Planned Development District, consisting of approximately 72 acres and for a Preliminary, P,lat of Cinnamon Ridge, located in the A of the SWk of Section 30, located north of Cliff Road and east of the Burnsville City Limits ll B. Bart Dunn for Rezoning from R-1, Residential Single District , to ' I R-2, Residential Double District , located on Lots 1-7, Block 1 ;i and Lots 1-7, Block 2, Overview Estates, Section 25 ?.\27C. Petition to vacate Metcalf Drive from Clark Street to S. boundary for River Hills 9th Addition \31D. Set public hearing for Industrial Revenue Financing for Yankee Square Office III in the amount of $1,403,480 for 5-5-81 131E. Final Plat - Safari at Eagan Addition 33P. Final Plat - Tara Court Addition VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS V %3 5A. Development Bond Requirements Policy Review p 13SB. Trunk Highway 13/Silver Bell Road Intersection Design Review 138C. Stop Sign Review - Rahn Road/Beau D'Rue Dr. %39D. MnDOT Speed Study Request - Blue Gentian Road 139E. Major Intersection Street Lighting Reivew f 131F. Contract 81-4, Approve Plans and Specifications/Advertise for Bids (St. Francis Woods 2nd, et al) P140G. Special Assessment Committee Meeting of 3-31-81 .A<H. Industrial Revenue Bond Placement/Terms of Amortizing F.)47I. History Committee Update IX. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) X, ADJOURNMENT f 1 MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE APRIL 3, 1981 SUBJECT AGENDA INFORMATION MEMO After approval of the March 17, 1981 City Council minutes and minutes of three (3) spegial _Cit:y. Council meetings, dated February 26 , March 12, and March 19, and approval of the April 7, 1981 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration: Mayor Blomquist has been asked by the local chapter of the Knights of Columbus to proclaim` 'April 24 through 26, 1981 as Tootsie Roll Days. City Councilmember Jim Smith, a member of the Knights of Columbus, will be representing that organization for the official proclamation. The proclamation reads as follows: Whereas, the Minnesota State Council of the Knights of Columbus is conducting its first annual Tootsie Roll Drive, and Whereas, the Eagan Council of the Knights of Columbus is conducting the drive in our area, and Whereas, the proceeds from this Tootsie Drive will be disbursed statewide and in accord with an approved list of recipients to help retarded citizens, Nowa therefore, I, Bea Blomquist, Mayor of the City of Eagan, do hereby proclaim April 24 through 26 , 1981 "Tootsie Roll Days" in the City of Eagan and urge all citizens to support'. this program. There is no action required on this matter. The City of Eagan hasreceiveda letter from Charlee Hoyt, alderman, 13th Ward, for the City of Minneapolis , and a copy of a resolution passed by that City Council requesting that the City Council and residents of Minneapolis support and .will join in wearing or dis- playing green ribbons showing their support and concern for the black families and their children in Atlanta. Alderman Hoyt has I Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Two sent copies of the resolution to a number of communities asking_ for their support. Mayor Blomquist has asked that this resolution be considered by the City Council. The resolution reads as follows : Whereas, the color green is symbolic of life; and Whereas, the fife cycle of twenty-one (21 ) black children has been heinously halted; and Whereas, the lives of black children in Atlanta are continually threatened; and Whereas, the black community in Atlanta is encompassed in the suffocating atmosphere of grief, apprehension and fear; Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Eagan: that the City Council and residents of Eagan support and will join in wearing or displaying green ribbons showing their support and concern for the black families and their children in Atlanta. Since this is a resolution and not a proclamation, it will require action on the part of the City Council. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the resolution as -presented or with modifications. ROUEN FIRE DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department - There are no items to be considered for the Fire Department at this time. POLICE DEPARTMENT B. Police Department -- Item #1: Exemption from Residency Require- ments for Linda Scott ---The personnel policy specifically states under Employment, page 2, that all sworn officers in the Police Department, upon six months after completion of probationary period, are required to live within the corporate limits of the City of Eagan. This residency requirement affects only those persons who Agenda Information Memo April 3 1981 Page Three were hired by the City of Eagan after May 1 , 1977. Officer Linda Scott is requesting an exemption from the residency requirement. Chief of Police DesLauriers has reviewed her request and is recom- mending that the City make the exemption due to the close proximity of her proposed residence to the east border of Eagan. Enclosed on pages 4- through I is a copy of a memorandum from Chief of Police Destauriers aetter of re uest from Officer Scott. n q ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny consid- eration for the exemption as requested by Officer Scott att Vot 're DepartWt Martin DesLauriers ` < 3830 Pilot Knob Road Chief of Police `` Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Jay M. Berthe "+_ Assistant Chief of Police 26 March 1981 TO : Thomas L. Hedges , City Administrator FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: Exemption from Residency Requirements Please note the attached copy of a letter from Officer Linda Scott in which she has requested an exemption from the residency requirement for police officers . I would like to recommend that the city make such an exemption because of the close proximity of her proposed residence to the east border of Eagan. While living at this location, she would be as accessible to immediate call as she is now while residing with her parents at 3325 Wren Lane. I am sure she would like a response as soon as possible as the trailer is for sale now. Thank you. j �X, Martin, DesLauriers MD/vk attach. 4 March 24, 1981 - j T0: Chief Martin DesLauriersi' FROM, Linda M. Scott REi Exemption from rules gowning residency within the City of Eagan Sire I would like to request yjur consideration on a possible exemption for myself from the residency requirement governing the City of Eagan employees. I am presently living at home with my parents and am planning to get married in September. My fiance and myself have been looking at real estate in the City of Eagan but have been unable to find anything priced within our financial means. An apartment is the only dwelling which would be feasible for us at present. Recently, however, my fiance cheaked into a mobile home which was quite reasonable and is located in the Emerald Hills Trailer Park in Inver Grove Heights. The mobile hone in .question is being sold by the owner, not rented. In planning for the future, my fiance j suggested that we attempt to purchase it so that we acquire some real estate which may bellsold again later on. His sug- gestion was that, if possible,+ we live there until we could build up enough equity for a clown payment on a house in Eagan later on. - p The location of the trailer park to which I would like to move is in Inver Grove Heijhts on Argenta Trail which •-... �::.ti.5a..-7{�kSK71i�.il._. r 1kT''4.w:L,`. -�.'.':in.l��T.C'e •.... Ys i... - •.� • .r��e L., t.i a � is approximately seven-tenths of one mile ( .7 mile) east of Eagan's eastern border. , I have attached a map showing the location of the trailer parr. In the case of an emergency, it would take me at most ten minutes to arrive at the police department while coming from the trailer park. In summary. I am requesting that you please consider this exemption because I have peen unable to find any real estate within the city which i am able to afford at present. I am planning to move into the city at a future date when my financial situation will tolerate such a move. To rent an apartment a an would .be feasible, however, in doing so i 'n Eagan I doubt whether I could save she necessary money for a down a house The loaat ion where I wo uld like to move payment on is very close to the border of Eagan. I would be as readily available forwork in the ca. �- of an emergency as I am at - >is exemption/ be approved. present should th Thank-you very much for your time , - ,41 1 t 6 F G H I J K L 1400 RSO 1100 9Sc. 900 630 SOc _ HEIG) .El'AN R^ 1-191 � .S'A'E 191 1 � 1 rRAPV _AvE i EAuAN _ ND.lrSTRty _.RCnO 1 TRUN 1 �a °e + Qf t1 A..LoN E ,' i t ti � 'g � 2600A4.E.--// i 12' KENNETH UNI'R _ •L,r, NR - �-�. :-�� . C� 7 I+CNE �Tr 5T 4. =ARMAk KILL �r•-J{3friTJ� 11 Z of Ptr•r = FE w PWIK G70M'�(.� ST ji :: sERvcE FiAE'A�, srA LONE �.._WK RD \\ tOgST w Ra v 2611 26�j \ —_ all g 4 > 1 (w <PrfJ) 1 1 �'Ej4 Y • I R4LLYO y' RD-` I // A = F f Qy O i �. c ' 11 : GEr' . �� \ ' Y" _A ^� Y do ARK \ HloE 9- {o MR Nar "_—— Ao _ {'} - ,,.`,_ �'_ �4. -P - .c—s- e►R nEw-�:3>;00 4 J 4 ( I �; 1iGM SI E_QR- lI �.tJRIM DR ____ Al off ' r`yt•9"A`as RC I�. . _ ! -_ -- - NKEE _E _-_ IAJO0O E RC R i p 1cR e. No. zet o ;"'Tr 1 ; SQUARE u CARR/ HILLS � _ --- — 1. �n KCST RD C 1 GOLF COURSE ------------------ 'DEET '�.. ___ __� •{, � -1 '. I _ KO"TA s yOt,af.-,No 'm NIEES� MMILLSaA. s N TTT (� HAL r .ya MnR -'Rai E NAL �3 E t �1 y+ #�:._dM y'Wfg`EY S� MIIIJ CIMI CT �+45 wEOT T i� •�PCL!CE _ 1 H_ OEPARrArENr � 1 Gi 4cj �� NORTMVIEw_R.R� M yE 3pr _ AaY�Fk I/7^'' RAS KNOLL '�j cl B ico. Rd ',� �_ —wIW_..;i- LANE a� ,FR cr EBAESAMr a z <,CARL 9CrN lAA'E a°� O �j �1 LA !I BA S.M ST :LL—U,ME ../-&A, _ P^+OEROSA �maMOS___.�t 9a�°!i»- z CIR RaIFR a i.. Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Four Item #2: Accept resignation of George Hoey, Prosecuting Attorney &st-aTilish Criteria for Selection for Selection of a New Prosecu- ting Attorney - Mr. George Hoey, who is presently the City' s Pro- secuting Attorney, has been appointed by Governor Quie as a County Judge and, therefore, he must resign as the City' s Prosecuting Attorney. Mr. Hoey has officially noticed the City Administrator of his appointment and is requesting this action. A procedure should be discussed as io how a new prosecuting attorney should be selected by the City. "Mr. Hoey_ is scheduled to be sworn in as a County Judge on Monday, April 13, 1981 . The City Council has several options available: 1. Select . a law office and/or attorney as a temporary interim appointment as prosecuting attorney; 2. Select a law office and/or attorney as prosecuting attorney; 3. Appoint the law office and/or attorney as interim temporary prosecuting attorney and direct the City Administrator to advertise for the position of prosecuting attorney and go through a formal interview and selection process. Mr. George Hoey will be present for, recognition by Mayor Blomquist. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To accept the resignation of George Hoey as prosecuting attorney and take action to make a temporary or permanent appointment regarding the position of prosecuting attorney. PARK DEPARTMENT C. Park Department -- Item #1 : Patrick Eagan Park Fence -- At the request of the City CounciF per direction given November 1980, bids have been solicited for the fence project at Patrick Eagan Park. According to Director of Parks and Recreation Vraa, minimum standards for the specifications were drafted and an advertisement appeared in the Dakota County Tribune and Dodge Construction Bul- letin. Numerous fence contractors have been issued the specifica- tions, six of which have submitted price quotes. Because of the amount of work required, City crews have begun removal of the existing fence and clearing of brush and smaller trees to allow the contractor to begin work at the earliest opportunity. The contractor recommended has indicated that he would be able to begin installation within the next several weeks. Bids were carefully reviewed and compared against the published material. Because each fence contractors materials vary with the type of pipe, fabric, and coating to some degree, comparisons were difficult to make. Agenda Information Memo April 3 , 1981 Page Five However, it appears that for the type of project and the intended purpose of the fence that a reasonable price has been submitted and is generally within the cost range estimated. Unit price was bid to obtain the base bid of '$8,985. This includes the entire south. boundary of the park which is adjacent to the Rooney and ; Caponi property. It is the recommendation of the Director of Parks and Recreation that United State Steel , Cyclone Fence, be awarded the fence project in the amount of' $8 ,985. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation to award the fence project to United State Steel, Cyclone Fence. Item #2: Selection of Park Maintenance Employee -- Over 100 appli- cat—ions were received for two (2) openings in the Park and Recrea- tion Department. As the City Council recalls, a new maintenance position for the Park & Recreation Department including tree forestry was approved as a part of the 1981 budget. That position was to be filled in April 1981 . The other opening was caused due to Mr. Don Weckop' s resignation. The Director of Parks and Recrea- tion has completed the interview process , and upon completing his final reference check will be in a position to make recommendations to the City Administrator for final approval and acceptance by the City Council on Tuesday. Both positions are Maintenance Level I positions, relating to union classifications. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: ' To approve or deny the recommendation to hire the two candidates recommended by the Director of Parks and Recreation and City Administrator at the meeting on Tuesday. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT D. Public Works Department -- In the future, depending upon the length of agendas, items relative to Public Works will be placed` to the end of the agenda under Additional Items. The City Administrator will attempt to use discretion for purposes of best utilization of; Council time when planning the agendas . All items to be considered by: the Public Works Director have been placed under Additional Items for this City Council meeting. There are twenty-eight ( 28) items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one (1 ) motion by the City Council Lf 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 noticedat7 :00 p.m. Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Six 3.2 ,Beer License Blue Gold Softball Assn. A, Larry Duvick for a Temporary 3.2 Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Blue Gold Softball Association for 5-16-81 -- An appli- cation for a non-intoxicating malt liquor license in the name of Larry Duvick for the Blue Gold Softball Association is in order for consideration. Mi, Duvick. resides at 2038 Carnelian Lane and the license application is for May 16-17, 1981 . The softball tour- nament will be held at Northview Athletic Field. Chief of Police DesLauriers has reviewed the application and has given his approval per the application form. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve <the application for a non-intoxicating malt liquor license in the name of Larry Duvick. 3.2 Beer License Valley Lounge Softball Team B. Gary A. Skinn .for a Temporary 3.2 Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License .for Valley lounge Softball Team for 6-20-81 -- An applica- tion for a non-intoxicating malt liquor license in the name of Gary A. Skinn for the Valley Lounge Softball Team is in order for consideration. Mr. Skinn resides at 1535 Cliff Road and the license application is for June . 20-21 , 1981 . the softball torunament will be held at Northview Athletic Field. Chief of PoliceMartinDes- Lauriers has reviewed the application and has given his approval per the application form. - ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the application for a non-intoxicating malt liquor license in the name of Gary A. Skinn. SERVICE STATION RENEWALS C. Service Station Renewals -- The 1981 . Service Station Renewals are in order for consideration. There are eight (8) service station licenses granted within the City. Those stations are Allen's Auto Care Center, 4195 Cedar Avenue South; Standard Oil, 4205 Cedar Avenue South; George Huber Standard Service, 3206 Sibley Memorial Highway; Mendota Skelly Oil, 3150 Dodd Road; Q Petroleum, 4206 Cedar Avenue South; Sinclair Station, _3946 Cedar Avenue South; SuperAmerica, County Road 30 and Highway 13 and Yankee Square Standard, 1424 Yankee Doodle Road. All the above service station renewals are in order for consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER,: To approve the service station renewals for 1981-1982. 10 Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Seven HEALTH INSURANCE D. Health Insurance, Call for Bids As the City Council recalls, the City was noticed in March that Mutual Services Insurance is proposing a 34.8% increase in the health insurance package. Speci- fically, there is no percentage increase in the life, accidental death and dismemberment or short term disability insurance. The increases were in the employee and dependent medical and the Medd- care supplement which totals the 34.8% increase. The -City Administrator is preparing a set of plans and specifications along with bid proposals based on the current health package which will be used as the base bid for health insurance at the direction of the City Council. The City Administrator would like an opportunity to discuss at a later date the possibility of considering .alterna- tive programs such as the health maintenance or practicing physician package as well as dental and other insurance requests that are being made by the various employee groups This may be a matter for the Personnel Committee to review within the next two (2) weeks The City Administrator will review the insurance specifications with City Councilmember Smith who was extremely helpful three ( 3) years ago when the City- bid the entire health insurance package. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: Authorize the City Ad- ministrator to prepare plans and specifications for -the health insurance program. It is anticipated that. this will be received in late April or early May and presented to the City Council at either the May 5 or May 19 City Council meetings. CONTRACT 221 B B. Change Order #1, Contract 221 B (Hilltop/Duckwood Estates - Streets) -- This change order consists of two (2) parts : " Part 1 : provides for the installation of a temporary crushed rock row surface prior to improved street construction in Duckwood Estates (add $5,220) . Part 2: provides for additional. gravel and asphalt to compensate tor poor subgrade soil in the Hilltop Estates Addition (Add $22,137.60) : All costs associated with this change order have been assessed to the development. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve change order #1 to Contract 221 B (Duckwood/Hilltop Estates Streets) in the amount of $27,357.60. r Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page -Eight CONTRACT 221 B F. Change Order #2, Contract 221 B (Hilltop/Duckwood Estates Streets) - Duringthe construction of the streets within the Hill- top Estates Addition. (Project 217) and Duckwood Estates Addition (Project 221 ) , additional 'work was required on behalf of the con- tractor as it pertains" to properly preparing subgrading for gravel base and performing additional grading to the right of way limits that had not been completed by the developer. This provides for a net add of $12,252.50. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve Change Order #2 to Contract #221 B (Hilltop/Duckwood Estates Streets) in the amount of $12,252. 50. CONTRACT 225 G. Change Order #3, Contract 225 (Wescott Road Streets) -- This change order provides for restoring the area where additional material was taken adjacent to the site and corrective redesign of road elevation to eliminate drainage problems Total cost of this change order is to be assumed by the Major Street Fund. (Add $12 ,262 ) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve Change Order #3 to Contract 225 (Wescott Road Streets) in the amount of $12,262 . CONTRACT 80-17 H. Change Order #1, Contract 80-17 (Quarry Lane Streets) -- During construction of streets along Quarry Lane (Project . 199 R) addi- tional costs were incurred to realign the proposed storm sewer, reconstruct the existing driveway and provide extra labor to re- establish some landscaping as. a part of the . easement acquisition negotiating process. Total Change Order #1 amounts to an addition of $899. 56. All costs are to be assessed for this project. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve Change Order #1 to Contract 80-17 (Quarry Lane Streets) in the amount of $899. 56. Agenda Information Memo April 3 , 1981 Page Nine CONTRACT 231A I. Change Order #1, Contract 231A (St. Francis Wood, et, al Streets) - This change order consists of four (4) parts: Part 1 : Provides for a temporary access road in St. Francis Woods A-�on prior to street . construction. This work was included in the assessment. (Add $3,060) Part 2: Provides for additional grading work in Oak Chase "4th Aad-i on and Rustic Hills to restore grading disturbed by severe rainstorms. All of costs for this part were assessed to these developments. (Add $3,830.25) Part 3: Provides for driveway removal and replacement on 81st t�reet adjacent to Yankee Square Shopping Center. This cost was assessed with this project. (Add $1,838) Part 4: Provides for addtional curbing in the Rustic Hills Addi- tion -which was not included in the original contract (Add $3,470) All costs associated with this change order - have been assessed against the respective developments. ACTION ,TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve Change Order #1 to Contract 231 A (St. Francis Wood, et al) in the amount of $12,198 .25. CONTRACT 79-1 J. Contract 79-1, Final Payment/Acceptance (Beacon Hills Utilties) The City has a request for final payment for the above contract .from the consulting engineering firm along with certification of all plans and specifications which adhered to. The project is also recommended to the City for perpetual maintenance. The final construction cost exceeded the revised contract by 2.68% due to substantial subgrade correction and trench stabilization rock being required. _Because this project has not yet been assessed, all construction costs associated with this final payment will be as- sessed to the benefited property owners. All inspection have been performed by the consulting firm and maintenance department. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the 13th and final payment to Fredrickson Excavating Company, Inc. , in the amount $6,077 and accept these .utilities for perpetual maintenance. Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Ten CONTRACT 79-2 K. Contract 79-2, Final Payment/Acceptance (Beacon Hills Streets - Project 262 B) -- The City has received a request for final pay- ment through the consulting engineering firm for the construction of streets for the Beacon Hills Subdivision. They have also sub- mitted a certification,, that all . approved plans and specifications were adhered to and final inspections have been performed by their firm and the City ' s maintenance division. The final construction costs exceeded the revised contract by 1 . 74% due the requirement of . extra gravel quantities required in unstable areas. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the tenth and final payment to McNamara Vivant Contracting Company in the amount of $5,006. 30 and accept Project 262B (Contract 79-2) for perpetual maintenance. CONTRACT 79-7 L. Contract 79-7, Final Payment/Acceptance (Wilderness Run Road Grading - Project 267) -- The City has received a request for final payment from the consulting engineering firm along with a certifi- cation that work was completed in comformance with the approved plans and specifications . All tests and inspections have been performed by the consulting firm and verified by the City' s main- tenance division. All costs associated with this contract have been assessed during September of 1980. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the fourth and final payment of Contract 79-7 to Enebek Construction Company in the amount of $18, 793.07 and accept the project for perpetual main- tenance. CONTRACT 79-10 M. Contract 79-10, Final Payment/Acceptance (Cedar Ave. Trunk Utilities) -- The City has received a request for final payment from the consulting engineering firm certifying this project was completed in accordance with approved plans and specifications and all inspections have been performed by their firm and verified by the City' s maintenance division. The final construction costs exceeded the revised contract amount by 0. 25% to an additional granular material required within MnDOT and Dakota County right of way. All costs associated with this final payment have been assessed to the benefited properties . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER To approve the seventh and final payment of Contract 79-10 (Cedar Ave. Trunk) to Richard Knutson, Inc. , in the amount of $36 ,600.95 and accept for perpetual maintenance. Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Eleven CONTRACT 79-12 N. Contract 79-12, Final Payment/Acceptance (Dodd Road Streets) -- The City has received a request for final payment from the City' s consulting engineering firm for the above referenced contract along with the certification of compliance with the plans and specifica- tions, in addition to final inspections being performed and verified by City maintenance personnel . The final contract obligation ex- ceeds the revised contract amount by 11 .1% due to extensive sub- grade soil correction required under this project. This project is funded by MSAS funds in addition to residential equivalent street assessments which are adequate to cover the overrun. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the sixth and final payment for contract 79-12 (Dodd Road Streets) to Enebek Construction Company in the amount of $22 ,604.01 and accept for perpetual maintenance. CONTRACT 79-18 0. Contract 79-18, Final Payment/Acceptance (Brittany, Lake Park, Thomas Lake Utilities) -- The City has received a request for final payment from the City' s consulting firm along with a certification of compliance with plans and specifications in addition to assurance that all inspections have been performed and verified by public works personnel. The final construction costs exceed the revised contract amount by 4.03%. All costs associated with this final pay request were included in the assessment calculations in Septem- ber of 1980. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the tenth and final pay request to Contract 79-18 (Brittany First Addition) to Richard Knutson, Inc. , in the amount of $10,594 and accept for perpetual maintenance CONTRACT 80-8 P. Contract 80-8, Final, Payment/Acceptance (Ches Mar East 2nd and 3rd Utilities) -- The City has received a request for final payment from our consulting engineering firm along with a certifi- cation of compliance with plans and specifications in addition to final inspection certification verified by public works person- nel . Although this final contract payment provides for a 3.6% underrun to the revised contract amount, all construction costs were not included in the assessment hearings held in September of 1980. This will require $3,433.07 but overhead to be funded by our Trunk Utility Fund. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the fifth and final payment to Contract 80-8 (Ches Mar East 2nd & 3rd Utilities ) to Fredrickson Excavating Co. , Inc. , in the amount of $8,687.25 and accept for perpetual maintenance. IS Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page .Twleve CONTRACT 80-13 Q. Contract 80-13, Final Payment/Acceptance (Ches Mar East 1st Addition Streets) -- The City has received a request for final payment from the City' s consulting engineering firm along with a certification of compliance with plans and specifications in addition to final inspections being performed by their firm with public works personnel. The final construction cost exceeds the revised contract amount by 4.9%. All costs associated with this project will be assessed in the near future. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the fifth and final pay request for Contract 80-13 (Cher Mar East 1st Addition Streets ) to Bituminous Roadways , Inc. , in the amount of $3,899. 35 and accept for perpetual maintenance. CONTRACT 221 B R. Contract 221 B, Fianl Payment/Acceptance (Hilltop/Duckwood Estates Streets) -- The City has received a request for final pay- ment from the City' s consulting engineering firm along with the certification of compliance with plans and specifications in addi- tion to final inspections performed by the firm with public works personnel. The final construction costs of this contract exceeded the revised contract amount by 2.6%. However, the final con- struction costs exceed those costs used for assessment purposes by $12,769. 30, excluding overhead costs. The City is awaiting recommendation from the consulting engineer as to where this addi- tional cost should be recovered. Special Note: The staff will provide proper direction on this item at the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the eighth and final pay request for Contract 221 B (Duckwood/Hilltop Estates Streets) to McNamara Vivant Contracting Company in the amount of 17, 769. 30 and accept ,for perpetual maintenance. . CONTRACT 231 A S. Contract 231 A for Final Payment/Acceptance (St. Francis Wood, et al, Streets) -- The City has received a request for final payment from the consulting firm along with a certification of compliance with all plans and specifications in addition to completion of inspections by their firm with public works personnel . The final construction costs exceed the revised contract amount by 2.8%. However, the final construction costs exceeded those costs used for assessment calculations previously levied by $1 ,910.16, /b Agenda Information Memo April 3 , 1981 Page Thirteen excluding overhead costs . The City is again awaiting recommendation from the consulting firm as to where this additional cost could be recovered. Special Note: The staff will be prepared to address this matter either prior to or at the meeting on Tuesday. However, the contractor has completed the contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the ninth and final payment for Contract 231 A ( St. Francis Wood, et al ) to McNamara Vivant Contracting Company in the amount of $5 ,688.85 and accept for perpetual maintenance. PROJECT 331 T. Project#331, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Galaxie Park Addition) -- The City has received a petition from the majority of the property owners affected by this proposed installation of streets and utilities. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To receive the petition and order the feasibility report preparation for Project 331 (Galaxie Park Addition Streets and Utilities ) . PROJECT 332 U. Project 332, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Overhill Farm Addition) - The City has received a petition signed by the affected property owners for this requested improvement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To receive the petition and order the feasibility report for Project 332 (Overhill Farm Addition Streets and Utilities ) . PROJECT 333 V. Project 333, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Pilot Knob Center) -- The City has received a petition from the majority majority owner of the property benefited by this requested improve- ment together with a statement waiving their rights to the public hearing and requesting that plans and specifications be prepared consecutively with the feasibility report and guaranteeing the costs of both reports and plans/specifications should this project not be officially approved. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To receive the petition and order the preparation of the feasibility report for Project 333 (Pilot Knob Center Streets & Utilities ) and also order the preparation of plans and specifications. 17 Agenda Information Memo- April emoApril 3, 1981 Page Fourteen PROJECT 334 W. Project 334, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing -(Pilot Knob Road Services) -- With the pending improvement of Pilot Knob Road from Yankee Doodle Road to Eagandale Blvd. , the staff has researched all properties within the construction area adjacent to Pilot Knob Road as it pertains to, their existing utility services. The re- search has indicatedthat there are approximately ten (10) property owners who do not have a sewer and/or -water service stub to their property lines from the mains located within the street. The staff feels that these utility services should be installed prior to permanent street improvements to avoid future,construction within the street right of way. Therefore, the staff has prepared a feasi- bility report and would like to hold a public hearing at the April 21, 1981 meeting to consider this item. It would be the staff' s intent that, if any property, owner officially requested not to have these services installed and assessed at this time, the City would not allow connection for these services for a five to ten year period or elect to proceed with the installation and absorb the installation costs until such time of connection. In any event, these installation and construction costs wouldbe performed by way of a- supplementalagreement to the existing contract with the County. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To receive the feasibility report for Project 334 (Pilot Knob Road Utility Services) and order the public hearing to be held on April 21 , 1981 . CONTRACT 31-05 X. County Contract 31-05, Approve Bids (Pilot Knob Road Street and Utilities) On March 13, the County opened bids for the pending improvement of Pilot Knob Road and the related adjustment to City utilities. The low bid was submitted by McNamara Vivant in the amount of $1 ,296,783. 32 as compared to the engineer's esti- mate of $1,612,219 which results in the low bid being approximately 20% under the engineer' s estimate. Based on these bids , the City' s share of construction is calculated to be $705,606 which includes utility adjustments, surfacing, storm sewer, bikeways, signals and all other improvements. The County Board, on March 31 , approved these bids and awarded the contract to McNamara Vivant subject to approval by the City Council. This item is on . Consent only because it is a radification of a County accepted project. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER To approve the low bid submitted by McNamara Vivant for County 'Contract 31-03 in the amount of $1,296,783.32. t � Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Fifteen COUNTY CONTRACT 31-05 Y. County Contract #31-05, Approve MnDOT Bikeway Grant Application Agreement - The City has received approval from MnDOT for grants covering 75% of the City' s construction costs of the City' s bikeway trail on the west side of Pilot Knob Road. In order to receive the matching grant, it ''� s',required, that the City enter into a formal agreement with MnDOT. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said bikeway grant agreement. BACKHOE BIDS Z. Public Works Maintenance Equipment, Approve Plans & Specifica- tions/Advertise for Bids (Backhoe) - Plans and specifications have been completed for a newtractorbackhoe for the public works maintenance division. This backhoe is shared equally between the streets and utilities section. Subsequently, this new backhoe was approved in the 1980 budget to be funded 50% by sewer/water and 50% in the street budget for equipment certificates. This new tractor backhoe will replace the existing 1974 model that is presently suffering metal fatigue- and stress at critical support parts to the extent that its usefulness is severly limited. Cost estimates to prepare the existing piece of equipment were judged to be prohibitive in lieu of the age of the machine and number of hours on the existing engine. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the plans and ,specifications for a new tractor backhoe and authorize advertisement for bids with a ,bid `opening scheudled for May 7 at 3:00 p.m. DUMP TRUCK BIDS AA. Public Works Maintenance Equipment, Approve Plans and Specifi- cations/Advertisement for Bids (Dump Truck) -- The Public Works Department has completed the plans and specifications required for the acquisition of a new single axel (32`,000 GVW) maintenance truck with snow plow attachment. This vehicle is intended to re- place an existing 1972 I.H. single axle dump- truck and a 1964 Ford S-A dump truck. This major purchase has been approved in the 1980 Budget to be purchased with equipment certificates sold in 1981 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To; approve the plans and specifications and order advertisement for bids for the new 32,000 GVW single axle dump truck with the -bid opening to be held on May 7 at 3:00 p.m. 9 Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Sixteen CONTRACT 225 BB. Contract 225, Final Payment/Acceptance (Wescott Road Streets) -- The City has received a request for final payment from the City' s consulting engineering firm along with a certification that all plans and specifications were adhered to and recommending that the City accept this project for perpetual maintenance. All inspec- tions were performed by the consultant and public works -personnel . The final contract costs exceeded the revised contract amount by 3. 7%. No assessment was levied for this project. All costs are paid by MSAS funds or Major Street Funds. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the eleventh and final payment for Contract 225 '(Wescott Road) to McNamara Vivant in the amount of $11 ,726.38 and accept for perpetual maintenance. PROJECT 316 A. Project 316 - Galaxie Avenue Streets and' Utilities - On March 3, 1981 , the City Council received the feasibility report for Pro- ject 316 and scheduled a public hearing to be held on April 7. This project provides for the installation of streets and utilities along Galaxie Avenue which is being relocated due to I-35E construc- tion south of Cliff Road. The Public Works Director will conduct the Public Hearing. All required notices have been set out to affected property owners. A copy of the preliminary report is enclosed on pages S through -O for your reference. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To close the public hearing and either approve or deny Project 316 (Galaxie Avenue Streets and Utilities) . Z Glenn R.Cook,P.E. Keith A.Gordon,P.E. Otto G.Bonestroo,P.E. Thomas E.Noyes.T.E. Ci 0 Robert W.Rosene,P.E. Richard W.Foster,P.E. v Joseph C.Anderlik,P.E. Robert G.Schunicht,P.E. 1335?f/ '74,-436 Bradlord A.Lemberg,P.E. Marvin L.Sorvala,P.E. Richard E. Turner,P.E. Donald C.Burgardt.T.E. St. Howl /{,(wwarsta'55113 James C.Olson.P.E. Jerry A.Bourdon,P.E. Mark A.Hanson,P.E. nbawr 611-636-*600 Steven M. QuinceY Chanes A.Erickson 1956 — th — 1981 Leo M. Harlan M..Olson Olson � organ Preliminary Report on nniversaryDavid E. Utility Crossings of IC-35E an Galaxie Avenue Improvements v U� Project No. 316 Eagan, Minnesota January 2, 1981 (Revised March 1, 1981) SCOPE: This project includes the grading of Galaxie Avenue where it is relo- cated due to the construction of I-35E, the installation of water main, sani- tary sewer and storm sewer in Galaxie Avenue, the extension of these improve- ments across the right-of-way of proposed I-35E and the further extension of the trunk sanitary sewer to connect to the existing trunk and of trunk storm sewer to the north side of Cliff Road (Co. Rd. No. 32) . (These utility exten- sions were previously discussed in the report of Project No. 314 on Ridgecliff First Addition.) Also included in this report are the costs of surfacing this portion of relocated Galaxie Avenue which includes cost sharing by Mn/DOT and completion of the surfacing of the south one-half mile of Galaxie Avenue previously graded and provided with base under Project No. 311. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The project is feasible and is in accordance with the Master Utility and Street Plans of the City of Eagan. The complete project as outlined herein can best be carried out as one project. However, due to economic reasons, it might be necessary to complete the surfacing of Galaxie Avenue (previously graded and provided with base under Project No. 311) as a separate project in the future. Page 1. 2200a Al • i DISCUSSION: A. Galaxie Avenue Relocation: The plan for I-35E in the vicinity of Cliff Road requires that Mn/DOT relocate present Galaxie Avenue near Cliff Road and connect it to the intersection of Blackhawk Road at Cliff Road. The Inter- state Highway plan also requires a bypass road to be built on the south side of Cliff Road to carry Cliff Road traffic during the construction of the in- terchange of Cliff Road with I-35E. This construction together with I-35E grading will require additional storm sewer construction in the vicinity which will outlet into Pitt Lake (AP-11) north of Cliff Road. The right-of-way for I-35E and for the relocated Galaxie Avenue has been acquired by Mn/DOT. Grading of relocated Galaxie Avenue was postponed from the contracts awarded in 1980 due to funding problems and cannot be included in Mn/DOT contracts until mid summer 1981. By joint agreement with the City of Eagan, this grading can be included with the Eagan utility construction contract and paid for by Mn/DOT. This will expedite the installation of needed utilities for Eagan and allow an earlier start of bridge and bypass contracts of Mn/DOT at Cliff Road. B. Water Main: A 20" diameter trunk water main is required in relocated Gal- axie Avenue by the Trunk Water System Master Plan. This trunk line must be installed before surfacing of relocated Galaxie Avenue and is required now to serve the Safari Estates Addition which is currently being developed. This main will provide the High Zone pressure to Safari Estates which is needed for proper service in this area. The proposed 20" diameter trunk main will con- nect with the existing trunk water main installed with the Safari Estates Utilities. Page 2. 2200a z.� • C. Sanitary Sewer: A 12" diameter trunk sanitary sewer is required in reloca- ted Galaxie to connect the southwestern portion of Ridgecliffe First Addition with the existing trunk sewer on the west side of I-35E. This trunk sanitary sewer was discussed in the report for Project No. 314 dated July 1, 1980. Sanitary sewer within Ridgecliffe First Addition were installed under Project No. 314 but this trunk extension could not be constructed at that time because of the lack of grading of Galaxie Avenue. This trunk sewer extension from Ridgecliffe First Addtion to the existing trunk on the west side of I-35E must be completed before sewer service can be provided to the southwest portion of Ridgecliffe First Addition. Cost estimates for this trunk sanitary sewer are re-calculated and included under this report. D. Storm Sewer: The trunk storm sewer outlet for the pond at the west end of Ridgecliffe First Addition was also previously discussed in Project No. 314 but could not be constructed with that utility project. This outlet, as well as those required for Ponds AP-14 and AP-15 of the Trunk Storm Sewer Master Plan, are required to be installed in the relocated Galaxie Avenue. The out- let from Pond AP-15 must be extended across I-35E and Cliff Road to provide drainage for these ponds, and temporary drainage of the Cliff Road bypass and I-35E during I-35E construction. Permanent storm sewer connections will be made to this line by M/DOT during their construction program. Mn/DOT will also provide a permanent siltation pond on the south side of Pitt Lake to pro- vide protection of the water quality of Pitt Lake. E. Galaxie Avenue Surfacing: The surfacing of the relocated portion of Gal- axie Avenue should be accomplished as soon as practical after the completion of the utilities. It is proposed that this be accomplished by the City of Page 3. 2200a .23 Eagan with an agreement with Mn/DOT. The surfacing will be a 9 ton M.S.A. street, 46 feet wide with standard B618 concrete curb and gutter. Mn/DOT by agreement would pay for a 46 feet wide street. Drainage costs will be shared on the standard M.S.A. runoff basis. The surfacing of Narvik Drive from Ridgecliffe First Addition to Galaxie Avenue will be the standard 32' wide, 5 ton residential street and will be paid for from assessments levied against the adjacent benefited property. This surfacing can be postponed until the adjacent land is developed, if de- sired. The surfacing of Galaxie Avenue from the Apple Valley border to the end of the relocated Galaxie surfacing project will also be a standard 44' wide, 9 ton M.S.A. minor collector street. The grading, drainage and partial base were installed as part of the Safari Estates Addition development under Proj- ect No. 311. The completion of the base and surfacing can best be accom- plished as part of this Project No. 316. Municipal State Aid funds can be used for this work. Included as part of the surfacing of Galaxie Avenue is the construction of an 8 foot wide bituminous trail on the east side. The proposed trail, however is not to be constructed along that street frontage owned by Dakota County Park. F. Scheduling and Coordination: All of the proposed improvements are being coordinated with Mn/DOT and will be the subject of one or more agreements be- tween the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Eagan. Each party will pay its fair share of any facilities that are jointly required or jointly used. Page 4. 2200a .2 f� Recent scheduling of Mn/DOT indicates that the award of the contract for Galaxie Avenue grading and utility construction in spring 1981 which will al- low completion during the summer of 1981 will coordinate well with their next phase of I-35E. They plan to award their contract for the Cliff Road bridges, bypass road and grading of the next phase of I-35E in the summer of 1981 with completion in 1983. AREA TO BE INCLUDED: Assessment Area Construction Area NE 1/4 Section 32, Parcel 010-01 NE 1/4 Section 32, 010-01 Lot 17, B1k.10 Ridgecliffe 1st Addn. Lot 16,17, Blk. 10 Ridgecliffe 1st Addn. NW 1/4, Section 32 T27, R23 Lot 1, 23, Blk. 9 Ridgecliffe 1st Addn. SW 1/4 Section 32, Parcel 011-50 Outlot D & E Ridgecliffe 1st Addn. NW 1/4 Section 32, T27, R23 SW 1/4 Section 32, 011-50 COST ESTIMATE Detailed cost estimates are presented at the back of this report. A summary of these costs are as follows: Sanitary Sewer $ 140,130 Water Main 221,230 Storm Sewer 256,850 Street (Project 316) Galaxie Avenue 325,150 Narvik Drive 28,650 Galaxie Avenue Trail 19,340 Street (Project 311) Galaxie Avenue surfacing 228,100 Galaxie Avenue Trail 5,530 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT. . . $1,224,980 The total estimated cost of the project as outlined herein including con- tingencies and all related overhead costs is $1,224,980. Overhead costs are estimated at 25% and include legal, engineering, administration and bond in- Page 5. 220Oa d� terest. In the event certain portions of the project are deleted, the total estimated cost of the project should be recalculated deleting those portions. EASEMENTS Easements will be required as part of Phase I construction. The right-of- way acquisition for the realignment of Galaxie Avenue has been acquired by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The easement for the construction of storm sewer from Narvik Drive to the pond located northeast of Narvik Drive was included as part of Ridgecliffe lst Addition plat. Easement descriptions and the acqisition of the remaining easements are presently being undertaken. The remaining easements to be acquired are as follows: 1. The right-of-way for Narvik Drive from Galaxie Avenue to Ridgecliffe 1st Addition. 2. The two ponding easements for Pond AP-14 and Pond AP-15. 3. Slope easements along Galaxie Avenue and Narvik Drive. 4. Utility easement for construction of trunk utilities west of Galaxie Avenue. Parcels affected by easement acquisitions are listed below along with the area for each particular type of easement. Temporary easement also includes slope easement. The following rates were applied for estimating easement costs: EASEMENT COSTS PER ACRE Land Use Permanent Temporary Ponding Residential, Multiple $2,000 $1,000 $2,000 Commercial 4,000 2,000 4,000 Page 6. 2200a • • 'PIP The commercial rate was" applied to all that land located in the N 1/2 of the NW 1/4 Section 32 T27, R23 and east of Interstate 35E. Parcel Permanent Temporary Ponding (1) Est'd.Esmt. Description Owner (Acre) (Acre) (Acre) Rate Cost NE 1/4 Section 32, T27, R23 010-01 0.04 R $ 40 Lot 17, Blk. 10 0.09 R 90 Lot 16, Blk. 10 0.08 R 80 Lot 23, Blk. 9 0.03 R 30 Outlot D, Blk. 9 0.09 R 90 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 330 NW 1/4 Section 32, T27, R23 010-26 0.60 0.94 4.97(AP-15) R $12,080 0.94 2.48(AP-14) C 11,800 010-27 0.76 2.75 R 4,270 010-28 0.10 0.36 R 560 010-29 0.46 0.75 R 1,670 TOTAL ESTIMATED EASEMENT COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $30,710 (1) Rate refers to either the Commercial rate "C" or Residential rate "R". ASSESSMENT Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited property with- in the areas shown in conjunction with cost sharing from the Minnesota Depart- ment of Transportation.. A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this report. Assessment rates for construction of trunk utilities will be assessed in accordance with base rates in effect at the time of the public hearing. Assessment rates for construction of lateral facililties will be de- termined by final improvement costs and be assessed to each benefited proper- ty. Base rates for trunk assessments in effect at the time of this report are as follows: Page 7. 2200a a � Lateral benefit from trunk sanitary sewer $14.30/FF Trunk Sanitary Sewer $770/Acre Lateral Benefit from Trunk Water Main - Single Family $12.00/FF Multi-Family, Comm/Ind. $14.35/FF Trunk Water Main $770/Acre Trunk Storm Sewer - Single Family $0.0374/Sq.ft. Multi-Family $0.0468/Sq.ft. Commercial-Industrial $0.0561/Sq.ft. The realignment of Galaxie Avenue is due to the construction of Interstate 35E. As a result, the Minnesota Department of Transportation is paying for the street construction of Galaxie Avenue including a portion of storm sewer laterals directly related to street runoff. Cost sharing from Mn/DOT is re- flected in the preliminary assessment roll and includes 8% for administration and engineering. These costs were received from Mn/DOT based on our estimated engineering costs. No cost sharing from Mn/DOT is included for Narvik Drive. It is proposed to assess the benefited property owners along Galaxie Ave- nue an equivalent rate based on estimated costs as presented in this report. The residential equivalent rate assumes 50% of the grading cost for Galaxie Avenue and the cost of a 34 foot wide 7 ton residential street with concrete curb and gutter. The commercial equivalent rate also assumes 50% of the grad- ing cost for Galaxie Avenue and the construction of a 46 foot wide 9 ton street with concrete curb and gutter. The proposed 2361 bituminous material was not included in computing either the residential or commercial rate. Page 8. 2200a Costs associated with Narvik Drive are proposed to be assessed completely to that frontage west of Ridgecliffe 1st Addition. The proposed assessment rates are as follows: Residential street equivalent rate Galaxie Avenue $30.04/FF Residential street rate Narvik Drive $29.78/FF Commercial street equivalent rate, Galaxie Avenue $46.75/FF Galaxie Avenue Upgrading, Project 311, proposed assessing property owners along Galaxie Avenue a residential equivalent in accordance with base rates in effect at the time of the public hearing. M.S.A. Funding, however, was pro- posed to finance the total project cost which would result in a positive proj- ect balance in the amount of that assessed at the residential equivalent rate. To finance project costs to complete Galaxie Avenue, M.S.A. funding is pro- posed. REVENUE SOURCES Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are listed as follows: SANITARY SEWER Project Cost Revenue Balance Laterals $ 55,520 Lateral Assessment $ 55,551 Lateral Service Trunk --- 18,060 Trunk 84,610 Trunk Assessment (1) Trunk Fund 66,519 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $140,130 $140,130 - 0 - WATER MAIN Lateral $100,160 Lateral Assessment $ 10,344 Lateral Service Trunk 74,592 Trunk 121,070 Trunk Assessment (1) Trunk Fund 1360294 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $221,230 $221,230 - 0 - Page 9. ��nnn ? 9 STORM SEWER Project Cost Revenue Balance Lateral $200,380 Lateral Assessment $ 30,025 Mn/DOT 56,100 Trunk 56,470 Trunk Assessment 136,207 Trunk Fund 34,518 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $256,850 $256,850 - 0 STREET A.) Galaxie Avenue (Prof. 316) $325,150 Residential Equivalent $ 50,859 Commercial Equivalent 96,679 Mn/DOT 268,900 B.) Narvik Drive 28,650 Residential Equivalent 28,650 TOTAL (Proj. 316) . . . . $353,800 $445,088 +$91,288 C.) Galaxie Avenue (Proj. 311) $228,100 MSA Funding $228,100 TOTAL (Proj. 311). . . . $228,100 $228,100 - 0 - GALAXIE AVENUE TRAIL Portion along Project 311 $ 5,530 Portion along Project 316 19,340 Major Street Fund $ 24,870 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . .. . • $ 24,870 $ 24,870 EASEMENT $ 30,710 -$30,710 BALANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +$60,578 (1) Trunk assessment previously assessed under Project 254R, Safari Estates Additions. The projected project balance for Project 316 is +$59,878. As indicated above, however, it is estimated that $237,331 is provided through trunk utili- ty funds. This is due in part to trunk area assessments for this project be- ing previously assessed as part of Project 254R and 314. As part of these projects surplus money was contributed to the trunk fund. A summary of money Page 10. 2200a 3& Nov 0 contributed to the trunk fund (+) or taken from the trunk fund (-) as part of these projects are summarized as follows: TRUNK UTILITY FUND BALANCE Project 316 Project 254R Project 314 Galaxie Ave. (Safari) (Ridgecliff) /I-35E) Total Sanitary Sewer -$ 41,500 (1) -$ 66,519 -$108,019 Water Main + 108,200 +$ 14,400 -$136,294 - 13,694 Storm Sewer + 13,300 + 185,500 34,51.8 + 164,282 BALANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +$ 42,569 (1) Trunk sanitary sewer construction costs included in Project 314 was in- cluded in Project 316 since it is to be constructed as part of Project 316. The projected project balance for the trunk utility fund for all three projects is +$42,569. A review of trunk facilities to be constructed in con- junction with determining final assessment costs for Project 254R and 314 should be evaluated to determine a true trunk utility fund balance for this area. PROJECT SCHEDULE Present Feasibility Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . March 3, 1981 Public Hearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . April 7, 1981 Approve Plans & Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May 5, 1981 Open Bids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May 29, 1981 Award Contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . June 2, 1981 Construction Completion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July, 1982 Assessment Hearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . September, 1982 First Payment due with Real Estate Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May, 1983 Page 11. 2200a 3/ 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. Robert W. Rosene Date: January 2, 1981 Reg. No. 3488 Approved By-2:�� Z&Zz Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works Date: // 311 Page 12. 2200a APPENDIX A EAGAN PROJECT 316 I-35E/GALAXIE AVENUE PROJECTED ASSESSMENTS December 17, 1980 I. SANITARY SEWER A. Lateral Service from Trunk Sanitary Sewer Legal Description Owner Front Ft. Rate/F.F. Total NW 1/4 Section 321 T27, R23 010-27 M.G. Astleford 528 14.30 $ 7,550 010-28 E. Schindeldecker 264 14.30 3,775 010-29 Pine Bend Dev. Co. 471 14.30 6,735 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $18,060 B. Lateral Assessment for Sanitary Sewer NW 1/4 Section 32, T27, R23 010-26 C. Tatsuda 3,778 13.73 $51,872 Ridgecliffe 1St Addition Lot 17, Blk. 10 , 268 13.73 3,679 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $55,551 II. WATER MAIN A. Lateral Service from Trunk Water Main Legal Description Owner Front Ft. Rate/F.F. Total NW 1/4 Section 32, T27, R23 010-26 C. Tatsuda 3,712 12.00 $44,544 010-28 E. Schindeldecker 264 12.00 3,168 010-29 Pine Bend Dev. Co. 1,334 12.00 16,008 NE 1/4 Section 32, T27N, R23W 010-01 U.S. Home Corp. 258 12.00 3,096 Lot 17,B1k.10 Ridgecliff lot Addn. 268 12.00 3,216 SW 1/4 Section 321 T27, R23W 011-50 Fortune Realty 380 12.00 4,560 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $74,592 B. Lateral Assessment for Water Main NW 1/4 Section 32, T27, R23W 010-26 C. Tatsuda 862 12.00 $10,344 TOTAL $10,344 13. 1979a a III. STORM SEWER A. Trunk Storm Sewer Rate "A" Rate "B" Rate "C" Legal Sgl.Family Multi-Family Comm/Ind. Description Owner $0.0374/sf $0.0468/sf $0.0561/sf Total NW 1/4 Section 32, T27, R23 (1) (3) (1)(3) 010-26 C. Tatsuda 1,060,307 s. f. 800,052 s. f. $ 94,505 010-27 M.G.Astleford (S.E. I-35E) 103,400 5,800 010-28 E.Schindeldecker 87,120(2) 1,234 010-29 Pine Bend Dev. 926,957(1) 34,668 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $136,207 (1) Parcel in which 20% deduction in area was applied for future public street dedication. (2) Parcel in which ponding area was subtracted from total area. (3) Large existing parcel which is not expected to be subdivided. Rate charge equals $617/acre. B. Lateral Benefit Legal Description Owner Area(sq.ft.) Rate/sq.ft. Total NE 1/4 Section 32, T27, R23 010-01 U.S. Home Corp. 74,464 $0.059 $ 4,393 Lot 17 Ridgecliffe 1st Addn. 61,640 0.059 3,636 NW 1/4 Section 32, T27, R23 010-26 C. Tatsuda 372,821 0.059 $21,996 Mn/DOT 56,100 TOTAL $86,125 IV. STREET A. Galaxie Avenue Legal Description Owner Front Ft. Rate/F.F. Total NW 1/4 Section 32, T27, R32 010-26 C. Tatsuda 2,068 $46.75 $ 96,679 010-26 C. Tatsuda 898 30.04 26,976' 010-29 Pine Bend Dev. Co. 269 30.04 8,081 Mn/DOT 268,900 NE 1/4 Section 32, T27, R32 Lot 17 Ridgecliffe 1st Addn. 268 $30.04 $ 8,051 010-01 U.S. Home Corp. 258 30.04 7,751 . TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $416,438 B. Narvik Drive NW 1/4 Section 32, T27, R32 010-26 C. Tatsuda 962 $29.78 $ 28,650 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 28,650 14. 1979a 351 APPENDIX B GALAXIE AVENUE UTILITIES AND STREETS I. SANITARY SEWER 60 Lin. ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 34'-36' dp. @ $56.00/lin. ft. $ 3,360 34 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 32'-34' dp. @ $50.00/lin.ft. 1,750 35 Lin. ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 30'-32' dp. @ $44.00/lin. ft. 1,540 60 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 28'-30' dp. @ $42.00/lin.ft. 2,520 60 Lin. ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 26'-28' dp. @ $38.00/lin. ft. 2,280 60 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 24'-26' dp. @ $34.00/lin.ft. 2,040 370 Lin. ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 22'-24' dp. @ $30.00/lin. ft. 11,100 370 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 20'-22' dp. @ $26.00/lin.ft. 9,620 400 Lin. ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 18'-20' dp. @ $22.00/lin. ft. 8,800 75 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 16'-18' dp. @ $20.00/lin.ft. 1,500 75 Lin. ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 14'-16' dp. @ $18.00/lin.ft. 1,350 150 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 12'-14' dp. @ $16.00/lin.ft. 2,400 150 Lin. ft. 12" RCP, Sanitary Sewer, 10'-12' dp. @ $14.00/lin. ft. 2,100 340 Lin.ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary Sewer, 14'-16' dp. @ $17.00/lin.ft. 5,780 365 Lin. ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary Sewer, 12'-14' dp. @ $15.00/lin. ft. 5,475 5.70 Lin.ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary Sewer, 10'-12' dp. @ $13.00/lin.ft. 7,410 920 Lin. ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary Sewer, 8'-10' dp. @ $12.00/lin. ft. 11,040 13 Each Std. 4' dia. MH w/cstg. @ $750.00/each 9,750 95 Each MH depth greater than 8' dp. @ $60.00/each 5,700 4.0 Lin.ft. 12" riser pipe 'for drop MH @ $75.00/lin.ft. 300 7.4 Lin. ft. 8" riser pipe for drop MH @ $40.00/each 296 2 Each Cut into existing MH @ $400.00/each 800 1 Each Connect manhole to existing 8" PVC @ $200.00/each 200 400 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $8.00/ton 3,200 LUMP SUM Clear and grub trees MH-5 to existing MH @ $2,000/LS 2,000 4 Acres Seeding with mulch @ $800.00/acre 3,200 2,500 Lin. ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $0.50/lin. ft. 1,250 Total Estimated Construction $106,761 +5% Contingency 5,339 $112,100 +25% Legal, Engrng. & Administrative 28,030 TOTAL ESTIMATED SANITARY SEWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $140,130 15. II. WATER MAIN 3,800 Lin. ft. 20" DIP, Cl. 51, Water main @ $25.00/lin.ft. $ 95,000 665 Lin.ft. 16" DIP, Cl. 51, Water main @ $20.00/lin.ft. 13,300 200 Lin. ft. 8" DIP, Cl. 52, Water main @ $12.00/lin.ft. 2,400 800 Lin.ft. 6" DIP, Cl. 52, Water main @ $10.00/lin.ft. 8,000 385 Lin. ft. 16" DIP, Cl. 51, Water main with carrier @ $50.00/lf 19,250 2 Each 20" Butterfly valve and box @ $1,700.00/each 3,400 2 Each 16" Butterfly valve and box @ $1,300.00/each 2,600 4 Each 8" Gate valve & box @ $400.00/each 1,600 8 Each 6" Gate valve & box @ $300.00/each 2,400 6 Each Hydrants @ $750.00/each 4,500 13,000 Lbs. C.I. Fittings @ $1.00/lb. 13,000 2 Each Connect to existing 20" plug @ $200.00/each 400 2 Each Connect to existing 6" plub @ $150.00/each 300 4,800 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $0.50/lin.ft. 2,400 Total Estimated Construction $168,550 +5% Contingency 8,430 $176,980 +25% Legal, Engrng. & Administrative 44,250 TOTAL ESTIMATED WATER MAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2219230 III. STORM SEWER 30 Lin. ft. 24" Storm Sewer, 0'-8' dp. @ $26.00/lin. ft. $ 780 20 Lin.ft. 24" RCP Storm Sewer, 8'-10' dp. @ $28.00/lin.ft. 560 20 Lin. ft. 24" RCP Storm Sewer, 10'-12' dp. @ $30.00/lin.ft. 600 40 Lin.ft. 24" RCP Storm Sewer, 12'-14' dp. @ $32.00/lin.ft. 1,280 245 Lin. ft. 21" RCP Storm Sewer, 0'-8' dp. @ $24.00/lin.ft. 5,880 50 Lin.ft. 21" RCP Storm Sewer, 8'-10' dp. @ $26.00/lin.ft. 1,300 285 Lin. ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 0'-8' dp. @ $20.00/lin.ft. 5,700 15 Lin.ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 8'-10' dp. @ $22.00/lin.ft. 330 365 Lin. ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 10'-12' dp. @ $24.00/lin.ft. 8,760 16. 1979a .36 MPFFF, 6 0 115 Lin. ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 12'-14' dp. @ $26.00/lin.ft. 2,990 115 Lin.ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 14'-16' dp. @ $28.00/lin.ft. 3,220 120 Lin. ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 16'-18' dp. @ $30.00/lin.ft. 3,600 200 Lin.ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 18'-20' dp. @ $32.00/lin.ft. 6,400 290 Lin. ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 20'-22' dp. @ $34.00/lin. ft. 9,860 130 Lin.ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 22'-24' dp. @ $36.00/lin.ft. 4,680 115 Lin. ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 24'-26' dp. @ $40.00/lin. ft. 4,600 115 Lin.ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 26'-28' dp. @ $44.00/lin.ft. 5,060 115 Lin. ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 28'-30' dp. @ $48.00/lin.ft. 5,520 115 Lin.ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 30'-32' dp. @ $52.00/lin.ft. 5,980 115 Lin. ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 32'-34' dp. @ $56.00/lin.ft. 6,440 70 Lin.ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer, 34'-36' dp,. @ $60.00/lin.ft. 4,200 180 Lin. ft. 15" RCP Storm Sewer, 0'-8' dp. @ $17.00/lin.ft. 3,060 240 Lin.ft. 121'�RCP Storm Sewer, 0'-8' dp. @ $11.00/lin.ft. 2,640 10 Lin. ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 8'-10' dp. @ $12.00/lin. ft. 120 390 Lin.ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 10'-12' dp. @ $14.00/lin.ft. 5,460 10 Lin. ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 12'-14' dp. @ $16.00/lin. ft. 160 10 Lin.ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 14'-16' dp. @ $18.00/lin.ft. 180 680 Lin. ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 16'-18' dp. @ $20.00/lin.ft. 13,600 690 Lin.ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 18'-20' dp. @ $22.00/lin.ft. 15,180 135 Lin. ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 20'-22' dp. @ $26.00/lin.ft. 3,510 200 Lin.ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 22'-24' dp. @ $30.00/lin.ft. 6,000 95 Lin. ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 24'-26' dp. @ $34.00/lin.ft. 3,230 95 Lin.ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer, 26'-28' dp. @ $38.00/lin.ft. 3,610 18 Each Std. MH 4' dia. w/R-1642B cstg. @ $750.00/each 13,500 3 Each Std. CBMH 4' dia. w/R-3246BD cstg. @ $850.00/each 2,550 8 Each Std. CB w/R-3246BD cstg. @ $700.00/each 5,600 165 Lin.ft. MH depth greater than 8' dp. @ $60.00/each 9,900 1 Each 24" rCP flared end @ $750.00/each 750 1 Each 18" RCP flared end w/safety grate @ $500.00/each 500 1 Each 15" RCP flared end w/safety grate @ $450.00/each 450 6 Each 12" RCP flared end w/safety grate @ $400.00/each 2,400 17. 1979a 3 T 2 Each 15" RCP, 7-1/2o bends @ $100.00/each 200 LUMP SUM Clear & grub trees MH-105 to 18" F.E. @ $1,500/LS 1,500 30 Cu.yds. Rip rap, Class A @ $50.00/cu.yd. 1,500 15 Cu.yds. Filter material, type 1 @ $30.00/cu.yd. 450 15 Ton Bit. mixt. for patching w/6" gravel base @ $80.00/t. 1,200 600 Ton Rock stabilizatin below pipe @ $8.00/ton 4,800 2,400 Lin. ft. Mech. trench compaction @ $0.50/lin.ft. 1,200 4 Acres Seeding with mulch @ $800.00/acre 3,200 500 Sq.yds. Sod with topsoil @ $3.00/sq.yd. 1,500 Total Estimated Construction $195,690 +5% Contingency 9,790 $205,480 +25% Legal, Engrng. & Administrative 51,370 TOTAL ESTIMATED STORM SEWER COST . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . $256,850 IV. STREET GALAXIE AVENUE LUMP SUM Clear & grub trees @ $5,000/L.S. $ 5,000 49,000 Cu.yds. Common excavation @ 1.00/cu.yd. 49,000 3,000 Cu.yds. Common borrow @ $2.50/cu.yd. 7,500 5,000 Cu.yds. Muck excavation @ $2.50/cu.yd. 12,500 10,600 Ton Class 5, aggregate base @ $5.50/ton 58,300 1,500 Ton 2331 Bituminous base course @ $10.00/ton 15,000 1,500 Ton 2331 Bituminous binder course @ $12.00/ton 18,000 570 Ton 2361 Bituminous wear course @ $ $20.00/ton 11,400 175 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $180.00/ton 31,500 650 Gals. Bituminous material for tack coat @ $1.20/gal. 780 5,350 Lin.ft. B618 concrete curb and gutter @ $5.00/lin.ft. 26,750 12 Acres Seeding with mulch @ $1,000.00/Ac. 12,000 Total Estimated Construction $247,730 +5% Contingency 12,390 $260,120 25% Legal, Engrng. & Administrative 65,030 TOTAL ESTIMATED GALAXIE AVENUE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $325,150 18. 1979a 39 70pppF, i • NARVIK DRIVE LUMP SUM Clear & grub trees @ $500.00/L.S. $ 500 4,200 Cu.yds. Common excavation @ $1.00/cu.yd. 4,200 760 Ton Class 5 aggregate base @ $5.50/ton 4,180 160 Ton 2331 Bituminous binder course @ $10.00/ton 1,600 160 Ton 2341 Bituminous wear course @ $12.00/ton 1,920 16 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $180.00/ton 2,880 1;050 Lin.ft. Surmountable concrete curb & gutter @ $4.80/lin.ft. 5,040 1.5 Acres Seeding with mulch @ $1,000.00/Ac. 1,500 Total Estimated Construction $ 21,820 +5% Contingency 1,100 $ 22,920 +25% Legal, Engrng. & Administrative 5,730 TOTAL ESTIMATED NARVIK DRIVE . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . $ 28,650 Galaxie Avenue $325,150 Narvik Drive 28,650 TOTAL ESTIMATED STREET $353,800 V. GALAXIE AVENUE TRAIL (PROJECT 316) 2,700 Lin. ft. Trail excavation & grading @ $1.00/lin.ft. $ 2,700 860 Ton Class 5, aggregate base @ $5.50/ton 4,730 300 Ton Bituminous mixture in pl. @ $12.00/ton 3,600 15 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $180.00/ton 2,700 1.0 Acre Seeding with mulch @ $1,000.00/Ac. 1,000 Total Estimated Construction $ 14,730 +5% Contingency 740 $ 15,470 +25% Legal, Engrng. & Administrative 3,870 TOTAL ESTIMATED BIKE TRAIL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . $ 19,340 , Page 19. 1979a 39 i • I. Sanitary Sewer $140,130 II. Water Main 221,230 III. Storm Sewer 256,850 IV. Streets 353,800 V. Galaxie Avenue Trail 19,340 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $991,350 GALAXIE AVENUE STREET SURFACING APPLE VALLEY TO SOUTH END PROJECT 316 I. STREET SURFACING 7,500 Ton Class 5 aggregate base @ $5.00/ton $ 37,500 1,450 Ton 2331 Bituminous base course @ $10.00/ton 14,500 1,450 Ton 2331 Bituminous binder course @ $12.00/ton 17,400 1,450 Ton 2341 Bituminous wear course @ $14.00/ton 20,300 240 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $180.00/ton 43,200 6,900 Lin.ft. B618 Concrete curb & gutter @ $5.00/lin.ft. 34,500 3' Each Adjust gate valve & box @ $80.00/each 240 25 Each Adjust manhole and catch basin @ $150.00/each 3,750 3.0 Acres Seeding with mulch @ $800.00/Ac. 2,400 Total Estimated Construction Cost $173,790 +5% Contingency 8,690 $182,480 +25% Legal, Engrng. & Administrative 45,620 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . $228,100 Page 20. 1979a 31d II. GALAXIE AVENUE TRAIL (PROJECT 311) 750 Lin. ft. Trail Excavation & Grading @ $1.00/lin.ft. $ 750 250 Ton Class 5, aggregate base @ $5.50/ton 1,375 80 Ton Bituminous mixture in P1. @ $12.00/ton 960 4 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $180.00/ton 720 0.4 Acre Seeding with mulch @ $1,000.00/Ac. 400 Total Estimated Construction $ 4,205 +5% Contingency 215 $ 4,420 +25% Legal, Engrng. & Administrative 1,110 TOTAL ESTIMATED BIKE TRAIL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . $ 5,530 I. STREET SURFACING $228,100 II. GALAXIE AVENUE TRAIL 5,530 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $233,630 Page 21. 1979a a> V) 1)v �I P W i \ I \ I g f \N, / N O N 0 M o \� aD •3AV \ 31 Xd—1 V 9 '�J:• \ r Co cli \ O O i^ `\ N \�� ••moi, � I LA. NN PA V I W W c . of y - o H �. 24.15, N N I—a Z Zp W Ia< `o � p < < < < a J f- �cnOD I'1— Jamas uoS p d"�'a,Sl "x3 I I N . I E4 I v t T CLIFF ROAD ( Co. Rd. No. 32 ) K W -h•} N O �S % / lo, f� i ooll lf<f 000 'V/1 N .,1 / •�� / O O CD 1 6 ,l000 1.91 (\ \ N LL- 1 =Eto G)o O N O too N C O r-4 W c N Z M JHJ3 W � Z Q z COVI NGTON LA. W W E-♦ f--, CYD clio � W �, aOD � O z o o ( � a SAF AR` SS o N s s b Y �( Q a N • I \\N f _ \v \ \ /f/lo I Z � I 3AV 3 1 X V -1 V J ti� `\ •Fir \\ CD •• F, \ a, cn O I W H ��\ • r}. \\\ ��\ CYJ CYD LA- I \ cp �� ' V W Z '.ti.�► \ I \ f'•� CYD - J I W �� •''rr�{�N� r.•, rx W '•I I C p a z N 0 to 0 I 0 N ' dc I I CLIFF ROAD ( Co. Rd. No. 32 ) i Li N � I / / I I � I m a Cfl Q CYJ J W o COVI NGTON z LA. Z a �_ Ce, - W O P-Z a Z W O a S AF AR a s� ASS F+ 11 P .r } 1 � Q _j cyd Ir ICJC —Ail NV9V3 Jo N !•! tn W — Q W W O O :3 1 F_ QC- �� Z W c �1 W__ ui N N _l. � w W E-4 d W oZ Z d 0 0 o a a W m N •• 4 fJI CLIFF ROAD ( Co. Rd. No. 32 ) ---------- < i CAJ / o / �:};»+ %•��'• �/ Lj Y�• \ cli .• 1 / 11/ / N ��j�T/7I7jlTT1T/TI�Z�T 0 N N i N� ''1h•�� ,a z w w X W : E Q EW w o -� W-J Z Z Q Cr u mM(D > w o COVINGTON Nz� Z LA. WW W W E-4 cn� M a Na w Q z o Ro x w SAF�'S �; � g PAS E-4 W- o .. N Y Q1 p vu /Y I I Y- L X1 a �4 LE o moi' A� Q Cr (Co. Rd. -No.32) ,�'� �;— m L F R ` � DRIVER l; �� J I i 1 �i ll ff TEST J�❑l CENTER RIDGECLIF�F'1 ADDITION DAKOTA � COUNTY PARC I , SA v I '=-= ES A I v4, �- n GALAXIE AVENUE T. H. No. ' 35E CROSSINGS STORM SEWER TRUNK ASSESSMENT AREA PROJECT No. 316 49208 = 1,000 y� BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK & ASSOC,, INC. Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Seventeen PROJECT 323 B. Project 323 Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Streets & Utilities) -- On March 3, 1981, the City Council received the feasibility report for the above referenced project and scheduled the public hearing to be held on April 7, 1981 . The Public Works Director will conduct '�,hi,s public. hearing. All legal notices have been published and sent to respective property owners . A copy of the preliminary report is enclosed on pages T*0 through for your reference. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To close the public hearing and either approve or deny project 323 (Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Streets and Utilities) . 49 PP_PPPPP_ (,r,�T/'aae/ 4w, 2aJ.P~, T1 ada /-' ��,�„Qc , L Glenn R.Cook,P.E. /f� . Keith A.Gordon,P.E. Otto G. Bonestroo,P.E. Thomas E.Noyes,P.E. O Robert W.Rosene,P.E. Richard W.Foster,P.E. JoseFh C. Anderlik,P.E. Robert G.Schunicht, P.E. 2335 */ 9+....4 36 Bradford A.Lemberg,P.E. Marvin L.Sorvala,P.E. /� Richard E. Turner, P.E. Donald C.Burgardt,P.E. Ad,-91. ..l Af..Ao&55113 James C.Olson, P.E. Jerry A.Bourdon,P.E. P":612-636-4600 Mark A.Hanson,P.E. Steven M.Quincey Charles A.Erickson �( 1956 - th - 1981 Leo M. Pawe/sky Harlan M.Olson David E. Olson Preliminary Report on OQ nni versary' Coachman Land Company 1st Addition db Utility and Street Improvements vo`J Project 323 Eagan, Minnesota February 20, 1981 SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, and streets within Coachman Land Company lst Addition. Al- so included is the extension of Four Oaks Road to the east from Coachman Road and the widening of Four Oaks Road to the north west of Coachman Road. Coach- man Land Company 1st Addition consists of 22 quadrominiums. This report as- sumes that all the grading will be done by the developer. 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 as two contracts. Contract I would include the construction of .utilities and the installation of aggregate base. Contract II would include construction of the remaining portion of aggregate base and bituminous surfacing in conjunction with concrete curb and gutter. DISCUSSION: CONTRACT I A. SANITARY SEWER: An existing 9" V.C.P. sanitary sewer is located on the centerline of Four Oaks Road to the westerly " right-of-way line of Coachman Road. It is proposed to extend an 8" P.V.C. sanitary sewer to the east on Page 1. 2845a .'Sd • Four Oaks Road and then northerly along the centerline of Farnums Drive to service the easterly portion of Coachman Land Company 1st Addition. To ser- vice the westerly and northerly portion of Coachman Land Company 1st Addition it is proposed to construct an 8" P.V.C. sanitary sewer from the existing san- itary sewer in Four Oaks Road along the centerline of Farnums drive as indica- ted on the drawing at the back of this report. B. WATER MAIN: An existing 10 inch water main is located on Four Oaks Road to Coachman Road. An existing 18 inch water main is located on Coachman Road south of Four Oaks Road. The trunk water main layout for the City of Eagan indicates an 18 inch trunk water main extended from Coachman Road on Four Oaks Road. It is proposed as part of this report to construct the 18 inch water main on Four Oaks Road to the easterly plat line. A 6 inch water main is pro- posed to be looped through Coachman Land Company 1st Addition on Farnums Drive. C. SERVICES: Sanitary sewer and water main services are proposed to be con- structed to the right-of-way line of Farnums Drive. In those areas where the main line extends beyond the right-of-way line the service would be construc- ted to a point 20 feet from the santiary sewer. Sanitary sewer service is 6 inch and water service is 1-1/2 inch. Included at the end of each water ser- vice is a water shut off valve. D. STORM SEWER: An existing 24 inch storm sewer is located in Four Oaks Road to Coachman Road. Storm sewer proposed herein includes the extension of a 15 inch storm sewer east from Coachman Road to the easterly portion of Farnums Page 2. 2845a 5/ WWI • Drive. It is also proposed to extend a 15 inch and 12 inch storm sewer to the north from Four Oaks Road along the westerly portion of Farnums Drive approxi- mately 300' from Four Oaks Road. This storm sewer will intercept the major drainage prior to the steep grade proposed for the westerly portion of Farnums Drive to Four Oaks Road. E. STREETS (Grading/Gravel Base): This construction provides for the proper grading of the subgrade surface after installation of utilities in Farnums Drive and Four Oaks Road east of Coachman Road. Also included is the place- ment of a 4 inch aggregate base. A normal residential section and width is proposed for the extension of Four Oaks Road east of Coachman Road to Farnums Drive. CONTRACT II F. STREET (Surfacing) : This construction provides for the placement of the remaining portion of aggregate base and bituminous surface in conjunction with concrete curb and gutter for Farnums Drive and Four Oaks Road east of Coachman Road. Included as part of this construction is the widening of the north side of Four Oaks Road from Coachman Road to the westerly plat line of Coachman Land Company 1st Addition. The proposed widening provides for a 22 foot driv- ing surface north of the centerline of Four Oaks Road. Also included is the adjusting of manhole frames and gate valve boxes. AREA TO BE INCLUDED: Assessment Area Construction Area Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Page 3. 2845a Sa- • • Contract I Sanitary Sewer $ 47,580 Water Main 54,040 Services 18,280 Storm Sewer 31,030 Streets (Grading/Gravel Base) 16,230 TOTAL CONTRACT I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $167,160 Contract II - Street (Surfacing) $ 93,050 TOTAL CONTRACT II $ 93,050 TOTAL CONTRACT I AND II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $260,210 The total estimated project cost for Contract I and II is $260,210. This cost includes 25% for legal, engineering, administration, bond interest and all related overhead. EASEMENTS: As indicated on the drawings at the back of this report sanitary sewer and water main extend beyond the right-of-way of Farnums Drive to ade- quately serve each quadrominium. It is our recommendation that a "blanket easement" be acquired over the entire Coachman Land Company 1st Addition. It is anticipated that this easement can be acquired through final approval of the plat at no cost. ASSESSMENT: Assessments for sanitary sewer, water main, services, storm sew- er, and streets are proposed to be levied against each quadrominium within Coachman Land Company 1st Addition. Area charge for trunk water main, trunk storm sewer and trunk sanitary sewer have been previously assessed under Proj- ects #65, 10 and 110A respectfully. Page 4. 2845a S3 It is proposed to assess the benefit received from the extension of the 18 inch trunk water main at the rate per front foot for lateral service from trunk water main. A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this report. Fi- nal assessment rates for construction of lateral facilities will be determined by final improvement costs and be assessed to each benefited property. Base rates in effect at the time of the public hearing for this report for lateral service from trunk water main are is follows: Lateral Service from Trunk Water Main, Multi-Family . . . . $14.35/f.f. REVENUE SOURCES: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows: SANITARY SEWER Project Cost Revenue Balance Laterals $ 47,580 Lateral Assessment $ 47,580 TOTAL $ 47,580 $ 47,580 - 0 - WATER MAIN Lateral $ 34,460 Trunk 19,580 Lateral Assessment $ 34,460 Lateral Benefit from Trunk WM 8,760 Trunk Fund 10,820 TOTAL $ 54,040 $ 54,040 - 0 - Page 5. 2845a IS—Y pppppp- SERVICES Lateral $ 18,280 Lateral Assessment $ 18,280 TOTAL $ 18,280 $ 18,280 - 0 - STORM SEWER Lateral $ 31,030 Lateral Assessment $ 31,030 TOTAL $ 31,030 $ 31,030 - 0 - STREET Farnums Dr. & Four Oaks Rd. (Grading) $ 16,230 Farnums Dr. & Four Oaks Rd. (Surfacing) 81,070 Four Oaks Road Widening (Surfacing) 11,980 Street Assessment $109,280 TOTAL $109,280 $109,280 - 0 - Revenue from the City trunk fund for water main is $10,820. No revenue is required from City trunk fund for sanitary sewer, storm sewer or streets. PROJECT SCHEDULE CONTRACT I Project Feasibility Report March 3, 1981 Public Hearing April 7, 1981 Approve Plans and Specifications May 5, 1981 Open Bids May 29, 1981 Award Bids June 2, 1981 Construction Completion October 30, 1981 Assessment Hearing September, 1981 First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes May, 1982 Page 6. 2845a ss'' 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. Mark A. Hanson Date:_ February 20, 1981 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by• �L Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works Date:_ ZZ Page 7. 2845a slo pop- APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE COACHMAN LAND COMPANY 1ST ADDITION PROJECT 323 CONTRACT I A. SANITARY SEWER 1,880 Lin. ft. 8" PVC Sanitary sewer @ $12.00/lin. ft. $ 22,560 10 Each Std. MH with cstg. @ $900.00/each 9,000 22 Each 8"x6" wye branch @ $50.00/each 1,100 2 Each Cut in 9"x6" wye branch @ $100.00/each 200 1 Each Cut into existing manhole @ $200.00/each 200 1 Each Construct MH over existing sewer @ $500.00/each 500 10 Ton Bituminous Mixture for patching @ $80.00/ton 800 1,880 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 1,880 Total Estimated Construction $ 36,240 +5% Contingency 1,820 $ 38,060 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 9,520 TOTAL SANITARY SEWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 47,580 B. WATER MAIN 610 Lin. ft. 18" DIP water main @ $22.00/lin. ft. $ 13,420 1,640 Lin.ft. 6" DIP water main @ $10.00/lin.ft. 16,400 4 Each Hydrants @ $750.00/each 3,000 1 Each 18" Butterfly valve and box @ $1,500.00/each 1,500 3 Each 6" gate valve and box @ $300.00/each 900 2,500 Lbs. Fittings @ $1.00/lb. 2,500 1 Each Wet tap existing 10" water main @ $1,000.00/each 1'000 1 Each Cut into existing 18" plug @ $200.00/each 200 2,250 Lin. ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin. ft. 2,250 Total Estimated Construction $ 41,170 +5% Contingency 2,060 $ 43,230 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 10,810 TOTAL WATER MAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 54,040 Page 8. 2845a S7' pp- • pop- C. SERVICES 900 Lin. ft. 6" CISP for sanitary sewer service @ $6.00/lin. ft. $ 5,400 750 Lin.ft. 1-1/2" Type "K" copper for water service @ $6.00/l.f. 4,500 24 Each 1-1/2" corporation @ $40.00/each 960 24 Each 1-1/2" curb stop & box @ $90.00/each 2,16.0 900 Lin. ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin. ft. 900 Total Estimated Construction $ 13,920 +5% Contingency 700 $ 14,620 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 3,660 TOTAL SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 18,280 D. STORM SEWER 560 Lin. ft. 15" RCP storm sewer @ $17.00/lin. ft. $ 9,520 370 Lin.ft. 12" RCP storm sewer @ $14.00/lin.ft. 5,180 6 Each Std. catch basin manhole w/cstg. @ $900.00/each 5,400 2 Each Std. catch basin w/cstg. @ $700.00/each 1,400 10 Ton Bituminous mixture for patching @ $80.00/ton 800 1 Each Construct MH over existing sewer @ $400.00/each 400 930 Lin. ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin. ft. 930 Total Estimated Construction $ 23,630 +5% Contingency 1,190 $ 24,820 +25% Legal, ,Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 6,210 TOTAL STORM SEWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 31,030 E. STREETS (Grading/Gravel Base) Farnums Drive & Four Oaks Road (East of Coachman Road) 7,200 Sq.yds. Subgrade preparation @ $0.30/sq.yd. $ 2,160 1,700 Ton Class 5 aggregate base (100% crushed) @ $6.00/ton 10,200 Total Estimated Construction $ 12,360 +5% Contingency 620 $ 12,980 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 3,250 TOTAL STREETS (Grading) $ 16,230 Page 9. 2845a .S8 pp— • • Contract I - Sanitary Sewer $ 47,580 Water Main 54,040 Services 18,280 Storm Sewer 31,030 Streets (Grading/Gravel Base) 16,230 TOTAL CONTRACT I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $167,160 CONTRACT II F. STREET (Surfacing) Farnums Drive & Four Oaks Road (East of Coachman Road) 1,450 Ton Class 5, aggregate base @ $6.00/ton $ 8,700 530 Ton 2341 Bituminous base course @ $16.00/ton 8,480 530 Ton 2331 Bituminous wear course @ $18.00/ton 9,540 53 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $180.00/ton 9,540 3,600 Lin.ft. Surmountable concrete C.& G. @ $5.50/lin.ft. 19,800 15 Each Adjust manhole and catch basin @ $200.00/each 3,000 3 Each Adjust gate valve and box @ $150.00/each 450 1.5 Acre Seeding with mulch @ $1,500.00/acre 2,250 Total Estimated Construction $ 61,760 +5% Contingency 3,090 $ 64,850 +25% Legal, .Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 16,220 TOTAL FARNUMS DRIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 81,070 Four Oaks Road Widening (West of Coachman Road) 100 Ton Class 5 aggregate base @ $6.00/ton $ 600 75 Ton 2341 Bituminous base course @ $16.00/ton 1,200 100 Ton 2341 Bituminous wear course @ $18.00/ton 1,800 10 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $180.00/ton 1,800 440 Lin. ft. B618 concrete curb & gutter @ $5.50/lin. ft. 2,420 Page 10. 2845a S9 pppppw,- Four Oaks Road Widening, Cont'd. 2 Each Adjust manhole and catch basin @ $200.00/each 400 1 Each Adjust gate valve and box @ $150.00/each 150 0.5 Acre Seeding with mulch @ $1,500.00/Acre 750 Total Estimated Construction $ 9,120 +5% Contingency 460 $ 9,580 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 2,400 TOTAL FOUR OAKS ROAD NORTH SIDE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 11,980 CONTRACT II - Farnums Drive & Four Oaks Road $ 81,070 Four Oaks Road Widening 11,980 TOTAL CONTRACT II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 93,050 Page 11. 2845a Go ppppppp APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL COACHMAN LAND COMPANY 1ST ADDITION PROJECT 323 February 20, 1981 A. SANITARY SEWER (88 Units) Total Cost/Unit Coachman Land Company 1st Addition $ 47,580 $ 541 B. WATER MAIN (88 Units) Total Cost/Unit Coachman Land Company 1st Addition $ 43,220 $ 492 C. SERVICES (88 Units) Total Cost/Unit Coachman Land Company 1st Addition $ 18,280 $ 208 D. STORM SEWER (88 Units) Lateral Assessment Total Cost/Unit Coachman Land Company 1st Addition $ 31,030 $ 353 E. STREET (88 Units) Total Cost/Unit Grading/Gravel Base $ 16,230 $ 185 Surfacing 93,050 1,058 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,837 2845a Page 12. N IL �3 I� � Lo OUTLOT A Z 8 7 S 3 4 FOUR OAKS D. zZ EX. 9" VCP SANITARY SEWER ir Q V Q O COACHMAN LAND CO. 18T ADDITION EAGAN, MINNESOTA SANITARY SEWER PROJECT NO. 323 msTsm "wic momm j moc, W. 49211 SCALE: I"= 200' 4-A pppppN pp- 0 F A N D 6•• - R OUTLOT A E?--1 FOUR OAKS RD. EX.10"CIP EX. 18�� WATERMAIN it Q U Q O U COACHMAN LAND CO. 1ST ADDITION EAGAN, MINNESOTA WATERMAIN PROJECT N0, 323 4921 I tONEST1l00, WSW ANDE�LN( i Ag50�'., SCALE: I"= 200' !0 3 N P►RNVMS-`___`- �RI�E OUTLOT A o FOUR OAK$ RD. L t�aZ lall EX. 24 RCP STORM SEWER C) Z V Q O U COACHMAN LAND CO. 18T ADDITION EAGAN, MINNESOTA STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 323 49211 �ONESTwOQ, RO&Wn ABIDE" A AUK W. SCALE: I"= 200' � �y . N CED / OUTLOT A L-.`_� I 2r �._: __J I FOUR OAKS RD. WIDEN EXISTING ' STREETir 0 Q U Q O U � COACHMAN LAND CO. 18T ADDITION EAGAN, MINNESOTA STREETS PROJECT N0, 323 49211 �ONEST�00` ROSW ANOE" A ASSM M SCALE: I = 200' Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Eighteen PROJECT 325 C. Project 325 Timberline Addition Street Lights -- On March 3, 1981 , a public hearing was convened to consider the installation of street lights in the Timberline Addition in response to a peti- tion received from a majority of the residents within that addition._ At that public hearing, there were several questions that required additional research by staff. Consequently, the public hearing was continued until the April 7, 1981 Council meeting. At the request of the Council, the Director of Public Works, on March 19, held an informational. meeting, at the City Hall with all in- terested residents in the Timberline Addition. During the informa- tional meeting, additional costs associated with various alterna- tives were discussed as requested by consideration of several of the residents. In `addition, a formal petition form was processed throughout the neighborhood to receive a ' representation of the residents ' desires pertaining to the street lights. Of the possible 112 lots proposed to be assessed for street lighting, 90 people have responded. Of the 90 responses, 53 are in favor of street lighting, with 37 voting for no street lights. Of the 53 voting for street lights, 50 perfer the ornamental street lights with the remaining 3 requesting the overhead installation. Of the 50 in favor of ornamental street lights, / 7 of these are requesting two additional street lights at the intersection of Lone Oak Road and Woodlark Lane. Attached to this memo is a sample page from the petition form that was circulated for Council information, found on pageA copy of the entire petition form will be available at the City meeting. - If any member of the Council wants to examine the remaining pages prior to the City Council meeting, please feel free to contact the City Administrator' s office. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To close the public hearing and either approve or deny ornamental street lighting under Project 325 for- Timberline Addition. Special Note: Enclosed on page is an addendum of the Timber- line Report that was given out to residents of the Timberline Addi- tion at the informational meeting._ For additional information regarding the street lighting report, refer to pages 20 throug 26 of the March 3, 1981 City Council Packet. (t7 PETITIg-1 TL^'BE,t2LI*1E ADDITION STREET LIGHTS (Project 325) I am aware of a proposal,•t�o. install street lights within the Oslund-Timberline Addition. I am aware of the two alternates and their esti,rtiated costs providing for "Ornamental" lights with underground wire service or "Overhead" lights mounted on ex—isting newly-installed power poles serviced by overhead wires. This petition will be submitted to the City Council for review and official action at 7:00 P.M. , April 7, 1981 at City Hall. (One signature per property, please) PI,Er'qE PRr'T, T= INITIAL & y0TE FOR ONE ALTERNATE O!MY t APIE INITIAL ADDRESS R�IAr I�'^AL" 11=11 ENT WNE 2. P, r - 3. �u X3C � S. 6. 7. tl- 9. 10. 11. L5 12. 13. �C.� 14. t i e. r. 0, l�yi �'�� b�k�. ✓ 1 L.k. — 1 L:' -C L�-i t _ y_ t t1Q �i (, 17. (' J oyid J ADD I 1 N ST R` LIC:-Fi S r FEASIBUJTY REPORT i ADDENDUM #1 At the public hearing held on March 3, 1981, several questions were presented by affected property owners. These questions have been researched by staff and are r being attached to this feasibility report as an addendum for consideration. The public hearing was continued until April 7th to allow the affected property owners additional tine to review the proposal and this additional information. I RESIDaITIAL YAPD LIQi'T DSTALLATION At the public hearing, there was a question pertaining to the cost of this pro- pcsal as corpared to an individual property owner installing their own yard light. The estimated ocst obtained from three independent firers indicate that the in- stallation of a typical yard light with an electric eye, including labor and ma- terial, would-be _$300.00 per yard light. Assuming a 100-watt light bulb at a current energy rate of $0.038 per kilowatt hours and an average time of 8 hours per day, the yearly cost for energy to that property owner would be $11.09. ADDITIONAL STREET LIGHT I^JSTALLATION Staff had received some questions pertaining to the additional cost per lct if additional street lights were requested over an above those 13 proposed in the original feasibility report. It is estimated that it will cost an additional $18.00 per lot for each additional ornamental street light installed. It is estimated that it will cost an additional $ 1.30 per lot for each additional overhead street light installed. ILL 4INATION There was a question expressed regarding the extent of effective illumination by this proposed street lighting system. If the ornamental street light fixture is selected, there is a slightly different luminaire available that effectively increases the illumination effect of the street liahtt on the street side only. In addition to "throwing" the light an additional 75t feet in each direction, it triples the effective illumination 75 feet from the light on the street. This particular type of luminaire has been installed in Apple Valley but not in Eagan as of this date. If this additional illumination were requested, it would cost an estimated additional $18.60 per lot over and above the estimated $234.00 per lot quoted in the feasibility report. REVISED OVERHEAD LIGHT LAYOUT There were questions and concerns expressed regarding the feasibility of loca- ting the overhead light systems at the critical areas similar to the ornamental street lights (curves, intersections, etc.) . The original lighting layout was based on the availability of an unobstructed alignment for the overhead wire from the back lot line to the proposed overhead street light. An in-field review with NSP indicated that in order to conform with the proposed ornamental street light layout, the additional poles and/or cable placement would require an in- crease cost per lot from the estimated $17.00 to $20-$25 per lot depending upon a combination of overhead or underground wiring distribution for the overhead street light. 618 An informational meeting is scheduled at City Hall on Thursday, march 19th at 7 P"i to discass in further detail the fE-�ysibility report and this addendum. Agenda Information Memo- April 3, 1981 Page Nineteen PROJECT 327 D. Project 327 - Joyce Addition Streets & Utilities -- On March 17, 1981, the City- Council received a feasibility report for the above referenced project and scheduled a public hearing to be held on April 7, 1981. The Public Works Director will conduct this public hearing. All 1egdl notices have been published and sent to affected property . owners. For a copy of the preliminary report, refer to pages through . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To' close the public hearing IJ and either approve or deny Project 327 for the installation of streets and utilities in the 'Joyce Addition. 69 0 • 1 /J d/t�/J�i wa, • ou 4, 1 lad 144.4 fid 7�moiKaWJy /J nc Keith R.Cook,P.P. � Keith A.Gordon,P.E. Otto G.Bonesiroo,P.E. Thomas E.Noyes,P.E. �afAl Ifg n p Robert W.Rosette,P.E. Richard W.Foster, P.E. v Joseph C. Anderiik,P.E. Robert G.Schunichl,P.E. 2335 ?(/ 9+....b s� 36 Bradford A.Lemberg,P.E. Marv-in L.Sorvala,P.E. Richard E. Turner,P.E. Donald C.Burgardt,P.E. St. Howl, Mw.wyela 55/1.3 James C.Olson, P.E. Jerry A.Bourdon,P.E. Mark A.Hanson,P.E. PA.:612-636-4600 Steven M. Qutncey Charles A.Erickson welsky dril 1956 — 215t1i — 1981 � Leo M. P.Olson Harlan M.Olson Report on David E.Olson Preliminary p � nniversary' Joyce Addition Utility and Street Improvements d�b Project No. 327 Eagan, Minnesota March 4, 1981 SCOPE: This project provides for construction of sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, and streets within Joyce Addition. Joyce Addition is located in the southwest quadrant of State Highway No. 49 and No. 55. Joyce Addition consists of 7 single family lots, 8 double family lots and 2 commercial-indus- trial lots. The two commercial-industrial lots and one single family lot are serviced with sanitary sewer and water main. This report assumes the grading of the street will be done by the developer. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION: 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 as two contracts. Contract I provides for construction of all utilities and the placement of an aggregate base on a properly prepared subgrade. Contract II provides for the construction of the remaining portion of the aggregate base and bituminous surface in conjunction with the concrete curb and gutter. DISCUSSION: CONTRACT I A. SANITARY SEWER: An 8 inch sanitary sewer is proposed on the centerline of the proposed street within Joyce Addition. The sanitary sewer will connect to an existing 9 inch sanitary sewer located on the south side of State Hwy. 55. Page 1. 3010a 70 • • PPB. MAIN: A 6 inch water main is proposed to be constructed in Joyce Ad- dition. The water main will connect to an existing 8 inch water main located on the south side of State Highway 55. It is not proposed to loop the water main. C. SERVICES: This construction provides for the installation of sanitary sew- er and water main services 15' past the property line. Sanitary sewer service is 4 inch and water main service is 1 inch. D. STORM SEWER LATERALS: It is proposed to construct an 18 inch storm sewer from an existing storm manhole providing drainage within State Highway 55 right-of-way. The proposed storm sewer would be constructed to the west to the proposed street located in Joyce Addition. Two catch basins will be con- structed at the proposed street as indicated on the drawing at the back of this report. The catch basins will provide drainage from within Joyce Addi- tion. To accomodate this construction permission will have to be obtained from Mn/DOT to utilize their storm sewer facility. E. STREET (Grading/Gravel Base) : This construction provides the proper grad- ing of the subgrade surface after installation of utilities and the placement of a 4 inch aggregate base. Also included is the construction of a timber re- taining wall at the location indicated on the drawing at the back of this re- port. CONTRACT II F. STREET (Surfacing): This construction provides for the placement of the remaining portion of the aggregate base and the bituminous surface in conjunc- tion with surmountable concrete curb and gutter. Page 2. 3010a 7/ • • AREA TO BE INCLUDED: Assessment Area Construction Area. Joyce Addition Joyce Addition T.H. 55/Frontage Rd. COST ESTIMATE: Detailed cost estimates are presented at the back of this re- port. A summary of these costs are as follows: CONTRACT I Sanitary Sewer $ 21,990 Water Main 18,250 Services 14,630 Storm Sewer Laterals 11,800 Street (Grading/gravel base) 12,680 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST - CONTRACT I $ 79,350 CONTRACT II Street (Surfacing) 33,960 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST - CONTRACT II . . . $113,310 The total estimated cost for Contract I and II including contingencies and all related overhead is $113,310. Overhead costs are estimated at 25% and in- clude legal, engineering, administration and bond interest. EASEMENTS: A permanent easement for the existing sanitary sewer located on Lots 4 and 5 will have to be indicated on the final plat. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments for sanitary sewer, water main, services, storm sew- er and streets are proposed to be levied against the benefited property in Joyce Addition. As previously indicated Lots 1, 4, and 5 area serviced with sanitary sewer and water main. It has been indicated that Lot 1 will be sub- divided and utility service will be required. It is therefore proposed to as- sess Lot 1 for utility and street construction as two lots and not to assess Page 3. 3010a 72 PF7- Lots 4 and 5. Trunk sanitary sewer and trunk water main have been previously assessed under Project 449. There is presently a pending assessment for this area for trunk storm sewer as part of Project #182R. Due to zoning changes proposed as part of Joyce Addition trunk storm sewer rates reflected in the preliminary assessment roll for Project #182R will have to be revised. A pre- liminary assessment roll is included at the back of this report. Final as- sessment rates for constructin of lateral facilities will be determined by fi- nal costs and be assessed to each benefited property. Base rates in effect at the time of this report for trunk storm sewer are as follows: REVENUE SOURCES: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows: Project Cost Revenue Balance SANITARY SEWER Lateral $ 21,990 Lateral Assessment $21,990 Total $21,990 $21,990 - 0 - WATER MAIN Lateral $18,250 Lateral Assessment $18,250 Total $18,250 $18,250 - 0 - SERVICES Lateral $14,130 Lateral Assessment $14,130 Total $14,130 $14,130 - 0 - Page 4. 3010a 73 Op STORM SEWER Lateral $11,800 Lateral Assessment $11,800 Total $11,800 $11,800 - 0 - STREET Grading/Gravel Base $12,680 Surfacing 33 ,960 Street Assessment $46,640 Total $46,640 $46,640 - 0 No revenue is required from City trunk fund for utility or street con- struction. PROJECT SCHEDULE Present Feasibility Report March 17, 1981 Public Hearing April 7, 1981 Approve Plans and Specifications April 21, 1981 Open Bids May 28, 1981 Award Bids June 2, 1981 Construction Completion - Contract I October, 1981 Construction Completion - Contract II Summer, 1982 Assessment Hearing - Contract I September, 1981 Assessment Hearing - Contract II September, 1982 First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes May, 1982 First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes May, 1983 Page 5. 3010a 7 � 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. Mark A. Hanson Date: March 4, 1981 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by: Somas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works Date: Page 6. 3010a 7,5� PPPPP'F APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE JOYCE ADDITION PROJECT 327 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING A. SANITARY SEWER 600 Lin. ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary sewer, 10'-12' dp. @ $12.00/lin. ft. $ 7,200 130 Lin.ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary sewer, 12'-14' dp. @ $14.00/lin.ft. 1,820 50 Lin. ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary sewer, 14'-16' dp. @ $16.00/lin. ft. 800 4 Each Standard Manhole w/cstg. @ $1,000.00/each 4,000 15 Each 8"x4" wye branch @ $50.00/each 750 1 Each Cut into exisiting manhole @ $200.00/each 200 20 Ton Bituminous material for patching @ $60.00/ton 1,200 780 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 780 Total Estimated Construction $ 16,750 +5% Contingency 840 $ 17,590 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , & Bond Interest 4,400 TOTAL SANITARY SEWER $ 21,990 Page 7. 3010a 76 PPPPFPM B. WATER MAIN 800 Lin. ft. 6" DIP, Water main @ $10.00/lin. ft. $ 8,000 2 Each Hydrant @ $800.00/each 1,600 1 Each 6" Gate valve and box @ $300.00/each 300 1,200 Lbs. Fittings @ $1.00/lb. 1,200 1 Each Wet tap existing 8" CIP water main @ $1,000.00/ea. 1,000 800 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 800 Total Estimated Construction $ 13,900 +5% Contingency 700 $14,600 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , & Bond Interest 3,650 TOTAL WATER MAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 18,250 C. SERVICES 750 Lin. ft. 4" CISP Sanitary sewer service @ $6.00/lin. ft. $ 4,500 750 Lin.ft. 1" Type "K" copper water service @ $5.00/lin.ft. 3,750 16 Each 1" Corporation stop @ $40.00/each 640 16 Each l" Curb stop and box @ $70.00/each 1,120 750 Lin. ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin. ft. 750 Total Estimated Construction $ 10,760 +5% Contingency 540 $ 11,300 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , & Bond Interest 2,830 TOTALSERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 14,130 Page 8. 3010a 77 ppppor D. STORM SEWER LATERALS 200 Lin. ft. 18" RCP Storm sewer @ $20.00/lin. ft. $ 4,000 30 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, Storm sewer @ $14.00/lin.ft. 420 1 Each Standard Manhole w/cstg. @ $1,000.00/each 1,000 1 Each Standard Catch Basin Manhole w/cstg. @ $900.00/each 900 1 Each Standard Catch Basin w/cstg. @ $800.00/each 800 1 Each Cut into existing Manhole @ $200.00/each 200 1 Acre Seed with mulch @ $1,000.00/Ac. 1,000 10 Ton Bituminous mixturefor patching @ $60.00/ton 600 70 Lin. ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin. ft. 70 Total Estimated Construction $ 8,990 +5% Contingency 450 $ 9,440 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , & Bond Interest 2,360 TOTAL STORM SEWER LATERALS $ 11,800 E. STREET (Grading/Gravel Base) 400 Sq.ft. Timber retaining wall @ $10.00/sq.ft. $ 4,000 3,400 Sq.yds. Subgrade preparation @ $0.25/sq.yd. 850 800 Ton Class 5, aggregate base @ $6.00/ton 4,800 Total Estimated Construction $ 9 ,650 +5% Contingency 490 $ 10,140 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , & Bond Interest 2,540 TOTAL STREET (Grading/Gravel Base) $ 12,680 Page 9. 3010a 79 CONTRACT I Sanitary Sewer $ 21,990 Water Main 18,250 Services 14,630 Storm Sewer 11,800 Street (Grading/Gravel Base) 12,680 TOTAL CONTRACT I . . . . . . . . . . . $ 79,350 CONTRACT II F. STREET (Surfacing) 2,880 Sq.yds. Base preparation @ $0.25/sq.yd. $ 720 400 Ton Class 5, aggregate base @ $6.00/ton 2,400 225 Ton Bituminous Wear course @ $12.00/ton 2,700 225 Ton Bituminous base course @ $14.00/ton 3,150 23 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $200.00/ton 4,600 1,600 Lin.ft. Surmountable concrete curb & gutter @ $5.50/lin.ft. 81800 6 Each Adjust manholes & catch basins @ $200.00/each 1,200 2 Each Adjust gate valve & box @ $150.00/each 300 2 Acres Seed with topsoil @ $1,000.00/acre 2,000 Total Estimated Construction $ 25,870 +5% Contingency 1,300 $ 27,170 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , & Bond Interest 6,790 TOTAL STREET (Surfacing) $ 33,960 Page 10. 3010a 7? ppppp,m APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL JOYCE ADDITION PROJECT 327 March 4, 1981 A. SANITARY SEWER Total Cost/lot Single Family (8 lots) $ 14,660 $ 1,833 Double Family (8 lots) 7,330 916 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 21,990 B. WATER MAIN Single Family (8 lots) $ 12,170 $ 1,520 Double Family (8 lots) 6,080 760 TOTAL $ 18,250 C. SERVICES Single Family (8 lots) $ 7,065 $ 884 Double Family (8 lots) 7,065 884 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 14,130 D. STORM SEWER LATERAL ASSESSMENT Single Family (8 lots) $ 7,870 $ 983 Double Family (8 lots) 3,930 492 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 11,800 Page 11. 3010a so ppppp� • • it E. STREET (Grading/Gravel Base) Total Cost/Lot Single Family (8 lots) $ 8,450 $1,057 Double Family (8 lots) 4,230 528 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,680 F. STREET (Surfacing Single Family (8 lots) $22,640 $2,830 Double Family (8 lots) 11,320 1,415 TOTAL . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $33,960 SUMMARY COST/LOT Single Family Double Family Comm.-Ind. Sanitary Sewer $ 1,833 $ 916 Water Main 1,520 760 Services 884 884 Storm Sewer Lateral 983 492 Street (Grading/Gravel Base) 1,057 528 Street (Surfacing) 2,830 1,415 TOTAL $ 9,107 $4,995 Page 12. 3010a SI ppppp,pm • STATE HWY 55 �--EXISTING SANITARY —�_ SEWER I U) 0 c 2 O d. O Gj 17 16 15 3 RITA 0 8 13 I a CT. 5 6 ;� 7 8 19 101 11 12 � cr I t9 SCALE: I"=200 JOYCE ADDITION EAGAN , MINNESOTA SANITARY SEWER PROJECT NO. 327 BONE8rM ROSENE, ANOERUK & ASSOC, INC. COMM. NO. 49217 CONSULTIN UnWERS St.Fwl, Mis�ta g� ppppp"m 0 0 STATE HINY 55 / r-EXISTING 8WATERMAIN 0 Uj \ 20 \ 0- 0 0 0 17 16 15 f� tA� \ 4 314 611 -2. RITA O / 13 Z \ Q C T. 5 6 7 8 9 IOI II 12\ N � � SCALE : I"=200' JOYCE ADDITION EAGAN, MINNESOTA WATER MAIN PROJECT N0. 327 MURK RK RMNE, ANDMK i ASM, INC. COMM. NO. 49217 CONWING ENMERS St.pml, Mko.oc. 93 r Ex. MnDOT STORM SEWER ST.QTE 11 � 5 �, 12 5 EXISTING 21 C� STORM SEWER 61O U 2 O j(D 17 16 15 lY 14 RI TQ�- t O 13i Q CT.56 7 8 9 10 I it 12 SCALE: I"=200' JOYCE ADDITION EAGAN , MINNESOTA STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 327 MfSrM RMNE, ANDERUK A ASWC., INC. COMM. NO. 49217 CONSULTM EKIKEn St.rwi, Minnesota H y 55 1 � (n Timber Retaing Wall LU 2 O O ft 17 16 15 cS'� 4 3 14 o RITA t O 13 Z c CT 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 SCALE: I"=200' JOYCE ADDITION EAGAN, MINNESOTA STREETS PROJECT NO. 327 90NUMO, RMNE, ANMUK & ASSOC., INC. COMM NO 49217 CONMTM ENPRIE RS St.hrl, Miw�s�ta g5 STATE HWY 55 0 9j*1<1 RITA t o a CT. RateAq.ft. Single Family Rate 0.0344 illlllllilllllll Multiple Family Rate 0.0425 Commercial-Industrial Rate 0.051 SCALE: I _200� JOYCE ADDITION EAGAN, MINNESOTA TRUNK STORM SEWER REVISED PENDING ASSESSMENT PROJECT NO. 182R �ONEiT�00� Run men= a "SOC.' w COMM. NO. 49217 CON1101LTI N SER: It.hol, Na Agenda Information Memo April 3 , 1981 Page Twenty PROJECT 328 E. Project 328 for Ches Mar East 4th Addition Streets & Utilities - On March 3, 1981, the City Council received the feasibility report for the above referenced project and scheduled the public hearing for April 7. The Public Works Director will conduct this public hearing. All `legal notices have been published and sent to affected property owners. A copy of the preliminary report is enclosed on pages $$ through 102 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To close the public hearing and either approve or deny Project 328 for the installation of streets and utilities in the Ches Mar -East 4th Addition. 497 n��P, �� / /j�C Glenn R.Cook,P.E. " J � Keith A. Gordon.P.E. Ono G.Boncstroo,P.E. Thomas E.Noyes, P.E. p Robert W.Rosene,P.E. Richard W.Foster, P.E. JoseFh C. A nderlik,P.E. Robert G.Schunicht, P.E. .2335 r*4 %..nb# 1 36 Bradford A.Lemberg, P.E. Martin L.Sorvala,P.E. ^ '�'� Richard E. Turner,P.E. Donald C.Burgardt,P.E. St. Pawl A/rww�551f3 James C.Olson, P.E. Jerry A.Bourdon,P.E. /fle«. 6f2-636-4600 Mark A.Hanson,P.E. Steven M. QuinceHanson, Charles A.Erickson 'l 1956 — 5tlt — 1981 Leo M. Pawelsky KarOlson M.Olson nni versarjr' � David E.Olson Preliminary Report Ches Mar East 4th Addition C tAV Streets and Utilities Improvement Project 328 Eagan, Minnesota February 11, 1981 SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of utilities and streets within Ches Mar East 4th Addition. 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 Horizon Circle. The sanitary sewer will connect to an existing sanitary manhole located on Horizon Circle 200 feet from Valleyview Lane. The sanitary sewer will provide service to 28 lots abutting Horizon Circle. No sanitary sewer is proposed for Horizon Lane. The area to the west of Ches Mar East 4th Addition will be provided with sanitary sewer service from Oak Chase Addition. Page 1. 2832a 0 • B.) Water Main: A 6 inch water main is proposed to be constructed 10 feet west of the centerline on Horizon Circle. A 6 inch water main is to be con- structed on Horizon Lane to the westerly line of Ches Mar East 4th Addition. The 6 inch water main will connect to an existing 6 inch line located on Hor- izon Circle 200 feet from Valleyview Lane. To complete the water main loop, the proposed 6" water main will connect to an existing 20 inch water main on Lexington Avenue. This will involve constructing the proposed water main along a lot line from the cul-de-sac to the 20" trunk water main along Lexing- ton Avenue. C.) Services: This construction provides for the installation of sanitary sewer and water services 15' past the property line for each of the respective lots they serve. Sanitary sewer service is 4 inch and water service is 1 inch. D.) Street (Grading): This construction provides for the proper grading of the subgrade surface after installation of utilities on Horizon circle and Horizon Lane. Also included is the placement of a 4 inch aggregate base. CONTRACT II E.) 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 Ches Mar East 4th Addition Ches Mar East 4th Addition COST ESTIMATE: Detailed cost estimates are presented at the back of this re- port and are summarized as follows: Page 2. 2832a • Contract I Sanitary Sewer $ 20,400 Water Main 23,040 Services 25,500 Street (Grading) 9,450 Total Contract I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 78,390 Contract II Street (Surfacing) $ 45,620 Total Contract II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 45,620 TOTAL CONTRACT I AND II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $124,010 The total estimated project cost for Contract I and II is $124,010. This cost includes 25% for legal engineering, administration, bond interest, and all related overhead. EASEMENTS: No easements are required outside of Ches Mar East 4th Addition. The only easement required within the plat is a permanent easement for con- struction of water main on the lot line from the cul-de-sac to Lexington Ave- nue. It is anticipated this easement will be acquired with final approval of the plat at no cost. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments for sanitary sewer, water main, services, and streets are proposed to be levied against the benefited property in Ches Mar East 4th Addition. Trunk sanitary sewer has been previously assessed under Project #88. Trunk storm sewer and trunk water main are proposed to be as- sessed as part of this project. 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 costs and be assessed to each benefited property. Base rates in effect at the time of the public hearing for this re- port for trunk storm sewer and trunk water main are as follows: Page 3. 2832a • • Trunk Water Main $770/Acre 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 $ 20,400 Lateral Assessment $_ 20,400 TOTAL $ 20,400 $ 20,400 - 0 - WATER MAIN Lateral $ 23,040 Trunk Assessment 5,198 Lateral Assessment $_ 23,040 TOTAL $ 23,040 $ 28,338 +$5,198 STORM SEWER Trunk - 0 - Trunk Assessment $ 11,002 TOTAL - 0 - $ 11,002 +$11,002 SERVICES Lateral $ 25,500 Lateral Assessment $_ 25,500 TOTAL $ 25,500 $ 25,500 - 0 - Page 4. 2832a STREET Ches Mar East 4th Addn. (Grading/Gravel Base) $ 9,450 Ches Mar East 4th Addn. (Surfacing) 45,620 Ches Mar East 4th Addn. Assessment $55,070 TOTAL $55,070 $55,070 - 0 - The balance for trunk storm sewer is +$11,002 and for trunk water main is +$5,198. No revenue is required from City trunk fund for sanitary sewer, or street. PROJECT SCHEDULE Present Feasibility Report March 3, 1981 Public Hearing April 7, 1981 Approve Plans and Specifications - Contract I April 7,1981 Open Bids - Contract I May 1, 1981 Award Bids - Contract I June 2, 1981 Construction Completion - Contract I October, 1981 Construction Completion - Contract II Summer, 1982 Assessment Hearing - Contract I September, 1981 Assessment Hearing - Contract II September, 1982 First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes- Contract I May, 1982 First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes - Contract II May, 1983 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. Mark A. Hanson Date: Februar 11 1981 _ Reg. No. 14260 Approved by: d2?-b:z'00(— Who mhomas CA. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works Date: 2832a Page 5. 4��`z,�- APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE CHES MAR EAST 4TH ADDITION PROJECT 328 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING A.) SANITARY SEWER 720 Lin. ft. 8" Sanitary sewer @ $12.00/lin. ft. $ 8,640.00 4 Each Std. Manhole with casting @ $900.00/each 3,600.00 14 Lin. ft. Manhole depth greater than 8' dp. @ $70.00/each 980.00 28 Each 8"x4" wye branch @ $50.00/each 1,400.00 1 Each Cut into existing manhole @ $200.00/each 200.00 720 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 720.00 Total Estimated Construction $15,540.00 +5% Contingency 780.00 $16,320.00 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 4,080.00 TOTAL SANITARY SEWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20,400.00 B.) WATER MAIN 1,100 Lin. ft. 6" Water main @ $10.00/lin. ft. $11,000.00 3 Each Hydrant @ $750.00/each 2,250.00 3 Each 6" Gate valve and box @ $300.00/each 900.00 1,500 Lbs. Fittings @ ,$1.00/lb. 1,500.00 2 Each Cut into existing water main @ $400.00/each 800.00 1,100 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 11100.00 Total Estimated Construction $17,550.00 +5% Contingency 880.00 $18,430.00 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 4,610.00 TOTAL WATER MAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $23,040.00 Page 6. 2832a �1L/ C.) SERVICES 1,300 Lin. ft. 4" CISP for Sanitary sewer service @ $7.00/lin. ft. $9,100.00 1,300 Lin.ft. 1" Type "K" copper for WM serv. @ $5.00/lin.ft. 6,500.00 28 Each 1" Corporation stop @ $30.00/each 840.00 28 Each 1" curb stop and box @' $60.00/each 1,680.00 1,300 Lin. ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin. ft. 1,300.00 Total Estimated Construction $19,420.00 +5% Contingency 980.00 $20,400.00 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 5,100.00 TOTAL SERVICES . . . . . . . . . $25,500.00 D.) STREET (Grading/Gravel Base) 4,000 Sq.yds. Subgrade preparation @ $0.30/sq.yd. $ 1,200.00 1,000 Ton Class 2 crushed limestone @ $6.00/ton 6,000.00 Total Estimated Construction $ 7,200.00 +5% Contingency 360.00 $ 7,560.00 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. ; Bond Interest 1,890.00 TOTAL STREET (Grading) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 9,450.00 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING A. Sanitary Sewer $20,400.00 B. Water Main 23,040.00 C. Services 25,500.00 D. Street (Grading/Gravel Base) 9,450.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT CONTRACT I --- $78,390.00 Page 7. 2832a CONTRACT II STREET SURFACING E.) STREET 500 Ton Class 2 crushed limestone @ $6.00/ton $ 3,000.00 350 Ton 2341 Bituminous base course @ $16.00/ton 5,600.00 350 Ton 2341 Bituminous wear course @ $18.00/ton 6,300.00 35 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $180.00/ton 6,300.00 1,900 Lin. ft. Surmountable concrete curb & gutter @ $5.50/l.f. 10,450.00 5 Each Adjust manhole @ $200.00/each 1,000.00 2 Each Adjust gate valve and box @ $150.00/each 300.00 1 Each Barricade @ $300.00/each 300.00 1 Acre Seed with topsoil @ $1,500.00/acre 1,500.00 Total Estimated Construction $34,750.00 +5y Contingency 1,740.00 $36,490.00 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. , Bond Interest 1,740.00 TOTAL STREET (Surfacing) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45,620.00 Page 8. 2832a p� APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL CHES MAR EAST 4TH ADDITION PROJECT 328 February 11, 1981 I. SANITARY SEWER (28 lots) Total Cost/Lot Ches Mar East 4th Addition $ 20,400 $ 729.00 II. WATER MAIN (28 lots) Total Cost/Lot Lateral Ches Mar East 4th Addition $ 23,040 $ 823.00 Total Area Trunk (Acre) Rate/Acre Total Cost/Lot Ches Mar East 4th Addition 6.75 $770 $5,198 $ 186.00 Total Area Rate/sq.ft. III. TRUNK STORM SEWER (28 lots) (S -ft.) Single Fam. Total Cost/Lot Ches Mar East 4th Addition 294,165 $0.0374 $11,002 $ 393.00 IV. SERVICES (28 lots) Total Cost/Lot Ches Mar East 4th Addition $ 25,500 $ 911.00 V. STREETS (28 lots) Total Cost/Lot Grading/Gravel Base $ 9.450 $ 338.00 Surfacing 45,620 1,630.00 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5,010.00 Page 9. 2832a ?-7 PQ` /x 0000 it N J � 0 < Pio 8 cr-�10 • ' V YI* 0 0 Ho IZO I KIRKWOOD DR. SM, 1 •• I • Z Q AN '• '�' • o w 00, ... '_ � 811 XW.� V .• . W C- Q C IF ROA D CHES MAR EAST Lateral ossessment ® 4th ADDITION Sanitary Sewer SANITARY SEWER PROJECT No. 328 S9a i41'=200, . �� 1 . Pk A000 E .•:• Q• o •• \ - . 0 one 0 Y I HO lzu � I KIRKWOOD DR. 6.. _ s.•, AN X 4. W Q. C I F ROAD---,--- 3 r CHES MAR EAST Lateral Assessment for Watermain 4th ADDITION WATERMAIN PROJECT No. 328 4921410 me ve ik Now AMS a Afww*Nt A E -------- \ x _k/ i •� iN J� o 0 ' J •• P o v F� Y I oc H0 K I R KWOOD DR. rr : •' z a rf ' '• W Ci CD .-. • • r W / 1 •' X J LLI CL ROAD r-- CHES MAR EAST Water Main Trunk Assessment 4th ADDITION WATER MAIN ASSESSMENTS PROJECT No. 328 S 9a e41' =200' ROME MO, RMNE, ANDERUK & ASWC., MIC. /� • {• A E ' so* 60 Q c, ♦ • Po sem" 3 .• Y I � cr. , HO - I KIRKW 0 DR. O W _ •-} cr- CL g ROAD CHES MAR EAST Storm Sewer Trunk Assessments 4th ADDITION STORM SEWER ASSESSMENTS PROJE T No,, 3M 49214 a Scab= I'=200' A E ....................- ----------- Xv N J o �, • < QJ - Ij/ �Y cr V •..;•: Y I .00 HO I 0 r I KIRK OW OD DR. ASV o w z w .•. W CL � a CIF ROA D CHES MAR EAST 4th ADDITION Street Assessments STREETS PROJECT No. 328 49214 Sc 1V i'=200' AI�� aAww%ML Agenda Information Memo April 3 1981 1 Page Twenty-One FINAL PLAT JPK PARK ADDITION A. JPK Park Addition Final Plat - The final plat application for JPK Park Addition is in order for consideration. Enclosed on page,_00C is a copy,,o� 'the final plata ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the final plat for JPK Park Addition. � 0� i nS I a 21, a& Zl lip.k,s€� .iap I. .�Ac w V • :a ! is i? � i i� 35 e:H at kt � I 017 V I Y N Z ; ^Q awILI^ } LU nY -lot OO IK Of • 1, tib +y S • )`•L rpp• :v f OC Ott s •' w A M. -9 n�� —� ifr• /off ' Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Twenty-Two REZONING/PRELIMINARY PLAT GALAXIE PARK ADDITION B. Thomas W. Heiberg for Rezoning from A to PD and Preliminary Plat Approval of Galaxie Park Addition -- A public hearing was held before the APC at their January 27, 1981 meeting to consider two ( 2 ) applications submitted by Tom Heiberg. The first applica- tion submitted was a request to ,.rezone approximately 36 acres from A to PD. The second application submitted is a request for a pre- liminary plat for the first phase of Galaxie Park Addition which will contain approximately 7.9 acres and contain 44 dwelling units. The APC is recommending approval of both applications to the City Council The City . Council considered the APC action at the February 17, 1981 meeting, and, since there were questions raised regarding the definition of condominium and, more "specifically, how the City defines an eight-plex if units are sold to the developer, the matter was continued. The item was then readdressed at the March 3, 1981 meeting by the City Council . There were still questions regarding the definition of condominium and how condominium should be inter- preted as to zoning classifications within Ordinance 52. Therefore, the APC was asked to address the definition of condominium. The APC, at their March 27 meeting, did review the condominium issue. The APC feels that a definition should be added to the zoning ordi- nance requiring an amendment. Once a definition is written and accepted as a zoning ordinance amendment, the mechanics of treating a condominium by either specific zoning classification such as R-4 or by means of a planned unit development exist within the language of the present zoning ordinance. Therefore, recommending no change to addressing condominium in the language of the ordi- nance. Definitions that were considered by the APC for condominium are as follows : 1 . "A form of individual ownership within a multi-family building which entails joint responsibility for maintenance and repairs; each apartment or townhouse is owned outright and each occupant owns a share of the land and other common property of the building." 2 "The individual ownership of a single unit in a multi-unit structure, together with an interest in the common land areas and the underlying ground." 3. "Real estate, portions of which are designated for separate ownership and the remainder of which is designated for common ownership solely by the owners of those portions. Real estate is not a condominium unless the undivided in- terest in the common elements are vested in the unit owners.11 �d� i Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Twenty-Three A copy of the City Planner' s report regarding this itemisenclosed on pages 107 through (-4- for your review. Minutes of the APC meeting of-27 81 are enclosed on pages � through /14 , .also for your review. If there is any additional information required, please feel free to contact the City Administrator' s office. ' ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE +MATTER: To address a potential amendment to the zoning ordinance. To either consider simultan- eously action on therecommendationof the APC to approve the re- zoning and preliminary plat or to continue that portion of the item until the zoning ordinance is properly amended. CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: REZONING AND PRELIMINAAPY PLAT - GALAXY PARK ADDITION APPLICANT: THCHAS HEIBERG LOCATION: , E' OF THE 9,1&4-, SECTICN 32 EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JANUARY 27, 1981 DATE-OF REPORT: JANCMM 22, 1981 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLAi�IlVER APPLICATION SUBMITTED The first application submitted is a request to rezone approximately 36 acres frcri A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Developr3ent District) . The second appli- cation submitted is a requet for a preliminary plat of the first phase of Galaxy Park Addition which will contain approximately 7.9 acres and contain 44 dwelling units. W'2= The subject parcel is the land which is west of Ridgecliffe Addition and south and east of the new alignment of Galaxie Avenue. The proposed planned develcp- rent consists of 35.7 acres and will contain 170 dwelling units. The overall density for the development is 4.76 dwelling units per acre. According to the propgsed Comp Plan, the land use indicated for this area is R-2 (Mixed Residential) with a density of 3-6 units per acre. The proposed planned develcgnent is within this density range. The proposed planned development will have three different types of housing units. The breakdown on this development is as follows: Land Use Acres Units Density Single Family 1.4 4 2.8 units per acre Duplex 10.1 46 4.5 units per acre Townhouse 18.6 120 6.4 units per acre Pbad Right-of-way 5.6 TOTAL 35.7 170 4.8 units per acre The applicant has done a very good job in the layout and design of the proposed planned development. The proposed plan shows the extension of Covington Lane to Galaxie Avenue. It also takes into -consideration Narvik Drive which also bisects the northeastern portion of the site. The applicant has pieced together sore of the land-locked parcels in 2idgecliffe Addition, which will make the land-locked �0� 0 • CITY OF EAGAN GALAXY PARK ADDI710N JANUARY 22, 1981 PAGE TP1O parcel developable at this time. The applicant is also proposing to put duplexes abutting the Ridgecliffe Addition, then moving to a higher density as you go west to Galaxie Avenue. All of the proposed land uses for the type of dwelling meets the zoning ordinance requirements for lot coverage and density. The R-3, or tamhouse development, is proposed to develop as either 6-plexes or 8-plexes. itch ever type of unit would occur, the develon.rert would meet the 6.4 dwelling units per acre. The applicant is also proposing to develop this planned develcp- nent with the passive solar concept. The buildings are all directed to rzxL-ize the angle of the sun for both summer and winter. The applicant has also indicated that the construction would be with 2 x 6 walls for maxirm n insulation versus the 2 x 4, which is presently the standard in the building code. PRELIMINARY PLAT FIRST PHASE The first phase of develolxnent will Contain 13 lots and 2 outlots. The area which will be developed will contain approximately 7.9 acres and contain 44 dwelling units. The area which is being platted will have access by a looped street which will connect to Galaxie Avenue. The aprlicant is also proposing to plat a stub street to Ridgecliffe Addition in order that Orrin Tharrscn can develop the almost land-locked parcel. Another stub street is provided on the southerly port-ion of the looped street, which in the future, will be a cul-de-sac searing the duplex units. The applicant is also proposing to plat Covington Lane extension frau the Rddgecliffe Addition to Galaxie Avenue. The entire 35.7 acres is taken up with the plat with the First Phase. However, only 7.9 acres can develop at this time without a re-plat of either one of the two outicts. The applicant is proposing to construct duplexes on Lots 1-4 of Block 1; Int 5, Block 1 will contain 4 townhouse buildings with 6 duelling units in each building for a total of 24 units. Lots 1-3, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 will be single family homes. Lots 1-4, Block 4, will also contain duplex buildings. The only lot which at the present time does not meet ordinance recuirements is Lot 1, Block 3. Pre- sently, this lot contains 11,100 square feet. In the future there xA ll have to be cooperation between Ridgecliffe Addition and Galaxy Park. There is a small triangle which should be traded by each one of the developers to make the lots conform to this addition. ','lith this additional triangle, Lot 1, Block 3 would then contain 12,150 feet, which is in excess of the square footage requirement for a single family residential home. The applicant has proposed a phasing plan for this development. The phasing plan will be done in three phases, the first being 1981-1982, the second, possibly 1981-1983 and the third phase being in 1982- 1986. The applicant is then proposing a 5-year planned development for Galaxy Park Planned Development. If approved, the planned developrrent should be subject to the following conditions: 1. A planned development agreement shall be drafted and executed with the City of Eagan. ....._ , `2. There shall be no more than 170 dwelling units allowable for construc+...icn within the planned development. 3. A detailed grading and drainage and erosion ccntrol plan shall be approved by City staff. 4. A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by the City staff, and a lard scape bond of $2,000 shall be required and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. J'a� CITY OF EAC'M C,AIA,.YY PARK ADDITION JAZIUARY 27, 1981 PAGE THREE 5. A cash dedication shall be dedicated with the platting of each phase. This dedication shall be based at the current park ded__cati.on rate. 6. The sidewalk shall continue on the northside of Covington Lane to Galaxy Avenue. 7. A hcmeowner's association bylaws shall be reviewed by the City staff before final plat approval. DCR/jac ENGL"IEERIN,G =I=ATIONS 1. A 5-foot concrete sidewalk must be installed as a responsibility of this developer along the northside of Covington Lane. 2. Drainage easeme-nt incorporating the 916.0 elevation for Pond AP-15 must be dedicated as a part of final plat, in addition to the ccrmon drain- age and utility easements adjacent to property lines. TAC/jac TO: ADVISORY PLANNING CazaSSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLA MM FROM: THOMAS A. COLB=, DIRECMR OF PUBLIC VORKS DATE: JANUARY 22, 1981 RE: PRELL"UMRY PLAT - GALAXY PARK ADDITION Public Works Department has the following camients to offer in regards to the proposed preliminary plat: UTILITIES Sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities of sufficient size and depth to service this proposed addition are anticipated to be installed during 1981 under Project 316. Public hearings for these public utility installations are anticipated to be held during April of 1981. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The overall drainage for this plat will be picked up by internal storm sewer laterals as necessary, and directed to the onsite ponding area which will have a controlled storm water outlet provided under Project 316 as discussed previously. STP=- AND TRAILjZ%YS Due to the configuration and topography of this parcel of property, the proposed cul-de-sac is acceptable as proposed to the Public Works Department. The developer is proposing to continue Covington Way frau Ridgecliffe 1st Addition to Galaxie Avenue. Although this is a minor collector, the proposed 60-1--oot right-of-way is acceptable as proposed. There will be a requirement for a 5-foot concrete sideaalk to be installed along the northside of Covington Lane. An 8-foot bituminous trail- way will be constructed along the eastside of Galaxie Avenue under Project 316 by the City. EASSEMTI'S AND RIGHTS-OF-1W Sufficient richt-of-way has already been acquired for the relocation of Galaxie Avenue by MUOII . Sufficient drainage easements must be dedicated to incorporate the 916.0 elevation of Pond AP-15. I will be available to answer any questions concerning this plat at the Planning ConT issiah Meeting of January 27. Respectfully submitted, /-Jl I�1111 Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jac " h An r ;tip ;• .�-. ..T .......... , / ;'lel \\, _ k'- j c it _ ��iJ 1�► i'--T roam I \•.`'�°""-��_ a!'�, '�: .yam-"�%%/ r , '� \r'.',1,� , !' ---- WIDt 41 13 WAY 5OUN ell fr-ga t . �� ' ��,.'i_y��r• i� - .tea.. ti�1��^�c�.'1� � � f lJ''�` ^ ��1\�I%/�•J•• b_.- _ /� �• %w+�,.. .�.�� ,�\,q�� f ��_� SJrtS- K..p{ YJ.Ir 1 �1 •,f � 5 t' %�/ `bit 50Lme ununs- i romp �� '`; �.r !, � �,�• �, 1 i , , >�= -._ !111111'\!" f {• x �--- 4 3 _ J�(J p�'YlE nrz -" V •'� :rK:a ..✓.�W .t l"!.-�•.:iX yy - •I.v r'A.�k: .. YJ _ •r '•uAKO'(A"COUNTY DdRK� , GAIRXY PRRK PUD mnn.minnESOTn lite analyiil/utilities DATE JAM./.1901 BY 1.1"IfID"SAKE It � 4 INA b � �r.•I r�' �T �`� moi•' ` //+.+_l�TURE-/CdMMERCIA�, L? KARIS WAY `�'•/ -�.. fir+ - w y , /�.-�(/ --� 'l�1<'�1 - '� �� 'yl1 �� _ r '� � •� ,� � �� 'T��' ! Wil`.. +fin qO n. ice. i t� J •\\ iso '� �`� / ,r i _ � � � 1 )..--•,."` \\(R 1�:' + '�,�o �fil '1�� '�' :rte � . \� (•. ,��, f i� , . Multiple!; MpQ ( ' i \ land use acruu unlis dunnity • � `-�_ r.ii ,bpi- -- - :'•t�� — Single Family 1.4 4 2.8 u/ac t ✓✓✓ 1 �` '" tTY Double , Doubles 10.1 48 4.5 urac 1, Med.Multiple IR-2) \ td.6 120 6.4 uiac 'J+AOd.Multiple (6x,8=) -5) ., ; v ��..� Road R.O.W. 5.6 �'+ `'• ' t l j \ �_ r / Total 35.7 170 4.8 21 + !• Med.Multiple / �__.�:Z r! ri —� > t---- — l Double 11981 82 i < 1 \ I (R-2) GTO W Mad.Multiple COVIN .� - 1981 — 83 1 tq t7. ! - (R- ............. i 1982 86 Double _r __ ._._`._._._.�I _._ ,_._..............._..�R'2), �! �' ` -.-.� .... .r:>....J .... ��-- DAKOTA COUNTY PARK t ( cranxY Pniti( PUte EAGMAIA OTA land we plan By lnnD*5111(E S phering o.rE JANuar '' •i �� '� � ,A',-raSY L eiC� j�+►,�I\�j �-1.1.11 - •�_ IVB � I ��_ \\r'�'�. �i,,' �.1 W�-c� < ` �''! o—�*+k sd�+'s` fir',`\ !.•�,� �._i� � :'smell !;+► J��, ,f/ :!( ��,. '�" - !`CdMME►��fA4 i• I;,• ,��. - ;..'�f(,- �...�. �.l'. , , ..� aRls war V �/�� - � i�j1 ��;� �ll,�l�ll 'f �� II ,l, ��ti�.`. �: ��iii'' �''� � 1�'��•� i �, �, �� •.!� � �,�! /� � ��,�1A� .�,i�' :y�,'. ��I(-.is .. 777!!' \.� \`1 ` �P I,f� f ��/ /i,/ //� a1 I u w ')tTl `~ �.r \ °`C♦ ^i-+I `l ° . SL 1. ' � 1 /, /,f(, ms's "� � �\�� .•� _•� �: /7 Ir +:I�`' . I - ,l t� � .4orgln4leeealleM, , �• �. •--•> ".1 i �� ►i �" q�i i1 i' ��1'�� d" , BL CK 3, Lu ; }� � `; �. , �1 l,�l ',i� ... 1. � ! I:t , � � �,_..,8 �- • H 1 \� is ��• ;,, ",�— '� OU or , �/, ,��i_ L ��" ��) ,l\•' 1 , _ ' .II �l . 'I� � `. =j - >�i len(.•� .>m .e. �. j ,� �vt - r i v.:� �, .•'/ \i �..`�._��—'_ �... TON ...�. ..(..1 COVING /... .e..(..) w.00 /� 1 III' �:'�j�i�• \I .` r E 1 /)I�!'--�.. , wrs'vi rrao '�'" r' �` 1(77 •�, •` OUTLOT 2 i \ ` '` ' .. .r n..00 •y 4 �' �. ,.w�. a, •' f`� G: - ur.la al s.soc = DAKOTA COUNTY DARK GnInxY PARK Pun EnGnn.minnEsoTn preliminary plot pa1E JAN. 16,1041 t3Y tnnn'SnI(E _ i' - .. . . . . . . . . .fit +Qc, t/ ........ ... .... ... . . . . ... . �� p t, . . . . . . ... .. .. .. . . .. . . .. .. ....... . . . . . . t 1 . ;' I•'•'•'-'-'•'•'•'. f _ I .7 Z: K: t_. .G7 t d' P - �. . : 1 / y / is a --NOF S A ES P�'W �;_' ' .'::. . ." . UTILITY �'.� .;'; i - .r I+ I I I {ll / +i 'I• �-t �•,,,.. ,' - ��.y '.iiil lii��'tu I 'il III,t,I�', �, +(.. �!�*'r•'. '�r.. PD LE � 7: �� II'�!I►'III�11��1;,� i! '� ; .;I. Ittlt. ,, .�. .� l"/� _ .1,:.-1�-•- T ��('1�• (� 1�11�� Itlll' !' `Illi �i;ll�1� •�.�(� �i<�",.,�� _ l �.r. (/,Q•q I �� .a�A� � I It,tit �� II 't j1�li _ r�•� . .: •i � ��r � T? U. - ......... RIVER M T EST + ENTER a:l SU8.'EGT c ✓ PpiRcE1 / �i o! r cza ' ;j.• ` � ,�,)t l�l}.�i.�� N t l��,J�•�+�l,- �� '1.J'j l;.J.r-..�{'•.1:.%J 1,}.�>✓�}�!rl �'),.) - � �t:L..;• - •_�-� ,; :1.)�J.�'�.)j�> 1�. '+I.rf��; y: � �� ;l��. y,I •.i;•,lam��• ,J.r.`+J fj ,'!,. '� � .�'• �, .,1;,� �=��rr}`J .,1��1-vJ fy, ., .S J �''w,.3,� .!. 1��.•' v♦. :�. � �J,�l .�. •i ,,'j `-3�.�� ,r,..'�.J..'•v-;.f.�+•�1� i.1-`,�'��.j,` �1 ��r t y` � •��'•"•t �•;.fry•�J_ Ji . ,,1 - ry.+a..)�...J j:��-.) -,-1�.)�� •.11' -'`/.,•1 �+�� ,r,V,y�y,•.♦�J.i. r! -.i I .�,:��..�„�� j' '�'�'.:.1;`��. .r') +)...+?� .s,,�i :til >� ��_,ly��j i ". J. ' :' 'Ii•• �S�ti ,vu:. • GALA%IE PARK ADDITION REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT The next hearing convened concerned the application of Thomas Heiberg for the rezoning of approximately 36 acres located in the east half of the north- west section . of Section 32 from Agricultural to Planned Development District and also for the preliminary plat approval of the first phase of Galaxie Park Addition containing approximately 7.9 acres and containing 44 proposed dwel- ling units. Stelious Astelinidos appeared for the applicant and discussed the proposal including the connection with several streets platted in the Ridge- cliffe Addition and also the 'fact that"thelat had been designed� ned to full g Y utilize passive solar capabilities. There was concern that sa ade me parking q P g spaces be provided as required by Ordinance and City Planner Runkle indicated that 2-112 spaces per unit would be required for the multiple dwellings. Member Krob discussed the need for one or more tot lots within the planned development and City Planner Runkle stated that the construction of tot lots have been imposed as conditions in similar developments located within the City. Member Wilkins indicated her concern that, should the cul-de-sac ex- tending between Blocks 2 and 3 not be constructed prior to the sale of Lots 1 through 3, Block 2, the applicant should inform the buyers of these lots that only temporary access will be allowed off of Galaxie Avenue. After further discussion, the Planning Commission took the following action: 1. Krob moved, Heywood seconded, that the Planning Commission recommend rezoning to Planned Development District subject to the following conditions: A. That the Planned Development be completed within a period of five years. B. A Planned Development Agreement shall be drafted and executed with the City of Eagan. C. That there shall be no more than 170 dwelling units allowable for construction within the Planned Development. D. That the underlying zoning shall remain Agricultural. All members voted in favor. �i S 2. Preliminary plat. A motion was made by Krob, seconded by Gits, that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the prelimi- nary plat of Galaxie Park Addition under the following conditions: A. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan, including the proposed elevation and location for garages on each lot, shall be approved by the City staff prior to final plat approval. B. A detailed landscape plan, shall be approved by the City staff prior to final plat approval and a landscape bond adequate to require compli- ance with the plan shall be required with each phase of development and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. C. A cash park dedication shall be dedicated with the platting of each phase. This dedication shall be based on the park dedication rate in effect at the time of final plat approval of each phase. D. The homeowner's association bylaws shall be reviewed by the City staff before final plat approval. E. A 5-foot concrete sidewalk shall be installed at the cost_ of this developer along the north side of Covington Lane. G. A drainage easement incorporating the 916.0 elevation for Pond AP-15 shall be dedicated as a part of final plat, in addition to the common drainage and utility easements adjacent to property lines. H. All other easements required by the City shall be dedicated as required by the City staff. I. Prior to final plat approval of the first phase, the developer shall submit for City approval a plan for the location of tot lots adequate to ser,:e the needs of the development. The tot lots shall be constructed at the developer's cost with the applicable phase of development. ' J. The developer shall dedicate a 40-foot half right-of-way for Galaxie Avenue south of the right-of-way acquired by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. K. The developer shall inform any purchasers of lots located in Block 2 that only temporary access will be allowed off of Galaxie Avenue and plans for permanent access off of the adjacent cul-de-sac shall be provided at the time of building permit request. 116 Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Twenty-Four COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN FINAL APPROVAL C. Comprehensive Guide Plan for Final Approval -- All the changes to the Comprehensive Guide Plan as authorized by the City Council were completed this past week by the Planning Consultant The City Planner has prepared a brief memorandum that makes reference to the changes and also p'rovides. . instructions as to how to incor- porate the new pages `into your Comprehensive Guide Plans. For a copy of the City .Planner' s Memorandum as prepared by the Planning Consultant, refer to the manilla folder found within your packet identified as Comprehensive Guide Plan Revision. Upon approval by the City Council, the City Administrator will deliver the Compre- hensive Guide Plan to the Metropolitan Council ,this week, ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the Comprehensive Guide Plan and authorize its submission to. the Metropolitan Council for the review process. REZONING/PRELIMINARY PLATCINNAMON RIDGE A. Zachman Homes, Inc. , for Rezoning from A to PD and Preliminary Plat of Cinnamon Ridge -- A public hearing was first considered by the APC at the February 24, 1981 APC meeting to consider applica- tions submitted by Zachman Homes, Inc. , for rezoning from A, Agri- cultural to PD, Planned Development', 72 acres and a preliminary Plat entitled "Cinnamon Ridge". A rather lengthy public hearing was held at that meeting, and, as a 'result, a number of questions were raised in the minds of residents and planning commission mem- bers. The APC continued the item until the March 24, 1981 APC meeting. Considerable information was again compiled by the City staff, developer and the adjoining neighborhood. The public hearing was again lengthy, with some two and half hours devoted to this item. As a result of the last public tearing, the APC took action to recommend to the City Council denial of the rezoning and pre- liminary plat. There were no reasons given by the Planning Commis- sion as to what should be considered by the developer if the land is to be further considered for development by Zachman Homes. Since the Planning Commission meeting, Zachman Homes has contacted the City staff and asked if revisions can be made to their existing plan that will make efforts to address the major issues that were raised by the neighborhood. It was the opinion of the City Adminis- trator that there was - no specific direction given by the APC as to what changes should be made; ,and, since the City Council has not reviewed the issue, it was not possible to provide that direction to the developer. However, the developer has attempted 11 Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Twenty-Five to address the issues he feels are pertinent to the applications by making various changes to the original plans. The two major issues that have been raised by the adjoining neighborhood are 1. Connection of Metcalf Drive from River Hills Ninth Addition to the proposed Cinnamon Ridge development. 2 . Enforcement of the 150' setback per minutes of a Town Board meeting held some twelve years ago, which is an issue to those residents in . the Burnsville area of the additional River Hills Additions The item has been quite controversial . Both the developer and the neighborhood groups have given excellent presentations as the City Council will witness in their review of the enclosed material. It has been difficult for the City staff to work with this issue. The City staff has attempted to practice a professional responsi- bility as it relates to the Metcalf Drive connection, expressing reasons why the connection should be considered. The neighborhood is strongly in objection to the connection and their position is certainly understandable. The River Hills Ninth Addition will receive services whether the connection is allowed or not; however, the City staff would be remiss in their duties if reasons for the connection were not outlined to the Planning Commission and City Council. The issue of the setback adjoining the Burnsville resi- dents is a matter of interpretation. The minutes clearly indicate the 150' setback will generally apply. Zachman Homes, Inc. , consi- dered a lesser setback in the original development that conforms with current setback requirements. The revision has been a compro- mise to 100' setback which is considerably greater than 30' and must become a judgment issue with the City Council as to whether 100' is considered to comply with the intent of the former Town Board. The City Council also maintains an option to overrule or change that motion after conducting research on the issue. There is considerable information relating ,to this agenda item. Because of the amount of information, it was copied with separate page numbers given in order that it could be copied before the rest of the packet information to expedite the assembly process. This t� 0 Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Twenty-Six information is found immediately following this page in your packet and is numbered pages Z-1 through Z-55. A Targe drawing that shows the alternative is enc o ed for your review on page IZo• This drawing can be compared to. the smaller copy of what was originally proposed` by Zachman. -- The enclosed information includes all the information supplied at both APC meetings and a letter that was received from Zachman `Homes this week addressing the changes they are willing to consider if the proposed development is to be con- sidered. Also enclosed are minutes from both the APC meetings on pages 12 i through ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To either approve or deny the recommendation of the APC or consider the changes presented by Zachman Homes, Inc. , along with other considerations by the City Council and send the matter back to the Advisory Planning Commission for further review and consideration. Special Note: Due to the length of the agenda, both Zachman Homes, Inc. , and spokesmen for the various neighborhood associations have been told that the City Counci cannot spend but a limited time to hear public testimony. They realized the public testimony under the definition of public hearing was offered at the Planning Com- mission meetings and most of that information has been available for reading by the City Council as a result of the minutes and other information. I � 9 I I OA Z I .. KENTWOODy� COURT m T Ml lj �r \ ', i , \j Ii I v >4'"�� d/ 1 — Y APC Minutes February 24, 1981 CINNAMON RIDGE -- ZACHMAN HOMES PLANNED DEVELOPMENT The public hearing regarding the application of Zachman Homes to rezone approximately 72 acres from R-2, Residential Double, and R-4, Residential Multiple, to Planned Development north of Cliff Road and west of Cedar Avenue was next convened by Chairman Harrison. Steve Ryan appeared on behalf of Zachman Homes and submitted a detailed analysis of the proposal dated February 16, 1981. He indicated that a neighborhood meeting had been held with the developer and affected area owners on February 22 at Mary, Mother of the Church. Mr. Ryan went into detail concerning the natural features, the nat- ural berm along Cedar Avenue and reasons for Limited Business zoning at the southwest corner because no natural berming exists. A large number of affected area residents were present from River. Hills 9th Addition and Birnamwood Addition in Burnsville. It was noted that Burnsville had vacated the connections of Kentwood Court and Perrot Lane which would have accessed to Cinnamon Ridge so that the only accesses would be from Metcalf Drive on the north and two accesses on Cliff Road. The staff recom- mended all three accesses be provided in the development. There was a ques- tion as to the rezoning provisions approved by the Eagan Town Board on August 5, 1969 and a copy of those minutes was distributed to each Planning Commis- sion Member. It was noted there was a new zoning application and the proposal was for a 25 to 50 foot setback in the new development from the west line. It was noted that School District 196 is the appropriate school district rather than School District 191 and also no park land is being recommended but that three tot lots would be provided in the subdivision. There was considerable discussion concerning the single family cluster as an alternative which pro- vided that the grounds and driveways would be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. Also eight unit coach homes were being proposed as mid-rise units along the east with the single family cluster along the west adjacent to Birnamwood. Area residents were present and generally objected to the proposal including the use of Metcalf Drive as an outlet to the north claiming that there would be excessive traffic created. There was also an objection as to the small amount of open space and the lack of an identified park in the development. There were concerns about terrain changes and fea- tures and potential drainage problems from the pond to the south of River 4 12-L APC Minutes February 24, 1931 Hills 9th Addition. It was noted that storm sewer has now been connected across Cedar Avenue and that the storm sewer drainage should correct any drainage problems. There was objection as to the Metcalf Drive possibly cutting a number of oaks at the northeast corner of the property and the fact that the development would take as long as six years to develop which could potentially create excessive noise, dust, etc. A petition was submitted by area residents to vacate a portion of Metcalf Drive from Clark Street to,'the north line of the proposed subdivision as the connecting link. Some residents indicated that they had insufficient time to review the proposal and suggested a continuance. Mr. Daniel Wertz, president of the River Hills 9th Homeowners Association, was present and listed certain objections to the proposal including the fact that there is only one outlet from the office park to the south, objections to density, traffic safety, etc. It was noted, however, that the land is already zoned R-4, and the allowable density could provide for up to 944 residential units according to Commis- sioner Hall with the proposal at present of 378 units. There was discussion concerning a possible way of controlling the traffic on Metcalf Drive to the north including signing and leaving the access for emergency and City vehicle purposes only. The phasing would begin at the southwest corner in the fall of 1981, move to the northwest area, then the northeast coach home area, and lastly the commercial area to the southeast. A sanitary sewer service for the northwest portion Would be requested from Burnsville and water service would be provided by the City of Eagan. The Park Committee is expected to recommend against park land being dedicated in the subdivision and that a cash donation be received in order to avoid duplicating services, to avoid small parcels, and also to avoid difficulty in maintenance of park land. There was discus- sion concerning the action of the Town Board in 1969 noting that a new appli- cation for rezoning had been submitted, the conditions have changed substan- tially, and that the recommendations made in 1969 were not necessarily binding upon the present City Council and Planning Commission. Harrison moved, Wilkins seconded a motion , to continue the public hear- ing until the next regular meeting for additional study including review of the road pattern, the grade of Metcalf, and to report back to the Planning Commission. The hearing continued until 11:20 p.m. All voted in favor. 22- 5 SUBJECT TO APPROVAL MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA MARCH 24, 1981 A regular meeting of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, March 24, 1981, at 7:00 p.m. at the Eagan City Hall. Present were Planning Commission Members Harrison, Krob, Wilkins, Turnham, Hall, Gits, and Bohne. Also present were Public Works- Director Colbert, City Planner Runkle, City Administrator Hedges, Mark Hanson of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Asso- ciates, and City Attorney Paul Hauge. AGENDA The agenda as presented was approved with the addition of consideration of a revision to Ordinance No. 52 concerning condominium developments and discussion regarding lot sizes under the City minimum size restrictions. MINUTES Wilkins moved, Krob seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the February 24, 1981 regular APC meeting. All voted yes. CINNAMON RIDGE REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT HEARINGS At 7:00 p.m. the Chairman then convened the continued public hearings regarding the applications of Zachman Homes, Inc., for rezoning from R-2 and R-4 to Punned Development District and preliminary plat approval of Cinnamon Ridge in the southwest quarter of Section 30 at the northwest intersection of new Cedar Avenue and Cliff Road. Steve Ryan of Zachman Homes was present as were a large group of neighboring residents both in the River Hills 9th Addition and from the Burnsville River Hills area to the west. Mr. Ryan made an extended presentation including the following issues. 1. Metcalf Drive Connection. 2. Setbacks along the Burnsville boundary. 3. Park and open space issues. 4. Tree preservation. 5. Cluster lot size issues. 6. Pond easements and dedication. Mr. Ryan showed an employment destination drawing and also a shopping destination layout. He explained in detail the destinations expected from the residents of the Cinnamon Ridge area indicating that about 10% of the traffic from the Cinnamon Ridge area would proceed north through River Hills 9th Addition. He stated the developer would not gain any street frontage in the 123 APC Minutes March, 24, 1981 Metcalf extension and displayed several alternates for the Metcalf Drive connection including a proposal which would eliminate the throughh street for Metcalf running southerly. . In regard to the setbacks along the Burnsville line, Mr. Ryan stated that in his opinion all regulations in each district must be uniform but plats can differ in conditions if reasonable but the plat restrictions may differ somewhat. He cited the setbacks along the Burnsville boundary in relation to the Eagan development and: stated the setback from industrial to residential in Burnsville is 30 feet whereas it is .140 feet in Eagan. Mr. Ryan also reviewed the park issue s and in addition the expected numbers of children of school age with anticipated 26 children under the proposed development. There would be three tot lots on site, open space within each of the single family clusters and additional park in the River Hills Park and Metcalf Junior High play area. Mr. Ryan also stated that the developer would not disrupt the trees along the Burnsville line -but-that they would remove the boxelder trees at the northwest corner because of the proposed pond location. The City has requested a larger pond in the northwest corner of the property and will pick up the inadequacies of the northeast pond with the 100 year storm design. There were suggestions that there be provisions for emergency access to the north and the City staff recommended access on Metcalf Drive particularly for emergency and maintenance vehicles. There is no plan for a signal at Cliff Road, but would be needed at some time in the future. Member Hall suggested modification of the connection and also modification of the 150 foot setback to a more reasonable setback. Mr. Richard Victor appeared representing residents in River Hills 9th Addition with a slide presentation and a written brochure distributed to Planning Commission Members. His position was a Planned Development cannot abrogate the existing conditions but that it could make better use of existing land uses. He was concerned about fire truck access to the homes in cluster developments off of public streets and detailed the vegetation, trees, ponds, aesthetics, setbacks, etc., objecting to certain aspects of the development. Mr. Carl Teske of River Hills 9th Addition also appeared and reviewed the traffic counts in the neighborhood brochure and requested that semaphores be installed at Cliff Road with the cost to be born by the developer. Mary Teske objected to the additional commercial land at the southeast corner indicating that there was more than adequate commercial property and office space in the area that is vacant at the present time. Also appearing were Pat Robinson regarding park issues, Tom Kennedy from River Hills 9th Addition, and John Kelly, a neighbor in Burnsville to the west, all of whom objected to a part or all of the proposed development. At 9:05 a recess was called and member Tom Gits arrived at the meeting. Mr. Krob stated that the 150 foot setback could be challenged by either the neighbors or the developer if the Planning Commission and Council revise the setback and further stated that there is no specific Council directive regarding additional commercial zoning in the City. Mr. Ryan stated the commercial area would be strictly for office purposes and no other retail 2 12� APC Minutes March 24, 1981 would be installed. It was noted that fencing could be installed in the cluster single family area with an architectural control committee making decisions as to the fencing. The cluster single family is a new concept in the metropolitan area with only one other project approved in Maple Grove for Zachman Homes. Chairman Harrison questioned the validity of the vacation of the two streets by the City of Burnsville in 1969 and stated that the Burnsville City Council perhaps did not follow the proper procedures in the vacation. In any event the vacated streets were included in the Burnsville Comprehensive Guide and on the plat indicating access into Eagan with the vacation thus cutting off two important accesses from the subject property. Member Wilkins opposed more commercial or office zoning and would prefer to see a change in the ordinance to provide for cluster zoning. Mr. Ryan stated the closest house would be 28 feet from the west line with an average setback of about 50 feet. There was also discussion con- cerning an alternate providing for moving Metcalf Drive to the east so as to avoid the destruction of the northeasterly pond and reducing the number of trees to be removed with the gas easement to be placed in the side slope of Metcalf Drive. A homeowners association would be set up immediately after completion of the first home according to Mr. Ryan. At 9:40 p.m. Wilkins moved to close the public hearing, Hall seconded the motion, all voted in favor. Wilkins then moved to recommend denial of the rezoning for reasons including those stated above and in addition the fol- lowing: 1. That the commercial development is not feasible in the development nor is additional commercial development necessary because of the heavy con- centration of commercial zoning and existing development in the City of Eagan. 2. That the zoning ordinance should be reworked to accomodate cluster zoning prior to the approval of any such single family cluster in the City so that the developer and the City can properly plan for such cluster develop- ment. 3. Cluster development does not fit under the R-2 classification at the present time. 4. The requirements imposed by the Eagan Town Board in 1969 are not being complied with in the proposal. 5. The objections of the surrounding property owners and other reasons cited by the Planning Commission Members and the property owners. Those in favor were Wilkins, Bohne, Harrison, Krob and Turnham. Against were Hall and Gits. Harrison then moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend denial of the application for preliminary plat approval for reasons including the fact 3 APC Minutes March 24, 1981 that the zoning revision has been denied and further that there does not appear to be sufficient access to the parcel from public streets. All voted in favor except Gits and Hall. RIVER HILIS 10TH ADDITION STREET VACATION Chairman Harrison discussed with the Planning Commission the vacation of a part of Kentwood Court and Perrot Lane in River Hills 10th Addition in Burnsville which had been vacated by the Burnsville Village Council on August 25, 1969. He requested the staff investigate the vacation further in light of the fact that the plat of dyer Hills 10th indicates platted streets and the importance for access to the proposed Cinnamon Ridge area. Harrison moved, Hall seconded a motion that the staff investigate the vacation of the streets in Burnsville mentioned above and report its findings to the Planning Commis- sion. All voted yes. OVERVIEW ESTATES REZONING — BARTON DUNN A public hearing regarding the application of Barton Dunn to rezone 14 single family lots from R-1 to R-2, Residential Duplex, in Overview Estates was next convened. Bart Dunn and Mark Dunn were present and reviewed the 2- 1/2 year old replat of Overview Estates requesting that Lots 1-7, Block 1, and Lots 1-7, Block 2 be rezoned. A number of adjoining property owners were present objecting to the application. Bart Dunn stated that the estimate for the assessment improvements was $6,900 with actual assessments of about $10,550, indicating that the assessments amounted to about 65% of the land value. The owners had suggested smaller lots, reduction in assessments or the revision to R-2 use. The engineering staff indicated utility services are adequate. The objections included the fact that the property had been repre- sented to be developed as R-1 and that there would be additional congestion including additional traffic. There is only one service per lot but the property is being served by a trunk line and two services could be installed. Wilkins moved, Gits seconded a motion to recommend denial because the property had originally been zoned for R-1 purposes, the neighboring property owners had assumed that R-1 uses would be developed on the property, and there are R- 1 homes basically surrounding the property, and the Comprehensive Plan indi- cates R-1 use. All voted yes except Krcb who voted no. TOMARL ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT The public hearing regarding the application of Tomark Development Com- pany regarding preliminary plat approval of Tomark Addition consisting of approximately 37 acres with 432 dwelling units was next convened by Chairman Joe Harrison. The first phase, consisting of approximately 10.6 acres and containing 144 dwelling units is the immediate plan for development. Mr. James Hill and a representative of Tomark were present. It was noted that a portion of the parcel was proposed to be rezoned for R-1 use in 1977 and 1978 and after the Council had denied the request in changing the use, the case was contested by the property owner resulting in a favorable decision from the Minnesota Supreme Court in early 1980 denying the change in use from R-4 zoning to R-1 use. Mr. Hill indicated the overall density would be 12-1/2 units per acre, there would be two swimming pools and four tennis courts, and 4 12� Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Twenty-Seven REZONING - OVERVIEW ESTATES B. Bart Dun for Rezoning from R-1 to R-2 in Overview Estates - A public hearing was held by the APC at their last regular meeting held on March 24, 1981 to consider an application to rezone from R-1 , Residential Single District, to R-2, Residential Double Dis- trict, lots 1 through '7 , , 'Block. 1, and Lots 1-7, Block 2, Overview Estates. There were a number of property owners in the area opposed to the rezoning. The application was denied by the APC, their recommendation to the City Council. The developer has submit- ted a letter to the City asking for a continuance on this item _ until theApril21 , 1981 City Council Meeting. The developer would like an opportunity to meet with the residents of the surrounding area and give them and the 'developer a better chance and opportunity , to express opinions on the zoning req nest. '. There seemed to be some misunderstanding in the mind of the developer as to how the residents interpreted his proposal . The residents have been noti- fied by letter from the City that this item is to be continued until the April 21 meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve a continuance of the recommendation of the APC until the April 21 , 1981 City Council meeting. PETITION TO VACATE METCALF DRIVE C. Petition to Vacate Metcalf Drive from Clark Street to South Boundary of River Hills 9th Addition -- The City ,has received a petition from many of the property owners residing in the River Hills 9th Addition asking to vacate Metcalf Drive (Clark Street to Southern Boundary) within the River Hills 9th Addition. This application was received on February 24, 1981 and the City Adminis- trator informed the petitioner that the item would not be considered by the City Council until the rezoning and preliminary plat for Cinnamon Ridge -was considered. Whether item A of New Business is approved or denied, careful consideration should be given as to whether a street vacation of Metcalf Drive as illustrated should be considered at this time. If a -plat or `development , is approved and a road connection is warranted,, , obviously consideration to vacate this street would not be• proper. The development is proposed with consideration given to a future connection to Metcalf Drive if required, then it would not be appropriate to consider such a street vacation. If a development is approved for the 72 acres that does not allow for any potential street connection to Metcalf Drive, then a street vacation would be an appropriate consideration. These considerations should be made at the public hearing if the street vacation petition is accepted. Enclosed on pages t a� Agenda Information Memo April 3 , 1981 Page Twenty-Eight through 0 is a copy of the petition. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the petition as submitted; and, if approved, a public hearing should be established to consider said vacation. iFOR CITY USE ONLY, .... .` Petition # Date Received �1 - PETITION Presented to Council LOCATION/SUBDIVISION Ri v--R I/we, the undersigned, owners of the real property adjacent to MET—C/)L.F jy,- (2LARK 5r - To Souri,�E,2N ayuyDtN�, _(Street) or within NiC.Ls 9 /4Do/r/cAt Subdivision, hereby petition for: Street improvements Sanitary Sewer Water Supply (Check requested items) Storm Sewer Street Lights Other (Explain) STREET VACATION X I/we understand that this petition does not in itself request the installation of these improvements, but rather, request the preparation of a feasibility report in which the estimated costs of these improvements will be tabulated. I/we understand that upon receipt of this petition and the preparation of the requested feasibility report, a public hearing will be held at which time we may voice our support or opposition based on the costs as prepared in said feasibility report. If the requested improvements are denied for construction at the time of public hearing, I/we hereby guarantee payment for all costs incurred in the preparation of this feasibility report. Signa re of Land Owner, Address of Property i Ae nea Ae V7" — - 5. — — X3216. !Z—ixC =� 7. ,a.1 3 8. ? �. m 600 3 6-A is a�6S11- R/< 6 L )�r/v s s ice- Al V3 kr b'1"'1 Z2�. C 43L3 irk dl� 13 Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Twenty-Nine SET P.H. FOR I.R. FINANCING D. Set Public Hearing for. Industrial Revenue Financing for Yankee Square Office III in the amount of $1,403,480 for 5-5-81 -- A letter and documents concerning industrial development revenue bond financing for Yankee Square Office III is in order for consideration A public hearing has been requested for the May 5, 1981 City Council meeting. All information concerning the application and support data will be provided as support information for the public hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER': To approve or deny the establishment of a public hearing for the 5-5-81 City Council meeting to consider industrial development revenue bond financing for Yankee Square Office Building III .` FINAL PLAT `- SAFARI AT EAGAN E. Final Plat for Safari at Eagan Addition -- All information relevant to the final plat for the Safari at Eagan is in order for consideration. The development agreement has been reviewed in detail by the City Attorney' s office and City staff and is in order for consideration. Enclosed on page 1 30Z is -a copy of the final plat for Safari at Eagan. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the final plat for Safari ,at Eagan. I3 t f ' _ - ..a s�"OHL — '- • ,_ - _ i 3 CD ! � a a I£ 1x • 1—_ � r ay N = 1 - '�•` �`-r��--tea- �� - Z di 13Z Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Thirty FINAL PLAT - TARA COURT ADDITION F. Fianl Plat for Tara Court Addition -- All information relevant to the final plat for the Tara Court is in order for considera- tion. The development agreement has been reviewed in detail by the City Attorney' s office and City staff and is in order for consi- deration. Enclosed on%pake _ISft is a copy of the final plat for Tara Court Addition, ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER To approve or deny the final plat for Tara Court Addition. X33 1 I' jj s,ist t43 if I i ii' 1: L 1' r is ildC} i i i� • J i CID J O :3. c Q O ,Vww T V 1` Z W C7 Z W W m O Z CL 134 i • Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Thirty-One DEVELOPMENT BOND REQUIREMENTS FOR POLICY REVIEW A. Development Bond Requirements for Policy Review -- At the March 17 City Council meeting, staff presented a report reviewing the existing financial guai4ntee policies required by development bonds as a part of the platting process At that meeting, the City Coun- cil requested that the report be continued until the April 7 meeting for further consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the proposed revisions to the development bond policy pertaining to financial guarantees. , T.H. 13/SILVER BELL ROAD INTERSECTION B. T.H. 13/Silver Bell Road Intersection Design Review `-- As a part of the final construction of the T.H. 13/Cedar Ave. Freeway interchange, the minor connection work of east Silver Bell Road with T.H. 13 will be required this spring. After several meetings with MnDOT personnel, the City Administrator and Director of Public Works conducted a meeting with the Cedarvale Shopping Center Mer- chants ' Association to discuss the proposed impact of this intersec- tion improvement. The residents were informed that, starting approximately May 1, 1981, -access to the Cedarvale Shopping Center via old T.H. 13 will be closed off for a period of one to three weeks while Silver Bell Road from new T.H. 13 to Beau D'Rue Drive is reconstructed. In addition, discussion was held pertaining to the installation of a raised median on Silver Bell Road through the intersection of old T. H. 13. The merchants expressed concern about the restricted turning movements that would result from this proposed median installation as shown on the attached drawings found on pages 13c through 15:3 It was explained that access to Cedarvale Shopping Center would still be allowed by way of old T. H. 13 but that egress from the shopping center to the new T.H. 13 would be directed to the Beau D'Rue Drive/Silver Bell Road inter- section. The Public Works Director will discuss in further detail with the Council the ramifications of installing this median as compared with providing a break at the intersection of old T. H, 13. A representative of the Merchants ' Association more than likely will be present to discuss their concernswith the City Council . Action is only required if a plan deviation is considered from the proposal presented by MnDOT. Therefore, . action may be consi- dered if the City Council requests a break in the median as promoted by the Merchants' Association. cr ( �I WQ J Q �� • J o[ ,l'd z W cr �O z �, Q J} J Q = — N -� Z Y �MtlHN 1 n lri > Q a `�+►r'Q `� W0 i� u 2 � i " j� ono 1 0o H .' N18 °C1 t7 Nd83S�O a w d, z �O x-13Mr - >p 8J S T Id 8 NO Q Q 1113NJt/W i I -lo f. 1�NOW� v GQ zo a 38nd3 m bJ GZ. .d-1 �W d 8 �o AK Hl W a w M Py cr z I crb3QldLo L v �p \ +- --- - NHV6 c -0 w � � O� av N Lj J % ti Zed \ > d LE n, o w! a�� Wdld Id T LAJ l _ cr. J 3N8V a d08. Z LL � � Oho;• � � o 1 \ 0 3 11 N3de1 �11f � !J n � ON�ddlal$ F¢ Y 086•0 w 1 + 1 1+f zo O u.- �h•Y. OW ' O • u I m ll a3dY1 I, sz la JowlNtln91 038 89+ ON3 LC. 11 a3dY1 I'Sd 1l 3N1r1 Nail N3 ON3 81• f • u t o 0 A CI x f h W V N Y1 N t` W n m V r 1C., N N •r, � � � a o Ya ar3/dV1 1.O2 938 '• O�d �j 1 1 Qe• m a, .p P p T 01 r-.9 1111 �I T J. S1 g gc�� _ __�� .��/ a ZI L tell Z I r 9Ila O/ yq� i�0. ` • N cd 'g A m Y1 Y�O Y h 1'• 1► N r• J - N u v Q - a � 1 I W� I 1 V 3 11 a3dv1 t•p ONy sG� 1 1 ii Ya a3dYl i�tZ'038 CN I �� uu _ _1 Vf W 1 �J I } -..O 83dr1 flNd,yl(u.134 w p. Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Thirty-Two STOP SIGN REVIEW FOR RAHN ROAD/BEAU D'RUE DRIVE C. Stop Sign Review for Rahn Road/Beau D'Rue Drive - With the increased development that has occurred in this general vicinity combined with the final design improvements for T. -H. 13 and the resulting traffic distribution, stuff feels that a four way stop sign at the intersection of Beau. p'Rue Drive and Rahn Road is war- ranted. The Merchants ' Association is in agreement with this recom- mendation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the installation of stop signs at Rahn Road and Beau D`Rue Drive. SPEED STUDY BLUE GENTIAN ROAD D. MnDOT Speed Study Request for Blue Gentian Road -- With the recent improvementsof T. H. 55 which resulted in a realignment of the intersection of Lexington Avenue, northbound Lexington Avenue now coincides with the intersection of Blue Gentian and T. H. 55. The Public Works Department has received numerous complaints about the confusion resulting from the relocation of Lexington Avenue resulting in northbound Lexington ,Avenue continuing on to Blue Gentian Road without the knowledge that this continuation is actually Blue Gentian Road. The Public Works Department has ordered oversize street identification signs identifying Blue Gentian Road in addition to the pending installation of a "No Through Traffic Local Traffic Only" sign to be installed under the Blue Gentian identification sign. ' Recently, the. City Council authorized the restriction of truck traffic on this section of Blue Gentian Road. However, residents of the area still notice continued excessive traffic resulting in excessive. speeds for this shortcut to T.H. 149 . Because this roadway does not meet the urban design criteria for a 30 mile speed limit, it is restricted to 55 miles ;per hour by state statute. Therefore, because of the 'improvement by MnDOT, staff is requesting Council to officially. request District 9 Traf- fic Engineering Department to perform a speed study to officially reduce the speed limit on Blue Gentian Road to 30 miles per hour. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny a resolu- tion requesting a study by MnDOT with consideration being given to reducing the speed limit to 30 miles per hour. Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page. Thirty-Three MAJOR STREET LIGHTING REVIEW E. Major Intersection Street Lighting Review -- The City Council and staff have received several requests for the installation of street lights at various major intersections throughout the City. Subsequently, the Council directed the staff to . review the street lighting needs throughout the City at the major : intersections and try to prepare a priority listing for their installation. The Director of Public Works is preparing a street lighting report that pertains to major intersections along with a street lighting layout map which will be available at the meeting on Tuesday. The approved budget for 1981 provided for approximately $4,500 to cover installation costs at major intersections of street lights. Depending upon the monthly energy rate, the City would dike to maintain in the future the number, 'of street lights that could be ordered for installation in 1981 varies. Hopefully, this report will help to evaluate and determine ' how many street lights over the next several years the City Councilwouldlike to have installed so appropriate future budgets can reflect the needs. Due to the length of the agenda, there may or may not be time to discuss this item in detail and action regarding the matter is uncertain depending upon City Council philosophy on this issue. CONTRACT 81-4 F. Contract 81-4, Approve Plans and Specifications and Advertise for Bids (Project 307, 324, 328 and 329) -- Contract 81-4 consists of the following project numbers, their respective locations and the date of formal approval at the public hearing: Project 307-St. Francis Woods 2nd Addition-September 16, 1980 Project 324-Safari at Eagan Addition March 17, 1981 Project' 328-Ches Mar East 4th Addition - April 7, 1981 Project 329-Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition - March 17, 1981 Plans and specifications have been prepared and are ready for soli- citation of bids. All easements associated by these projects and required for the installation of streets and utilities have been dedicated as a part of the final plat. Project 324 (Safari at Eagan) is contingent upon final' plat approval under a pervious agenda item. Project 328 (Ches Mar East 4th Addition) is contingent upon formal approval of a public hearing held earlier in the evening of April 7, 1981 . The easement required from School District 191 will be addressed by the School Board on Thursday, April 2, 1981 . The Director of Public Works attended that meeting to discuss the easement with school board officials. The Public Works Director ct. Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Thirty-Four will be available to discuss the status of the easement on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny plans and specifications for Contract 81-4, order advertising for bids with a bid opening scheduled for Thursday, April 30, 1981 at 3 :00 p.m. SP& AL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE G. Special Assessment Committee Meeting of 3-13-81 -- The meeting of the Eagan Special Assessment Committee was held on Tuesday, March 31 , 1981. The Committee chairman Don Knight was called out of town to North Platte,- Nebraska, to transfer a prisoner as a part of his Ramsey County Sherrif' s Office responsibilities. There were a number of issues addressed 1 y the Special Assessment Commit- tee and a copy of the minutes is enclosed on pages 1 lthrough ld� for your review. Mayor Blomquist and Counci m m b er Egan have ' had an opportunity to review the support information that was prepared for each of these items. Copies of that support infor- mation are found as a separate enclosure for City Council review and consideration. Due to the lengthofthe City Council agenda, it might only be possible to _consider some of the recommendations made by the Special Assessment Committee. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny recom- mendations by the Special Assessment Committee by consideration of their minutes. 140 f MINUTES OF THE EAGAN SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMNIITTEE EAGAN, MINNESOTA MARCH 31, 1981 A meeting of the Eagan Special Assessment Committee was held on Tuesday, March 31, 1981 at 4:30 p.m. at the Eagan City Hall. Those present were Mayor Blomquist, Councilmember Egan, Planning Commission Member Wilkins, Arthur Rahn and Dale Vogt. Also present were Public Works Director Tom Colbert, City Administrator Tom Hedges, 'and City Attorney Paul Hauge. Committee Chairman Donald Knight was absent. AGENDA Tom Colbert indicated that the request of Mr. Leonard Chickett for defer- ment under Ordinance No. 66 covering his property in Lakeside Estates under Project #241 was stricken at the request of Mr. Chickett. Wilkins moved, Rahn seconded the motion to approve the agenda as amended. All voted yes. THOMAS BALKER ET AL — PROJECT #241 ASSESSMENT REDUCTION REQUEST Mr. Thomas Walker, who lives on Golden Meadow Road near Dodd Road, was present on his behalf and adjacent property owners to request reduction of assessments both retroactively and for future assessment purposes upon grant of the pond easements. The other property owners are Armand Laurent, Thomas Murr, and Jack Germaine, all on Golden Meadow Road. It was noted that at the time the assessments were levied in the fall of 1980 the elevation of Schwanz Lake had not been determined and therefore the easement descriptions had not been prepared. It was necessary to determine the acreage for each and it is also understood that each property owner now agrees to the grant of an ease- ment in return for the waiver of all area assessments by the City. Mr. and Mrs. Laurent, Mr. and Mrs. Murr and Mr. and Mrs. Walker have signed the easements. The importance of acquiring the easements prior to May 15 was stressed. Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend approval of reduction of the assessments both for existing and all future area assessments on the area within the pond easement with the understanding that the legal descriptions had not been determined at the time of the levy of the assess- ments and further understood that easements for each parcel must be submitted prior to May 15, 1981. All voted in favor. HEIDE LAUER SCHIELA -- PROJECT #241 (DODD ROAD) Mrs. Heide Schiela was present regarding her request for reduction of assessments at her property located at 4420 Dodd Road. Her property was assessed in 1980 under Project #241 covering a 10.56 acre parcel with ponding area covering 2.6 acres at 18.0 water elevation and NSP easement encompassing approximately 3.96 acres. There is some overlap of the NSP easement and the pond area. Mrs. Schiela indicated she was not certain whether she would grant easements for the pond or for park and trail over the NSP easement area and it also is not certain as to whether the Park Committee desires a trail in that area. She indicated she does qualify for Green Acres and would apply shortly. There was a question as to what portion would be affected by the Green Acres, 1 however. Blomquist moved to defer the special assessments on the Schiela property for a period of not to exceed six months to determine whether the property qualifies for Green Acres and also to allow the staff to determine in negotiation with Mrs. Schiela whether she will grant a pond easement and also an easement in the NSP area for park and trail purposes, and further determine the impact of such grant of easements upon the Green Acres qualification; it being understood that in the event that these issues are worked out satis- factorily that the matter could then go directly to the City Council. Egan seconded the motion, all voted in favor with the understanding that a decision would be made by May 15, 1981. EUGENE HAM -- PROJECT #241 (DODD ROAD) Mr. Haeg was present regarding his request for reduction or postponment of assessments levied against his 5-acre parcel at the southwest corner of Dodd Road and Hackmore Drive. It was noted that the total assessments under Project #241 were $32,491.88 spread over 20 years at 8% interest. It was further noted that a reduction of assessments had already been approved by the City Council and that the parcel could be subdivided into perhaps five to seven separate lots with internal street construction. The zoning is agricul- tural. After discussion, noting that the property is subdividable and a reduction had already been granted, Egan moved, Rahn seconded the motion to recommend to the Council that no change be granted in the assessments, encour- aging Mr. Haeg to look at the potential for developing the property at some time in the future. All voted yes. FRED PIETSCH -- .PROJECT #241 (DODD ROAD) Mr. Fred Pietsch of 4275 Dodd Road requested deferrment of assessments due to financial hardship. He does not qualify under Ordinance No. 66 as a senior citizen but it was noted that he has been laid off and has physical disabilities seriously jeopardizing his ability to pay the assessments re- quired against the property. Blomquist moved, Rahn seconded the motion to recommend that because of financial hardship that the assessments be postponed for one year with reconsideration being given to future postponments at that time based upon additional information indicating continued hardship. Rahn seconded the motion. All voted in favor. DAVID MATASOVSKY -- PROJECTS #299 AND #304 (HORTHVIEW SCHOOL AREA) Mr. David Matasovsky was present regarding his request that the Assess- ment Committee recommend deferral of all assessments associated with the project for the installation of sanitary sewer and water main to Northview School which crossed the Matasovsky property in the fall of 1980. The staff had recommended that the assessments be cancelled until such time as actual connection to the Eagan sanitary sewer and water lines, which assessments would then be levied at the rates then in effect. Vogt moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the staff recommendation with the understanding that it is not intended to be a precedent. All voted in favor except Blomquist who voted no. ERAFST SCHINDELDECKER -- PROJECTS #254R AND #316 (SAFARI ESTATES AND GALA%IE AVENUE) The request of Mr. and Mrs. Ernest Schindeldecker to defer assessments 2 under Ordinance No. 66 based upon senior citizen qualifications regarding sewer and water trunk area assessments for Safari Estates and pending assess- ments for lateral benefit from sewer and water under Project 4316 covering Galaxie Avenue was next considered. Based upon information submitted-, staff recommended approval of the deferment of the existing and pending assessments as mentioned above. Egan moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to accept the recommendation and forward the recommendation to the City Council. All voted yes. L. J. PARKER -- PROJECT 201 (CLIFF ROAD) The request of Mr. L. J. Parker requesting consideration by the City that his assessment for trunk sanitary sewer in the amount of $1,604.80 be omitted from the assessment roles. The staff has recommended that the request be denied stating that Mr. Parker does not meet the financial hardship requirement under the Ordinance #66, and further that it is normal procedure to assess trunk sanitary sewer area charges for this type of project. After a brief discussion, Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend that no adjustments be made to the trunk sanitary sewer area assessment levied to the L. J. Parker property described as Parcel 020 01. All voted yes. MARY KENNEALY -- PROJECT 285 (WUTHERING HEIGHTS UTILITIES) The request of Mary Kennealy to defer utility assessments against her Parcel 020 78 in the amount of $5,766.00 under the financial hardship provisions of Ordinance No. 66 was considered. The staff indicated that during the acquisi- tion of easements to provide the sewer and water to adjacent property owners, it was assumed that Mary Kennealy would be able to meet this ordinance require- ment, and therefore she did dedicate the easements with the understanding that assessments would be deferred under Ordinance No. 66. After further discussion, the matter and the motion by Blomquist, Wilkins seconded the motion to accept the recommendation of the City staff that the assessment against 11ary Kennealy for utility improvements to Parcel 020 78 be deferred in accordance with hard- ship provisions outlined in Ordinance No. 66. All voted in favor. LEONARD CHICKETT - PROJECT 241 (.LAKESIDE ESTATES) Director of Public Works Colbert reported that Mr. Chickett had withdrawn his request for hardship since his property was recently sold. There was no action required on this item. DON WARKENTIEN -- PROJECT 304 (SCHkEDT ADDITION) Mr. and Mrs. Don Warkentien of 4135 Lexington Avenue South appeared requesting special considerations for proposed utility assessments against their property. After discussion of the matter and a motion by Rahn with a second by Egan, the north 150' and the west 160' was eliminated from trunk area consideration and lateral benefit from trunk assessment rates with the understanding that the southerly 215' of lateral benefit from trunk watermain would be assessed in addition to the installed water service and the assessable area used to calcu- late the trunk area water assessment would be defined as the easterly 500' of the southerly 215' of Parcel 031 76, which would encompass approximately 2.47 acres for assessment purposes. All voted in favor. 3 TRUDI JOHNSON -- PROJECT 241 (DODD ROAD) The notice of appeal of special assessments levied against Trudi Johnson was re- viewed in detail. The basis of the appeal is a claim that the property does not benefit from the amount of the assessments ($32,323.61) in addition to the lack of a publicly-dedicated ponding easement over the property. The staff stated that the assessments as discussed have been levied and certified at the County and have appeared on the 1981 tax statements. It was also discussed that if the ponding easement were to be dedicated to the City with a configuration accept- able to both parties, the resulting net acreage could be deducted for future assessment calculations. Public Works Director Colbert further stated that if the dedication of this ponding easement creates a certain amount of frontage on Dodd Road that would be coAsidered unbuildable, this area could be excluded from future assessments. However, ,since this easement had not been dedicated at the time of the final assessment hearing, these credits were not allowed. If these easements were to be dedicated at some future date, the staff would like to re- ceive a recommendation pertaining to retroactivity of credits associated with these easement dedications. In any event, the condition of accepting the ease- ments and reducing any assessments should be contingent upon dismissal of the outstanding appeal. Assessment Committee members were told that of the approx- imate 800 feet of frontage for this parcel for sanitary sewer only, 380 feet were assessed. Additional benefiting footage for sanitary sewer lateral should be considered in any future assessment adjustments. Due to the complexity of the issue, and after considerable discussion in the matter, a motion was made by Egan, seconded Rahn that due to the complexity of the issue and the formal notice of appeal of special assessments, there was no recommendation provided to the City Council. All members voted in favor. DAVE GABBERT -- PROJECT 261 & 301 (CHES MAR EAST 1, 2 & 3) The request of Dave Gabbert to spread assessments for public improvements for a 15-year period of time rather than five years for the Ches Mar East lst, 2nd and 3rd developments was considered. The City staff stated that a recent policy was established whereby all streets and utilities installed in new-developed subdivisions are spread over a minimum of five years. It was also pointed out that the public improvement bond issue approved for funding these projects was set for a debt retirement amortization of five years. With those understandings and a motion by Blomquist, seconded Egan, it was recommended that 11r. Gabrert's request be denied due to the financial hardship such a variance would create on the public improvement funds of the City. All members voted in favor. PONDING EASEMENT POLICY Public Works Director Colbert discussed the ponding easement policy and asked that the formal consideration be given by the Assessment Committee to its adop- tion. A motion was made by Blomquist, Rahn seconded, that a ponding easement policy be approved by the City Council as prepared by City staff. Dated: March 31, 1981 PHH City Clerk 4 Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Thirty-Five TERMS OF AMORTIZING I.R. BOND PLACEMENTS H. Industrial Revenue Bond .Placement/Terms of Amortization -- Questions have been raised by applicants , fiscal consultants and the. City Council concerning the necessity of creating guidelines to handle self-amortitng for the term of industrial revenue bond placements. The City Administrator held a meeting with representa- tives of -Miller & Schroeder Municipals Inc. and the City Attorney to discuss this issue. Enclosed on page 1+/. is a copy of a memo- randum that outlines the recommendation ate—position of the City Administrator and City ,Attorney on this item. The City Attorney will discuss the matter in further detail at the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the City Administrator regarding criteria for the term of amortizing debt for industrial revenue bond placement. 14 s" • • MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: MARCH 25, 1981 SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND PLACEMENT/TERMS OF AMORTIZING A meeting was held on March 25, 1981 with Warren Preeshl and Ernest Clark of Miller & Schreoder Municipals, Inc. , Paul Hauge, City Attorney, and the City Administrator, to discuss the necessity of creating guidelines to handle self-amortizing for the term of industrial revenue bond placements. After discussing the issue, it was generally agreed that the City should judge each issue on its own merits. That is, depending upon the applicant involved, the City would determine requirements as to the terms of amortizing the revenue placement. If guidelines are established for the self-amortizing of the revenue placement, flexibility on the part of the City is lost regarding this issue. Mr. Jerry Leimer, senior attorney for Economics Laboratory, Inc. , has raised the question with the City regarding the City's position on how the self- amortizing should be structured for the permanent financing of the revenue bond placement. Whether a self-amortizing schedule is presented on a straight line twenty-five year amortizing schedule or a twenty-five year amortization with a ten year balloon or any other combination should not be of any real concern to the City. How this debt is retired is an issue with the financial institution which lends its money under the private placement. In the case of Economics Laboratory or Carson Pirie Scott, a self-amortizing schedule is incidental due to the corporate strength provided by both companies and their ability to pay off debt at most any time during either the temporary financing or permanent financing. On the other hand, in the case of a shopping center issue, as an example---Pilot Knob Associates, a self-amortizing schedule, that is practical and feasible, should be recommended by our fiscal consultants. In other words, a twenty-five year amortization with a three to five year balloon may not be possible and therefore should not be considered or allowed by the City, but a ten or fifteen year balloon may be acceptable.. In summary, it was felt that a preliminary resolution, once approved by a City Council, should be conditional upon the City reviewing the final amortizing schedule for short term and also permanent financing for the applicant. Once a preliminary resolution is approved by the City, a financial institution will then work with the applicant on a self-amortization schedule which should be reviewed by the City's fiscal consultants and an opinion given as to whether that schedule is practical or not for the issue in question. Therefore, the details of the amortizing schedule is to be considered on an issue by issue basis. City Administrator ;t Agenda Information Memo April 3, 1981 Page Thirty-Six HISTORY COMMITTEE UPDATE I. History Committee Update City Councilmember Wachter asked that this item be placed on the agenda. The City Administrator has contacted the Chairman and representatives of the History Com- mittee on various occasions, asking that the history be finalized so the City can procee4, with final plans for preparing its documen- tation. City Councilmember Wachter has suggested that the history be completed within the next several months so it is available for publication and recognition when the new library is opened in our community. It might be helpful to assign an intern to this project, which would expedite its completion. If the City Council has any thoughts on this matter, it would be helpful to discuss those procedures so we can guarantee the completion of the Eagan history. City Administrator 147 TO: JOE HARRISON, CHAIRMAN, AMID THE ADVISORY PLANNING C "IISSION FROM: DALE C. R NnE, CITY PLANNER DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 1981 RE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THE ZACHNAN HOMES APPLICATION As stated in their report prepared by Steve Ryan of Zachman Hanes, the City staff would only like to add to the information submitted in the report which has been enclosed in the packet. Staff feels that the report is accurate and there has been a lot of work put into this document to supply the Advisory Planning Camuis- sion and City Council with information regarding this proposed development. The first application which has been submitted is an application for rezoning approximately 72 acres frau R-2 (Residential Double District) and R-4 (Residential Multiple District) to a Planned Development, which would allow 64 single family cluster units, 66 twinhane units and 31 eight-plex buildings, or 248 dwelling units for a total of 378 dwelling units. The second application submitted is a request for a preliminary plat which would allow the first and second phase of development to be platted at this time. Phases three and four will be platted as outlots and will have to be replatted in the future before development can occur on these outlots. In reviewing the plan, staff had concerns as to access to the property. In first reviewing the overall proposal, staff had suggested to the developer that the developer tie into as many connections, or stub streets which have been provided around the surrounding developed property. After this discussion, staff has learned that the stub streets which extend from Burnsville, or on the west side of the proposed development, have been vacated and no longer can access be obtained to either one of these two streets. Therefore, the connections which have been propsed in the Cinnamon Ridge Addition to Burnsville should be cul-de-saced in- stead of showing the through-street connection. Exhibit G in the Zach¢nan report should be corrected to show this cul-de-sac street. The main access to the site will be frau Cliff Road. There will be one full movement access, which is the street to the eastern side of the property. The applicant proposed a second access a little bit west of the proposed full movement street. Staff is suggesting that this street be limited to a right-turn in and right-turn out movement to protect the traffic flows on Cliff Road. This plat has not been reviewed by the Dakota County Plat Camtission. Therefore, the proposed subdivision will be subject to Dakota County's comments for the street movements. In reviewing the density of the development, the present zoning is R-2 (Residen- tial Double District) and R-4 (Residential Multiple District) . According to this present zoning, there could be a density range of 650-700 dwelling units on the proposed site. According to the proposed planned development, Cinnamon Ridge, the developer is requesting to construct 378 dwelling units, which is a substan- tial reduction than what would normally be allowed according to the zoning dis- trict. In the single family cluster area, the developer is proposing 64 dwelling units on 12.75 acres. The density is 5 dwelling units per acre with a lot cover- age of 17.2%. The twinhare units are also proposed at a density of 5 dwelling units per acre and would have a lot coverage of 11.8%. The 8-unit condos are proposed at 9.6 dwelling units per acre with a lot coverage of approximately 21.6 . Z • CITY OF EAGAN ZACHMAN HOMES APPLICATION FEBRUARY 24, 1981 PAGE TWO The 8-unit condos exceed the 20% lot coverage requirement because of the detached garage space for each dwelling unit. The applicant is also requesting approxi- mately 12.3 acres of office-commercial in the southeastern portion of the develop- ment. The reason the request for the office-commercial is that a land-use buffer instead of a physical or buffer would be the best way to develop this portion of the property. Due to the noise levels which are expected on this area of the property, the commercial proposal is a- logical use to buffer the residential area. In reviewing the proposed planned development according to neighborhood needs, the Comprehensive Plan does not show a neighborhood park in this proposed planned development. When staff reviewed the neighborhoods for park locations, staff deterntined that the terrain was severe, and it was difficult to provide a neigh- borhood park within the Cinnamon Ridge development. Therefore, in accordance with the Comp Plan, the staff will be suggesting to the Park Committee that a cash dedication per unit be obtained instead of obtaining land dedication. The Cinnamon Ridge planned development is scheduled for the March 5, 1981 Park Com- mittee meeting, therefore, no official park action has been taken on this plat thus far. Staff is recommending, however, that Cinnamon Ridge Planned Develop- ment provides between two and three tot lots within the development. The tot lots will be maintained by the Homeowner's Association and will provide the need for the pre-school children within this neighborhood. Presently, staff is work- ing, or looking for, trail connections to the Metcalf School and also to a neigh- borhood park within Burnsville to provide the active recreational needs within this development. If the planned development is approved, it should be subject to the following conditions: 1. That a 75-foot half right-of-way be provided for Cliff Road. 2. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be approved by the City staff prior to any construction on the proposed site. 3. A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by the City staff, and an ade- quate bond shall be provided and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed.. 4. A planned development agreement shall be prepared and approved by the City of Eagan prior to any construction on the site. 5. The plat shall be subject to Dakota County Plat Ccnmission and the Minnesota Department of Transportation, because the proposed site abuts County and State rights-of-way. 6. 3 tot lots shall be provided within the development, and an adequate bond shall be posted to insure the installation. 7. The developer shall provide garages for all the single family clustered units as shown on the site plan. The developer shall also provide one garage space and one parking space for each one of the condominium units within the proposed development. The developer shall also provide � parking space in reserve for each condominium unit. When developed, the City will have the authority to require the developer to install that space per unit if needed. 8. The planned development should be for a maximum of six years, and if the planned development is approved, the underlining zoning should be removed and have an agricultural base. DCR/jac :Z Z_ CITY OF EAGAN ZACBMAN HOMES APPLICATION FEBRDAF& 24, 1981 PAGE THREE ENGDUMU G RECOMMENDATIONS 1. A miniim n 75-foot half right-of-way must be dedicated adjacent to Cliff Road. 2. An 80-foot internal right-of—way Waist be dedicated for the proposed Sunset Drive. 3. The cost of over-sizing the residential street of Sunset Drive be the re- sponsibility of this developrent. 4. The proposed onsite drainage and ponding area must be enlarged to incorpor- ate a minimum of 9.0 acre feet storage capacity. 5. The construction of Sunset Drive to its ultimate design width must be ccut- pleted prior to, or coincident with the second phase development. 6. An 8-foot bituminous trailway must be constructed adjacent to the south boundaries of this plat along Cliff Road. TAC/jac 7Z T0: PLANNING C (MISSION, C/O DALE C. RJNYLE, CITY PIXDNM FROM: THONG A. COLBER7T, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 1981 RE: PRMX4MU1M PLAT - CDNII M RIDGE Public Works Department has the following comments to offer for consideration of the preliminary plat application: UTILITIES Trunk sanitary sewer of sufficient capacity to handle this development was recently installed under the new Cedar Avenue Freeway to the east boundary of this proposed plat. In order for the entire 72 acres to drain into this trunk sanitary suer, additional fill would have to be placed in the northwest corner of this proposed plat to provide the proper elevations for gravity-flow sewer system. Consequently, the developer is proposing to drain the northwestern portion of this plat into the existing sewer of River Hills 9th Addition. This sewer is part of the Burnsville sewer collection system. Prior to the Planning Camuissian Meeting on February 24, a meeting will have been held with the Engineering Department of the City of Burns- ville to review existing available capacity as it pertains to handling this addi- tional sewer flow from this proposed develogrent. If the capacity is not available the developer will have to perform whatever grading is necessary to serve the en- tire 72 acres with the existing trunk sanitary sewer under the new Cedar Avenue Freeway. Tank watermain facility is available at the south end of this proposed develop- ment of sufficient size and capacity to handle the proposed densities. It is anticipated that an interconnection with the Burnsville water supply system will be performed with the development of this plat to insure emergency water supply should either system fail. This interconnection will be valved off to eliminate any daily cross-flow of water supply. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The general topography of the land provides for drainage frau south to north. Under the City's Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan, the City had Proposed a ponding area within the NSP easement along the northern edge of this plat. However, during the construction of several hares in the River Hills 9th Addition on the south side of Clark Street, we have not been able to reserve the required ponding capacity necessary to handle drainage from these 72 acres. Consequently, the developer is proposing to create an onsite ponding area in the northwest corner of his plat to handle the majority of the drainage. This Pond would then haVe an outlet to the existing limited drainage basin within the NSP easement. This existing drainage basin has recently had a positive storm sewer outlet installed during December of 1980. However, the proposed onsite ponding area within this subdivision provides for approximately 5.7 acre feet of storage capacity. This pond will have to be enlarged to provide for a minimum 9.0 acre feet of storage. Developer has provided a plan to control erosion during the grading construction activity of this development. CITY OF EAGAN CINNAMON RIDGE - PUBLIC WORKS DEPAFt7.T+l U FEBRUARY 19, 1981 PAGE TWO EASEMENTS AND FLIGHTS-OF-WAY Although MnDOT acquired additional right-of-way adjacent to Cliff Road as a part of their new Cedar Avenue Freeway, additional right-of-way will have to dedica- ted to provide for a 75-foot half right-of-way along Cliff Road. Adequate ponding easements will have to be dedicated upon the determination of the final configuration and elevation of the onsite ponding system. All other normal drainage and utility easements over cmucn property lines will required as usual. STREETS The proposed street layout provides for 3 cul-de-sacs. The westerly cul-de-sac (Cinnamon Circle) is unavoidable due to existing topography and the vacation of the previous dedicated stub street frcm Burnsville to its west property line. The two northerly cul-de-sacs are necessary due to the required ponding area in the northwest corner, and the location of the Northern Natural Gas easement which prohibits a possible realignment of the proposed Metcalf Drive. All internal streets will have a 60-foot dedicated right-of-way common to normal residential street design. However, Sunset Drive is anticipated to be the major access street for this subdivision onto Cliff Read. Its location is designed to be opposite the existing frontage road on the southside of Cliff Road. It is anticipated that as future traffic volumes warrant it, a signalized inter- section will be created at this location. Because this is anticipated to be the major focal point for traffic distribution for this plat, an 80-foot right-of- way will be required for Sunset Drive from Cliff Road to Cinnamon Trail to pro- vide for a 48-foot mirror collector street. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS The single family cluster home concept is a new one within the City of Eagan. It provides for a series of private drives providing access to the several individual homes. This appears to be similar to the existing townhome concept with the exception that individual units are not attached to each other. We understand that a similar homeowner's association would be formed between the affected single family properties to insure proper maintenance and accessibility to the individual units. The engineering department has no technical objections to this new concept. Except for the layout design of these cluster homes, it appears to be similar to the recently approved Ridgecliffe 3rd and 4th Additions. I will be available to discuss in further detail any concerns pertaining to joint use of utilities with the City of Burnsville or any other aspect of this report at the Planning Commission Meeting of February 24, 1981. Respectful y submitted, le4lO omas A. Colbert, P.E. • S Director of Public Works TAQ/jac _ s � t `""�"^ � . j � ,•�` _,'�,,�: tri _ 5 ,�- I (' '' •a 3 •. �CCa ti -t .�� i I KkNTWOO '! _ COURT It- p- 115 ate•#�-C /;� � � o,.. - , , �. 1 / a /r t �{ '� z- �- d _.�/' �C � I �� • - tea`' ✓1 i.�li 1�f f j Fg90/ . f7 i I/ / a/ y _ f`li+, e p ! 1 " r._��S 1 ;• .� � � ��\ I ��' III 11�1'" N i o- �t { Q i l' ✓tj SII iI h r P. W-3 a s V � ' /t:D , li ' s < It iA LA .- •.__. C.S3.N.31 _ --• (CLIFF ROAO� CZ sO z z A Cinnamon J�Cldge F'OOM2-� ZACHMAN HOMES Feb. 16, 1981 Honorable Mayor & City 'Council City Planning Commission City of Eagan, Minnesota Dear City Officials: As we near• the completion of Cedar Cliff, we look forward towards a new opportunity in which we can assist in facilitating the City's long term housing objectives. Over the past eighteen months both housing costs & interest rates have persisted in their general upward climb. Zachman Homes, Inc. like most builder s, has been forced to carefully analyze the future of housing and define the housing styles which be-t match the needs of new home buyers - in price ranges which are practical . In response to this task, we have , created several new innovative additions to our housing product line. The newest additions are the single family Cluster home and the Coach home ( 8 unit condominium), both of which we are proposing in our new subdivision "Cinnamon Ridge." It is our impression that these two styles, or slight variations, will become trend setters for a new era in midwestern housing design. Since the Cinnamon Ridge site is unique with many unusual features, we feel that its design potential is equally as exciting. Our proposal , as described in the following pages, attempts to capture the unique qualities of site and provide highly desirable and complimentary additions to the Eagan and Burnsville communites. We look forward to an opportunity in which to present our efforts. Respectfully; = ZACHMAN HOMES, I yan 4Dire of Subdivtons Z — g INTRODUCTION Applicant & Contract Owner: Zachman Homes, Inc. 7760 Mitchell Rd. Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 Fee Title Landowner: Hillcrest Development Co. Capital Square Building St. Paul*, Mn. 55101 Site Description: The subject site is comprised of approximately 72 acres located north of Cliff Road (abutting), west of the Trunk Highway 77 (abutting) and legally described as follows: That portion of the Southwest quarter of Section 30, Township 27, Range 23W, lying west and north of Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of way -Plat No. 19-10 according to the plat thereof on file and of record in Book 19, page 10 of Highway plats in the office of the County Recorder for Dakota County, Minnesota, except the south 241 feet of the west 181 feet of said southwest quarter of Section 30. Action Requested. Approval of planned development zoning and concept for the entire site; and preliminary plat approval for Phase 1 & 2 of the project (Western portion of the site). c 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing conditions both internal and external to any site tend to define the framework in which its development will eventually occur. In particular these conditions may significantly enhance future develop- ment or in some cases create constraints which require unique design treatment to resolve. The primary conditions which affect the future development design of Cinnamon Ridge are as follows: Environmental Factors: 1 ) Soils: The predominant soil types common to this geographic portion of the Eagan/Burnsville area consist of DesMoines Clayey glacial till and Superior sandy till . Both soil types have the general characteristic of moderate load bearing capacity and as such, present little, if any, constraint to development with light footing loads. 2) Tree Massings: Natural tree massings are relatively scarce on the subject property, with their existence being confined primarily to the few low areas of the site and along the site's southern & northern borders. 3) Topography: The land form of the site can best be described as rolling, though with a general downward slope from South to North. More specifically the high point elevation on the South portion of the site is 92 feet higher than the low elevation along the site's northern border. The site has a slight bowl shape from east to west preventing complete exposure to the new Cedar freeway on the east. 4) Gas Line: A 70 foot wide Natural Gas line easement traverses the northern portion of the site. This easement represents a significant design constraint as the shallow depth restrictions of the 16 inch gas line controls the grading flexibility over nearly one-half of the site. Beyond the obvious visual effects of the easement on subdivision layout it should also be noted that the grading restrictions indirectly create effects on house style choice, sewer feasibility, storm sewer design, etc. Land Use/Zoning As there is no formal interim land use for the subject site (such as agriculture) the discussion of existing land use conditions is confined solely to the factors of surrounding land use. As noted on the following exhibit surrounding-land uses consist of low density residential to the north and west of the site and-non-residential land uses (commercial ) to the east of the site. While undeveloped at this time, the property to the south of the site is proposed as a mixture of residential and non-residential land use. Z .. /o 2 LD aEs- UH0 VACANT C.SHH " 30 ANcl 4C- P ! LD 0 I ! v R E5. d } VACANT ..31 '1 z LD I 6c � � VACANT � s�P vA�1W1' � r LP �;� RES. 8 site a v�AK p � 3 LD / o vx�w Irk 1` / < VACANT" � �� co¢ As SV \ ` I' V O L L F F t o P.D VACANT NC/A[ Coll 1 5FAY,L D RES'. VACANT , 0 ac / m z z =' Y V' KEY t NC• NEIGHKWHO1D AG= AGRICULTYEAL qj C ),%WLRClAL LD = LOW DENSITY GC• GENERAL MD ` MEDIUM COMMEK IAL I7EN5I T .�ctSTtt4 el LRS Usk AC- AVTC PEIFENi,Dir 41? = HIGH CGMlAERCiAL DENSITY OC : OFFICE CCMMEF)CIAL .Z •,,, ' P • PUFLIG Existing zoog of the subject site is divide between R- 2 (medium density) and R-4 (high density) residential districts. The division line runs north/south through the site and cuts the site roughly in half. (Exhibit B) An analysis of the zoni ordinance provisions as they relate to the development potential of the site is outlined below: Zoning Site Ordinance Probable Total District Acreage Permitted Density Range * Density * Unit Potential R-2 40 Acres 3-6 du/acre 5 du/acre 200 R-4 32 Acres 12-22 du/acre 14 du/acre 448 Total dwelling units 648 * The Eagan Zoning Ordinance allows certain densities based upon the specific type of actual building. The probable densities indicated and used for actual calculation of unit potential provide a more specific reflection of the type of development which would be common to Eagan. As noted above the existing zoning for the site would permit construction of two family dwellings and three story apartments at normal density ranges resulting in roughly 650 dwelling units for a gross density of 9 dwelling units per acre. This intensity of development would be characterized as moderate overall and fairly compatible with surrounding land use intensities given the configuration of the two zoning districts. c Z - I Z 4 H� I � R-i GB 0 1 Po Ro + R D L 1 Na C �H A� RD �r� Re B-2 • ' h Rn_y RD PP U � R-1 R4 SI E: a csc � o R° � Y i P � R-2 v PD / 3 a A 0-3 9-3C - JI' � � � � � � i�1� im¢ R-2 'SIG i� , ` I CLIFF AO AS; r I RB I Le RD A it D►, ,, po / R-ic i 3I L� jl \ 7 , Y �• l )v CD Z: r xISotJ� -zo�1I�C� 2 -• � 3 _ - Transportation Existing transportation conditions undoubtedly have the greatest impact upon the site. Directly to the east of the site is the new Cedar Freeway (Trunk Highway 77) which when complete will carry over 50,000 cars per day. The new freeway is four lane divided, with restricted access. Posted speed limits will be 55 MPH. Cliff Road is an overpass intersection with new Cedar incorporating a diamond interchange. Cliff Road, itself, is another high volume traffic carrier with nearly 10,400 average trips per day currently (at the Burnsville/Eagan border). The capacity of Cliff Road according to the Dakota County Highway Department, is just over 25,000 ADT which could be reached easily by the end of' this decade.' The interchange at Cliff & new Cedar will assist greatly in funneling traffic, which will , in turn, make it a more attractive route and consequently raise the traffic volumes on Cliff Road. The status of both new Cedar and Cliff Road are of major significance to the site in that no direct access is permitted from new Cedar and access from Cliff Road is carefully controlled to protect its functional capability. On the north end of the site one unimproved stub access street exists from River Hills 9th Addition and on the site's western border one improved stub access street exists, permitting interconnection from an established Burnsville neigh- borhood. While access to the site is constrained, it appears adequate for moderate intensity uses. The connection points from the existing neighborhoods of Eagan & Burnsville could serve to allow additional means of access for those neighborhoods and would likely assist in improving emergency vehicle access. Since the most direct access to a major road (Cliff Road) occurs on the site, neither neighborhood interconnection point would improve access for traffic occuring on the site and thus would not likely be chosen as a practical means of access to or from the site. From a negative standpoint the proximity to the two major transportation routes (new-Cedar & Cliff Road), raises significant concerns over land use com- patibility and the capacity to absorb negative impacts. One of the most common negative by products from high volume transportation corridors is noise. So significant is this concern that we now have noise walls constructed along our freeways through most of the metropolitan area. In addition, unremedied noise issues create substantial marketing problems which can result in FHA/VA mortgage insurance rejection . Utilizing the Housing & Urban Development (FHA) noise standards and formulas the noise impacts on the site can be assessed. The following map (Exhibit C) illustrates the decibel level projected for various areas of the site. As can be noted from Exhibit C four points adjacent to new Cedar & CLiff were analized for c noise impact. In each case noise levels exceeded the Federal maximum standards (65 DBL) and thus, in each location special noise treatment will be required to create a compatible environment for residential use of the site. -Z 6 I r-- � n � t 1 -- 1 1 1 I 1 � . KAY —68-- dacIb4 Cove+ovr z -rs The conceptual graphic below illustrates the relationship between the site and its surroundings as regards impact levels on the site and the capacity of various types of land use to absorb those impacts. y,J 1 _ f h PaCA- 14-er .J s - 8 As illustrated, the north and west portion of the site receives little, if any,impact and thus, lower intensity land uses are fully appropriate. Since the east and south portion of the site are subjected to high level impacts, land uses must be of higher intensity with greater capacity to absorb those impacts. It should be noted however, that nothing short of high intensity land uses have the ability to absorb the impact levels anticipated and thus, filters must be employed. The two most common types of impact filters are berms (or walls) when topography permits, or utilization of land uses which are less sensitive to high impact and as such, become a barrier or impact filter themselves. The subject site has topography which lends itself to berms along the north and central eastern boundary but not along the south eastern edge or southern boundary (adjacent Cliff Road). Two conceptual cross sections below illustrate these two distinct topographic conditions: JL t. f cl�t� Q tOAa so ca c� t As can be seen in Cross-Section 6 a noise wall of equal height to the structure being protected would remedy the noise problem. However, the existance of the noise wall itself creates negative impacts of a visual nature. Accordingly in this situation the impact filter should be comprised of a less sensitive land use type which can absorb the high impacts, shelter the adjoining lower intensity uses and promote a compatible environment internally on the site. 2 — ( 7 9 i • Services Facilities At the present time water is available from Eagan along the southside of Cliff Road at the new frontage road west of the Cedar Freeway. Sewer service capable of serving the majority of the site extends under the Cedar Freeway from the east to a point along the site's eastern boundary line. A sewer line also exists north of the site in River Hills 9th Addition. Utilization of this line is necessary for a small portion of the site due to the difference in grade elevations and resulting flow direction across the site. Issues of water looping and sewer connection to the purnsville. system have been raised and will require careful analysis and cooperation between the two communities to provide the best solution. (Exhibit D) c -Z 10 Stu" _ I I i n � 1 I 1 � F � �t�vlC� �ALl�.lt'1fcS SUBDIVISION DES* RESPONSE • As is always true in any design effort, the first step involves defining the parameters or constraints to which the design must respond. The constraints which affect the subject site were discussed in the previous portion of this report (EXISTING CONDITIONS) and are summarized for easy reference below: PRIMARY DESIGN CONSTRAINTS o Negative impacts (noise, light, etc.) o Access Constraints o Density graduation requirement (Zoning) o Surrounding land use sensitivity o Service facility constraints o Storm water ponding needs o Gas line location & elevation constraints o Marketability concerns o FHA/VA Mortgage Insurance acceptance o . NSP powerline design impacts Reponding to these constraints in a fashion which eliminates the concerns of all interested parties is perhaps the greatest design challenge and as such, is rarely, fully achieved. The design response for Cinnamon Ridge however, represents a highly successful effort in weighing the constraints and providing solutions of equal sensitivity to divergent interests. Land Use The breakdown of proposed land use for the site is as follows: (low to mid density) Single Family Cluster Homes 12.75 acres (low to mid density) Twin Homes 12.82 acres (mid density) 8-unit Condominiums 25.61 acres (low intensity) Office Commercial 12.33 acres Street ROW 8.89 acres Total 72.40 acres The proposed corresponding unit count and commercial coverage is as follows: Single Family Cluster Homes 64 Units t Twin Homes 66 Units 8 Unit Condominium 248 Units Total 378 Units Office Commercial square footage 93,000 sq. ft. 12 2 7,0 The land use plan as shown on Exhibit E & F illustrates the techniques utilized in achieving a compatible relationship between internal site uses and external land uses. Low to mid density single family home Clusters were located adjacent the site's western boundary to provide a continuation of the single family character. Two family homes (twin homes) were proposed primarily in the north western portion of the site abutting a large open space area comprised of proposed ponding and powerline easement. This lower density character and surro unding open space acting as a buffer) is intended to smooth the transition to the single family home character existing to the north. The two above mentioned housing styles (single family home cluster and twin homes) _ combine to form the lower density "protective barrier" which wraps around the north and west borders of site buffering all surrounding low density land uses from the medium density uses -proposed in the eastern interior of the site. The site's eastern portion is proposed as a combination of mid-density residential housing in a small condominium building format (8 unit buildings) and low intensity cffice commercial located in the site's south eastern extremity. These uses will provide buffering to the north and western portions of site by utilizing impact filters or, in the case of the office commercial , by acting as the impact filter itsel To complete the discussion of general land use, a more specifics discussion of proposed construct pn type and style is appropriate. The following discussion will attempt to outline some exciting new concepts in practical priced housing and office construction which respond to land use compatibility concerns with greater sensitivity than most traditional approaches: 1 ) Residential - Single family home cluster: the single family home cluster design represents a direct and unique response to certain housing concerns expressed by prospective home buyers over the past few years. o Traditional single family homes are no longer affordable to the majority of first home buyers. o Many home buyers want greater separation between their unit and others due to sound control problems, loss of views and general lack of privacy concerns. o Many house buyers viewing the quadriminium as the only housing cost alternative, are discouraged with the lack of outdoor private living spaces and general loss of functional open spaces. o Many home buyers choosing alternative housing styles are greatly dissatisfied with the view orientation where the "corner lot" is truely surrounded with asphalt. t o Many home buyers are looking for housing styles which have more distinctive character in their exterior appearance. The evolution of the "Cluster" concept came about due principally to a growing recognition that the cost of traditional single family housing would soon eliminate the market segment being sought. However, while a medium density, lower cost housing product would respond to this primary buyer concern, the appearance of growing market resistance to traditional mid-density housing types suggested that the current solution was not universally accepted. 13 2 2 , o� �pa�e ne�sideh�ial i l ANIL COndow►tnIUVK � j rlSideh�iq,� i � `� 5ir1a`tt TAri1l(� I*csidcnkiat .,d I - Covuvher�ia.� ( I 1 � I L-- i I � r- W'►'tii� L wo Use p *1 • _� � _jam�„� �_�_�... �• �/ './ Of t1 - _ c 42, w FIX If A> -g _ ac It (y 4Y_ _' � _ `��, ^ __ _ '. -'., _; 111 ,,,• >1 � 1� <;--- � -� [tom _ •,, •Y ',«I.. ,. .................................................................................... ti 2 - � 3 • . - ��1-k�SIT" " �" . . . n SUDS ZOI Liai piL4s in z.ne L'Ius+er` (IesIgn -#dSate a 't'Uftl the t1exiuility in individual unit �arance. With the ability to ine different shapes and sizes of units withil he cluster, a far more distinc ive and interesting "street scene" can be created. Fortunately, it is the elimination of- another buyer concern (lack of choice in unit style) which brings about this positive result. The Single Family "Cluster" can best be characterized as low to mid-density cluster format, where each cluster contains four units surrounding a common private driveway. The common bond in each cluster is created through the jointly used driveway, common exterior finish appearance, and private patio system, which allows for the incorporation of spaces between units to be utilized as additional functional , living area. As can be noted on the site plan, these private patio living spaces created a continuation of living space, such that the cluster takes on the character of one continuous building designed in a horseshoe shape around _ the common driveway. The units contained in each "Cluster" vary in size, shape and style. While it is our intention to allow the prospective home buyer flexibility in unit choice within a given cluster, we feel that the typical purchase mixture of units may be comprised of (1 ) one bedroom split level , (2) two bedroom split level and (1 ) one or two bedroom two story units. As noted on the site plan, each unit will have a two car attached garage. Not unlike the traditional townhouse format all "Clusters" are proposed to be joined under a singular home owner's association, which would provide for all landscape grounds maintenance, trash removal and snow plowing, etc. As future phases of the overall project are completed each new phase would be annexed to the existing home owner's association. 2) Residential - twin home: The individually owner occupied twin homes are specificially tailored to bridge the gap between the more expensive single family homes and the less expensive Condominium housing format. The twin home offers the benefits of substantial privacy inherently found in a single family home, while providing significiant savings gained through land development efficiency. The Twin home will be available in a variety of styles; including split levels and tuckunders. 3) Residential - Coach Home (8-unit Condominium): The Coach homes represent the newest addition to Zachman Homes'residential home product line. The Coach home is characterized as a two story 8 unit structure offering both at grade and second story homes. This concept currently represents the most contemporary design in for sale (owner occupied) multifamily housing, as it successfully accomplishes design and cost objectives heretofore unmet in traditional single family, townhome, and condominium apartment projects. More specifically, the coach home design simultaneously offers: o Cost/price ecomonomies gained through building construction and land development efficiency, having greater similarity c to moderate density apartment style development. o Small building mass and greater privacy than typical condominium apartment projects. o All corner units (no inside units) with unobstructed views, similar to the Quadrimiunium concept. o Separate, private entryways for all units as compared to the common entry foyer typical of condominium apartments. 16 o Limited common area and facilities to minimize the association maintenance concerns typically found with condominium apartments. The Coach home units will be available in 1 & 2 bedroom floor plans ranging from 700 to 1 ,000 square feet of living area. Off street parking will be provided in detached garages accomodating at least one space of the two proposed spaces per unit. Illustrations of the various ZACHMAN HOMES, INC. house plans and elevations are included as.an appendix to this report. 4) Commercial - Office court style : The basic design philosophy for the office commercial portion of the sites, is that of creating a low intensity, resi- dentially compatible use, which both compliments and protects the site. To accomplish this objective best, well landscaped, one story office buildings, clustere into a "park-1 i ke"courtyard atmosphere are proposed. Preservation and enhancement of open space is key to the design philosphy for this type of office building concept. Transportation The overall design for internal site circulation involves making the best use of what is available. As mentioned in the previous discussion on existing transportation conditions, the site's access is primarily confined to Cliff Road. Existing connection points to the north and west can be used to improve access for emergency vehicles (and some cases improve access for adjacent neighborhoods by permitting a short cut through the site to Cliff Road), though would serve little function in improving access to and from the subject site. To accomplish adequate circulation and minimize any conflict from distinct land use types, two basic design solutions were employed: street looping .(permits routing choice , and divides traffic) and segregation of primary office access from residential circulation. Due to concerns raised over the amount and placement of access to Cliff Road, one solution which would minimize traffic impact on Cliff and yet meet the circu- lation needs for the sites, would be to consider a right turn in and out restriction on the western access point with Cliff Road. Service Facilities As currently proposed, the utilities for the site would utilize the available systems directly provided by the City of Eagan and to a very limited degree, sewer provided by the City of Burnsville through Eagan (River Hills 9th Addition). Questions of sewer capacity, etc, need to be analyzed by both cooperating cities in the near future. The proposed water system is independent of Burnsville and utilizes internal looping to minimize "end of system" concerns. The storm sewer system follows the natural grade direction (northward) and includes a new primary ponding system to assist in meeting the additional storage needs beyond the avail- able storage capacity in the existing ponding facility. (north boundary) 17 Open Space & Recreafonal Facilities Based upon the existance of active park and open space facilities in near proximinity to the site, park dedication requirements are proposed to be fulfilled in the form of cash contribution . This point has been discussed with Eagan City Staff and appears to be consistant with City long range park planning efforts. Private recreational facilities of a tot lot nature are envisioned for the Coach Home area on the eastern side of the site. These facilities, while privately owned and maintained could accomodate the potential needs of the entire site popu=_ lation. The limited nature of our proposed children oriented recreational facilities is due in part to our past experience with buyer family profiles and as well , with the known experiences of other builders. The proposed plan provides for construction of three distinct styles of homes oriented towards three distinct market segments. Based upon our recent experience in single family cluster sales we find that our average buyer is best characterized as a two & one half member family. Accordingly, we would anticipate a total single family cluster population of approximately 160 persons (64 units). As the average age of our typical homebuyer tends to be less than 30 years old, the associated school age population is far less than the anticipated total number of children. A reasonable estimate would appear to be .3 school children per household or a total projected school age population of 19 attributed to the single family portion of the development. The market segment choosing twin homes can be differentiated from single family cluster residents by family size and corresponding composition. Twin home residents typically have smaller families and correspondingly less children. We would antici- pate approximately 2 persons per household with roughly .l school children per family. This estimate suggests a twin home population of 132 persons (66 units), including approximately 7 school children. Finally, the market segment which has historically choosen a condominium is comprised of retired couples, "empty nesters", young singles and young married couples without children. Based upon the marketing experiences in other similar projects, we would estimate a condominium population of roughly 1 .7 persons per unit. This estimate suggests a total condominium population of 422 persons. Any school children population included in this total is expected to be negligible. In conclusion, the overall population of the total site is estimated to be roughly 714 persons including 26 school children. c Phasing The proposed project is envisioned to be a 4 to 6 year development process. As noted on the following exhibit G , . the four phases would begin with the South western portion of the site and follow in a clockwise manner leaving the for south eastern corner as the last phase. This phasing scheme is mandated by the fee owner of the site as a purchase contract obligation. It should be noted however, that the clockwise phasing scheme provides the best protection to surrounding land uses by creating the protective barrier as the first step. 18 -2 - 2� -7-- _O IcEMTmum OCO w00 _�• �� J�� _ �. Ilk 1 ♦ lam-,�� , 717. ''��1Y/ f/./( �} �.�• t E3 y J •o' 17Y �/� t ,. '. •��11 \1 zr .,, • C= z - 27 �v u is.•.r �� n _ APPENDIX t Af IL IL ==Z—Zzz --= `tea _r i 1� 1� �a1\\\�\' 1f•`. I .r F- 3.". ,{ zi ZIP- rr -`z_-_ Cb Izz /��ynT e`er- • -i �', F �� +1 I � 12�: �\ 11.� �I `Y -\.Yrs •_-`{: '�_ ;,>^ !:_�• __.= �� ,�*-'� '\r rte- •.•sj .'ice: _�`� iii?,`z�• z _ ': ...-..- lit I all 3314 ♦a:i .�� I'�,:3 � \r ,I�I,IIN�;,, � -� r II,'P+I'I 1 - ; it 1• ` •�.- r ,� � ,� `� .,fid, I' 1,. lipl� 44 `_ • ----" ji";' rllr F l�, 1 A _' ; -' IF Ol '";I �:�: .�j..► � _-=._-=S III', :',�.��{'�� 1��'�'�� , z� r tt Poll, �` n °' `,� ►f . X1-4 ` � i e •' l i. ►,yl�yi'r (t o a i ' • it , r � - ��x`}. •�{ ---_ _ / .4, lilt LI I ctr or-- 0 • Z-3O r • JOE HARRISON, CHAII!IN AND THE ADVISORY PLANNING OOI�MSSION FROM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PIER TE: MARCH 19, 1981 SUB=: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THE CIMVMJN RIDGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION At the February 24, 1981 Advisory Planning Commission Meeting, the public hear- ing was opened for Cinnannn Ridge Planned Developrmnt. There was a lengthy discussion regarding the proposed development, and many questions and concern were brought out. The Advisory Planning Commission tabled the item to be able to study and request further information regarding the proposed planned develop- t. The staff has reviewed the minutes frc n the Advisory Planning Omission Meeting and have indicated that the items that requested further study were: 1. Vacation of streets and street circulaticn 2. The zoning which had occurred in 1969. 3. Parks 4. Single family cluster Staff will try to address each one of the concerns stated above: 1. VACATION AND STP= CIRCULATION Tie staff has re-evaluated the overall circulation of the develoFu ents. At the present time, there are only three accesses to the property, and three accesses ll be the most this property will be able to obtain. Two are being provided Cliff Road on the south, and one access would be provided by extending Metcalf Drive on the north. In reviewing the overall site, it appears that 90% of the traffic generated in the proposed development will take access to the south on Cliff Road. It is approximated that no more than 10% would travel north and use Metcalf Drive or Clark Street to get out of the development to the north. There- f re, most of the traffic will take access to Cliff Road on the south. Exhibit A is submitted with this report as an overall circulation of existing streets 'thin this area. The other subject regarding the vacation, staff has researched vacation of Kentwood Court and Perrot Lane. The City of Burnsville sent a of the petition for vacation and the minutes when these two streets were sated. It appears that on August 25, 1969, the Burnsville City Council approved the vacation of these two streets. In reviewing this vacation, staff has checked th Dakota County and has found out that this vacation has not yet been recorded th the County. However, talking with the City Attorney, it appears that the recording of this document is not that important and that the recording could take place at any time with the County. It is the staff's understanding that the vasa on is binding and that access to these two streets is not possible. Enclosed is a copy of the vacation notice sent from the City of Burnsville. The last item staff would like to cmu ent on in regard to the overall circulation pattern is that there has been an overall traffic analysis done of the project and has been reviewed by the City Engineer. Z - 3 t • • ITY OF EAGAN INNAMN RIDGE PLANNED DEVEIDPMENT 24, 1981 AGE 'IWC) NDITIONS PLACID AT THE 1969 REZONING taff has reviewed the minutes of the August 5, 1969 Eagan City Council Meet- . The minutes do reflect that conditions were placed on the zoning fran -2 to R-4. These conditions were as follows: 1. That generally a 150'• setback frau the west line of the property to the proposed buildings be maintained and the style of the building similar to•the Birnanwood style be used. 2. That the trees be saved and the natural terrain and other factors in- cluded in the discussion be maintained to the fullest extent possible. Again, staff could go either way with these minutes. These minutes could be interpreted and the strict conditions could still be placed on the development as it was required in August, 1969. On the other hand, these conditions could be removed because it is a new applica- tion and that usually conditions are not placed on a zoning classifi- cation. So, whichever way the City would want to go in either enforc- ing or not enforcing these conditions, would be a City decision at this time. The other item the Advisory Planning Cmr ission may want to consider is what the setbacks are in the Birnanwood Addition right now. Staff has been out on the site and has looked at the setbacks, and it appears that the setbacks in Birrnamwood range anywhere frau ap- proximately 5-10 feet from the property line to 40-60 feet frau the rear property line. Therefore, ir.•posing a 150' setback requirenent would be more than double than what was required on the Burnsville side of the line. Presently, the Zoning Ordinance requires a 15 foot rear setback in an R-1 (Residential Single District) and 30 foot set- back in a Townhouse District. In reviewing the setbacks for other residential districts, it appears that the 150' setback is far in ex- cess of what the City requires in other locations. However, since these conditions were placed on the property in 1969, the City could also enforce the 150' setback requirement. Whichever decision the City wishes to make could be challenged either by the developer or by the residents in the area. Therefore, the best setback requirement would be a ccnpranise between the residents and the developer as to what the distant should be, if in fact this is possible. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE Since the February 24, 1981 Advisory Planning Comnission Meeting, the Advisory Parks CaYmittee met and have reviewed the Cinnamon Ridge Planned Development proposal. The Park Cornu ttee has recanmended that no land be dedicated within the Cinnamon Ridge, and that a cash contribution be made for each of the units thin the development. 2 ,.3 2. CITY OF EAGAN CINNAWN RIDGE PIANNED DEVEWPM Wr WRCH 24, 1981 PAGE THREE SINGLE FAMILY CLUSTER As stated in the February report, the density and lot coverage are within the cknsity permitted in an R-2 Zoning District. According to Ordinance 52, an R-2 density requires 7,500 square feet per unit. In the single family cluster, each block set out for the cluster contains approximately 28,500-30,000 square feet and would contain approximately 7.125-7,500 square feet of space per unit. TTe actual platting of the property is split into 4 lots for each dwelling unit ard a lot which is owned in oocmnn which Provides access to each individual. Therefore, the lots look small the way that it is being platted, but a space provided for each unit does meet the ordinance requirements for density in an R2 District. As stated in the report, the overall density and lot coverage does not exceed-the R-2 density for the R-2 District. An exhibit has been closed for your review as to haw the area would be Platted. Outlot A is a ammn area for access to units 1, 2, 3 and 4. If anyone has any questions regarding the single family cluster, or would like additional information, please feel free to contact me. D(Wjac Z -3 � TO: PLANING CU44ISSION, C/O DALE C. FiiME, CITY PLANNER FROM: THCMS A. ODLBERT, DIRECIOR OF PUBLIC WORKS -.. �. .,. . ..: .$,. DATE: MkRCH 19, 1981 RE: PRE LDMIARY PLAT - CrtUQN 7N RIDGE (ZACH AN Ha4E'S INC.) There has been additional concerns and questions raised pertaining to the street configuration and ,continuity in addition to anticipated traffic volumes generated from this proposed plat as it pertains to providing ade- quate access to this development. A detailed analysis of the traffic volumes that will be generated by this development in addition to their anticipated and expected destination distribution has been performed by Westwood Planning and Engineering Co. City staff has reviewed this re- port in detail and concurs with the basic assumptions that were used to provide the number of vehicles anticipated to use each of the proposed access points. There has been a major concern regarding the proposed connection to Met- calf Drive in River Hills 9th Addition from this proposed development. This connection has been planned since the inception of the River Hills 9th Subdivision and has been provided for by having an approved street con- structed to the north boundary of this Cinnamon Ridge Addition. The resi- dents of River Hills 9th have always had full knowledge of the extension of this street upon development of this 80 acres presently being proposed. This connection will be required to be constructed in conjunction with the development of phase two (1983-85) . Upon its completion, it is anticipated that the peak hour (4:30-5:30 PM) traffic volumes will total 17 vehicles (1 VEH./3.5 MIN) . Upon completion of all four phases, it is estimated and anticipated liberally that a maximum of 10% of the traffic generation from this development will use the Metcalf Drive connection to the River Hills 9th Subdivision. At full development, it is estimated that during the peak hour period there will be a total of 52 vehicles (1 VEH./l MIN.) using this access point. The local streets within the River Hills 9th Addition are designed to handle standard local traffic volumes far in excess of their past and present use. Therefore, the staff feels that this minor anticipated addition by 1987 will not create an unsafe or unnecessary bur- den on these local streets. Presently, the City pays a yearly sum to the City of Burnsville to provide snow and ice control services to the River Hills 9th Subdivision because of its inefficient accessibility to our maintenance vehicles. Public Works Department feels very strongly that this access be provided so that we may provide the necessary services to those public streets within the River Hills 9th Addition. In my previous report dated February 19, 1981, I had indicated that Sunset Drive should have an 80' right-of-way dedication from Cliff Road to the inter- section with Cinnamon Trail. Upon review of the traffic volume generation figures, it is suggested that this right-of-way requirement be reduced to 66' . This will provide for the necessary 40' minim n width street for Sunset Drive from Cliff Road to approximately 250' north. In addition, their report recommended that Sunset Drive be constructed prior to or coincident with the PIANN NG COMMISSION M%RCH 19, 1981 PAGE TWO second phase development. This is being revised to require that its construc- tion be performed in conjunction with the third phase due to the ability of Cinnamon Trail intersection with Cliff Road being able to handle the first and second phase traffic generation volumes. I will be available to discuss in detail the above facts and answer any questions the PlanningCommissionmay have at their meeting on March 24, 1981. ENGINEERLNG RECQMK24DATIONS (REVISION TO FEBRUARY 19TH REPORT) All engineering recanrendations should remain the same with the following exceptions: 2. A 66' internal right-of-way must be dedicated for the proposed Sunset Drive. 5. The construction of Sunset Drive to a minimum 40' width for a minimum 250' north of Cliff Road must be constructed as a part of the third phase development. I will be available to address these issues at the Planning Ca!ntission Meeting of March 24th, 1981. Respectfully sulxnitted, Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jac -2 ,35- TO: DALE C. RUNKIE, CITY PLANNER FROM: BOB CHILDERS, FIRE CHIEF DATE: MUCH 18, 1981 RE: CINNMM RIDGE ADDITION In reviewing this proposed plat, the Fire Departrent feels it is essential to Link River Hills 9th Addition and Cliff Road via Metcalf Drive through this proposed addition for the following reasons: 1. The Fire Deparbnent would have a quicker response to River Hills Addition from Station #3 (Wilderness Run & Pilot Knob Road) . 2. The proposed future fire station located in the vicinity of Rahn and Galaxie on Cliff will have a quick and easy access to River Hills 9th Addition and the proposed Cinnamon Ridge Addition. BC/jac Z -3 6 L U t o JUNIOR ci HIGH 00 SCHOOLI 1121H Cr ACV .ca CLARK ST �T f1 v - Fqt/ At rjfR 9 T KENTWOOD C T. MC LE00 f .Z 111114 ST. w cr SELKIRK 0R. S1,1 �lr� t1 too rx Co. RD N0. 32 0 . R0. o .x_37 ;K � VIM Vatice t I I-Lit Martin DesLauriers 3830 Pilot Knob Road Chi of Police , Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Jay M. Berthe Assistant Chief of Police _ 12 March 1981 r TO: Dale Runkel, City Planner FROM: Chief of Police ' SUBJECT: Zachman Homes Cinnamon Road Plat In reviewing the proposed street alignment for this plat, I remembered there was some opposition from the River Hills No . 9 Addition in regard to the extension of Metcalf Drive south to Cinnamon Trail. I feel it is very necessary to continue Metcalf Drive from River Hills No. 9 in order to allow for proper police patrol and other police and fire needs . At the present time, because of the fact that our squads have to drive down Highway 13 to River Hills Drive and then into the addition, we probably do not patrol the area as well as we would if Metcalf continued through to Cinnamon Trail . rtin DesLauriers MD/vk THE LONE OAK TREE — THE SY.VBOL OF STRENGTH & GROWTH /N OUR CO.tifVEWITY r- t+ Ira% PETITION \2` t Believing that the vacation hereinafter described will be in the best nterest of the public, and that no damage will be suffered by any party by reason of such vacation, the undersigned property owners, being a majority f the abutting owners to said-property, do hereby petition the Village Council f the Village .of Burnsville, Minnesota, to vacate the following described treets in the Village of Burnsville, to-wit: That part of Kentwood Court lying east of the easterly right.. of-way line of Galtier Drive and the east boundary of River Hills 10th Addition to the Village of Burnsville, Minnesota; and that part of Perrot Lane being and lying 30 feet west of the east boundary line of River Hills 11th Addition to the Vil- lage of Burnsville, Minnesota, according to the plats thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds for Dakota County, Minnesota. //1/ 717 11 L45 � • .'1 Y. ' � it,i /i'.J :1� r r-` Vii^:-7 _ � �'-�_.i'-�.i� �!-J J�J-�� V • 72 CO ::CIL ItI"UT1-S REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 25, 1969 - -3- 6. Public Hearing_ - Street Vacation - Portion of Kentwood Court and a Portion of Perrot Lane. It being 7:45 p.m. Mayor Hall called for the public hearing on the application for a vacation of a portion of Kentwood Court and a portion of Perrot Lane. All those desiring to be heard were heard at this time. Motion by Holmes; seconded by Pappathatos, to close the public hearing at 7:49 p.m. Ayes - Hall , Holmes, Kelley, Pappathatos, and Schaefer. Nayes - none. Motion carried. Motion by Holmes, seconded by Pappathatos, to approve the street vacation of a portion of Kentwood Court and a portion of Perrot Lane per the attached petition. Ayes - Hall, Holmes, Kelley, Pappathatos, and Schaefer. Hayes.- none. Motion carried. D-69-83 7. Continued Public Hearinq - Gerald Rummel - Rezonina - Burns- vi e Crosstown - Mile South of County Poad 42 Extended 1-3 and R- A to R- D. It being 7:50 p.m. Mayor Hall called for the public hearing to continue on the application of Gerald Pummel for a re- zoning of the area on the Burnsville Crosstown, 1/4 Mile South of County Road 42 extended from I-3 and R-lA to R-3D. All those desiring to be heard were heard at this time. notion by Holmes, seconded by IT to close the public hearing at 9: 27 p.m. Aves - Hall, Holmes, Kelley, Pappa- thatos, and Schaefer. Mayes - none. I:otion carried. 8. Public Bearing Pezoninq - East of Burnsville Crosstown and 1/2 Mile South of County Road 42 Extended - R-lA to P.- D. It being 9:30 p.m. Mayor Hall called for the public hearing on the application for a rezoning on the east side of the Burnsville Crosstown 1/2 mile south of County Road 42 ex- tended from R-lA to R-3D. All those desiring to be heard were heard at this tire. Motion by Kelley, seconded by Hall, to close the public hearing at 10: 00 p.m. Ayes - Hall, Holmes, Kelley, Pap- pathatos, _ and Schaefer. Nayes - none. Motion carried. 9. Approval of South 80 Acres and Denial of North 40 F_cres - Rummel e P ze o in na Request , 21otion by Kelley, seconded by Pappathatos, to approve the rezoning of the W1/2 of the SE1/4 of Section 27, Township 115, } Range 21, per the application of Gerald Rummel. Said rezoning from the present R-1A to R-3D. Ayes - Hall, Holmes, Kelley, Pappathatos, and Schaefer. Naves - none. Motion carried. 2 -40 N i • • r � � � �.. ,; .. �' .,.. � _ ... .. .� ,: . . . 3 ' � � / � 4 � . �� '�.� ,. � �� J . A �-. � - �/ / , -� � � 2 �. � -- � ��. � , � � , , 1. _ � - 1 `` l� iii; ' 1 3 � 4 - ' . - � � _ _ - --�- L � �, , � - � J 1 . I .- �--, " 1 �.__ , _ '� - 4t .. .. _ . Ad&L ' • C n am on A - NEIGHBORHOOD PERSPECTIVE rf. v t TABLE OF CONTENTS ZONING................. .. .. . ... . . .... .. .. .Page 1 & 2 COMMERCIAL....... ... .. .. .... .. .. .. . . . . .. . .Page 3 TRAFFIC.. . ........... ... ....... ... .. .. . .. .Page 4 thru 6 PARKS..... ....... ...... .. .... ..... ... .....Page 7 PONDING.. .. ............... . .. ............ .Page 8 SET BACK ISSUES....... ... .. .. . ..... .. ... ..Page 9 7Z ZONING The Eagan City Council rezoned the land currently being proposed for development by Zachman Homes to the present R-2 & R-4. Zachman has indicated in his proposal that the existing zoning would allow for 648 dwelling units. He conveniently left out any provisions for the necessary streets, utilities, the ponding needed for drainage or any of the other fixes which could affect the overall density. According to their existing plan at least 15 acres of land is devoted to these items. This could easily lower the maximum effective density down to approximately 500 dwelling units. The Eagan Zoning ordinance is very specific as to what is allowed in each zoning classification with one exception. That is the Planned Development District. This can apparently supercede all of the underlying zoning and their associated requirements. In most other cities P.U.D. districts are formed not to change land use, but to allow greater flexibility in placing the type of units allowed. Under Eagads concept adjacent land owners have little if any protection for the long term. The developers can violate the existing zoning requirements, change the existing land use as well as not conform to the comprehensive plan and still get approval and the recommendation from the City staff. We have also attempted to find out what is the existing use actually is as the present maps only indicate Planned Development Districts. We think that this practice should be changed so that we, the citizens of Eagan,can obtain the facts easily. Our concerns have been summarized below: Commercial 1 . Allowing property presently zoned R-2 & 4 for 93,000 ft of commercial use is unconscionable. 2. Parking requirements for commercial property alone would amount to approximately 550 spaces. 3. Traffic generations from this part of the development alone would require a signal on Cliff Road.Dakota County Traffic Engineer stated that the county could force the developer to pay for this installation ($75,000 or more) . We think this emphasizes how much traffic will be generated. 4. We have no control over what type of commercial development goes in and when other than the developers guesses. Residential 1 . The City staff in recommending that the developer be allowed to proceed with single family Cluster Homes. These homes do not comply with the existing lot size requirements or frontage require ents for single family. The developer has also stated that these are done to "twin home" R-2 zoning standards.However, what he fails to state is that under his proposal he is only installing 1/2 of the streets,utilities, etc normally required at a significant savings. We also believe that once the private driveway (which is to be shared by the S.F. Cluster homeowners)is not considered - 4- .1 as part of the lot, they become substandard. Some of these lots appear to be in the 3,000 - 5,000 ft range. We are sure this was not the in- tent of the Zoning Board or the City Council which established 7,500 ft minimums for 1/2 of a twin home. 2. Portions of the existing development appears to have poor soil - being gray clay - which may restrict the ability of the developer to build what he is proposing. 3. The developers present roadway plan involves extending Metcalf Drive from River Hills 9th into the Cinnamon Ridge area. According to our analysis, the roadway construction would totally remove the present tree line south of the existing pond. It would also necessitate filling in a portion of the pond to build the roadway. Portions of this pond are within the City Park Property. Our kids presently use this pond for skating, exploring nature and a learning experience. We find it deplorable that the City would consent to this wanton destruction of nature. 4. Further this is being done in the name of emerging access and/or for snow plowing convenience.The existing fire station on Rahn Road is approximately 2 miles from our development. There have been discussions with regard to a new station on Cliff and Rahn Road but so far none has been officially selected to our knowledge. This would be approximately 1k miles from our development which doesn't appear to be significant. We have however, suggested that consideration be given other alternatives for allowing vehicular access. No consideration has been given of these by the City staff. 5. The condominiums are according to the zoning ordinance to provide recreation areas totalling 200 square feet per 2 bedroom dwelling unit. This amounts to 1 .4 acres of land. The developer however has stated he intends to build 2 tot lots with one wood play structure in each. Not enforcing this puts additional . burdens on the park system. 6. The City is recommending waiving of the land coverage requirements which limits the coverage to 20%. The developers plans indicate a 21 .6% coverage. The City is apparently recommending that the developer not only be allowed lower than normal open area but also no additional park space. 7 Finally, the City has proposed allowing the developer 6 years to develop this land. Normal development agreements per the zoning code are limited to a maximum of 3 years. The neighborhood has been subjected to the freeway con- struction, a blacktop plant, a gravel crushing operation and more since moving in. Six more years of construction will be unbearable especially when the prevailing wind is from the southwest. In summary, the City staff has gone out of its way to bend the rules for the developers while at the same time giving very little consideration as to what effect this development would have on the adjacent neighborhoods. Seems like they have forgotten who they are serving - the developers or the residents and voters. 2 - 45 2 COMMERCIAL ISSUE The Zachman proposal contains some 12.33 acres of commercial land. This is a complete departure from the present residential zoning and not in keeping with the residential character of the existing or proposed neighborhood. Only the most general and vague information is given regarding this area of the plat. Since Zachman does not build office buildings, it must be assumed that they only intend to have the zoning changed for developing and resale, using the profits to aid them in the financing of the rest of the project. Since Zachmen offers no definite design or use or development for this commercial land, has no buyers or tenants, and in light of the overzoning of commercial property in Eagan and the neighboring Burnsville, the venture appears to be purely speculative in nature and therefore, contrary to the goals set forth in the Master plan to resist speculation. Furthermore, given the City's extreme reluctance to downzone property, great caution must be exercised in any additional commercial zoning. The Comprehensive Master Plan repeatedly mentions that the City of Eagan is overzoned commercially and that any more commercial zoning should be resisted (III,21 ,25,27) . These admonitions were written over a year ago and since that time we have continued to add commercial areas to our city. How much more can not be determined because no running count or map is available (Can anybody tell us just how much land in Eagan is zoned commercially and industrially?) Looking at the zoning map, the commercial zoning is staggering, yet Zachman wants to add yet another 12 acres. Our population is not now enough, nor will it ever be enough to support this much commercial activity because we are part of a larger metropolitan area and a certain percentage of our residents will shop outside the City, especially for larger items (III-21 .) In the existing commercial buildings in our area, the vacancies are staggering. We have been trying to compute the amount of vacant office, retail , and warehouse space for 3 days and have barely scratched the surface. There are, within a radius of just a few miles, over 935,386 square feet with dozens of vacancies yet untabulated. Just across the road from Zachman, Hillcrest is building a Medical/ Professional building, shopping center, and a McDonalds.On the S.W. corner is a Harddees, Durnings Restaurant, and two office buildings, 1 completed, with 4,000 square feet vacant. Offices and commercial is also slated for the N.E. & S.E. corners. Just beyond at the intersection of 35E and Cliff, the whole junction is zoned commercially. In the neighborhood is Riverview Shopping Center at Highway 13 and Ct. Rd 30, 10,000 square feet or 40% vacant, Sioux Trail Shopping Center has- 14,000 square feet empty. There are 23 acres zoned commercial at Mill Pond on the NW corner of Cliff and Highway 13 and more on the NW corner. All four corners of Cliff and River Hills are existing commercial buildings and the 7-11 went broke there within months. Going down Old Cedar towards the River, virtually all the land on the west side of the road is commercial , as are the SW, NW and SE corners of Nichols and Highway 30. Highway 13 is commercial virtually all the way through Eagan. 'Vacancies are everywhere. Cedarvale has 10,000 square feet empty. There are empty stores and offices on Beau de Rue. The Juke Box has 9,100 square feet and Nichols Station is closed. Just up the new 35E is the largest regional shopping center in the upper Northwest - with 85,000 square feet vacant, and space going begging in at least four other centers there. Diamondhead Mall is virtually deserted and Coldwell -Banker has 60,000 square feet in a new complex at highway 13 and Nicollet. The list goes on and on. One realtor alone has 243,000 square feet vacant in Eagan and 316,000 square feet . R;.'r^s:"??a. Kraus Anderson is building a 100,000 square feet enclosed mall nearby on Pilot Knob. Many newspaper articles , among others report the commercial market in the Twin Cities suburbs overbuilt for sometime to come. The Zachman commercial zoning request is totally unnecessary and should be denied. z - q-4 . • TRAFFIC I, TRAFFIC ON CLIFF ROAD ° CAPACITY = 25.000 CARS 1978 = 10.377 CARS DAILY AWYAGE 1980 = 17,400 ACTUAL DAILY COUNT (TA0 WEDIESDAY - FRIDAY OF AUG 2000 = 30.000 I I , SLtMR( OF TOTAL TRAFFIC GENERATED USING TIMAL USING DA(OTAA COUY AVEA) RHPE 9TH 1.040,0 1.040,0 378 WITS 2,986,2 3.780,0 GEM 4,045.5 4,0)45.5 TRIPS GEN, 3) HE 9TH 1.040.0 1.040,0 378 WITS 2,986,2 3.780,0 hEDICAL 6,975.0 6.975.0 TRIPS GEN 11_,On1,2 11,795 4. C) HE 9TH 1.040,0 1.040,0 378 WITS 2.986,2 3.780,0 SHOP0CTR, 7,440.0 7,440.0 TRIPS CfJ, 11,466 . 12,260,0 Cinnamon Ridge .Generated Traffic A. Housing Type and Number of Units Single 64 Twin 66 8 Unit Condos = 248 Total Units = 378 B. Commercial 93,000 square feet C. Vehicabar Trips Formula (Residential ) National Average Single/Twin _ Average 10.0 P.U.D. _ Average 7.9 Condos = Average 5.1 D. Computations of Vehicular Trips (Residential 1 ) By Housing Type proposed 64 x 10.0 = 640.00 66 x 10.0 = 660.00 248 x 5.1 = 1 ,264.80 Total Trips = 2,564.80 2) By P.U.D. 378 x 7.9 = 2,986.20 Per National Average 378 x 1 .0 3,780.00 per Dakota City Average E. Vehicular Trips Formula (Commercial ) . Trip Ratio per 1 ,000 square feet General = Average 12.0 Medical = Average 75.00 Gen/Med Averaged = Average 43.5 Shop.Ctr. = Average 80.0 5 • • F. Computation of Vehicular Trips (Commercial ) General 93 x 12.0 = 1 ,116.00 Medical 93 x 75.0 6,975.00 Gen/Med Average 93 x 43.5 = 4,045.05 Shp.Ctr (50K) 93 x 80.0 7,440.00 G. Additional Traffic From River Hills 9th Addition 69 Single Homes x 10.00 = 690.00 *35 Single from Burnsville x 10.00 = 350.00 Total -Trips R.H. 9th 1 ,040.00 IV. Comments Regarding Traffic: According to the County Traffic Official 3,000 - 4,000 cars onto Cliff Road warrant a "Stop and Go" light at the intersection of Zachman 's development. If a development is known in advance to generate the volume to warrant a semaphore, the County requires the developer to supply the sign. When volumn becomes so heavy on Cliff Road that you can not get out - a semaphore is needed. Quoting traffic engineer Peter Sorenson: "The shortest route is taken only if it is the fastest. If there is a wait, then the fastest route is the route of choice", which will be the case with Metcalf Drive. Assuming that only 1/3 of the traffic uses Metcalf Drive and River Hills 9th, the traffic will be anywhere from 2,690 to 4,087 trips per day. At that rate, with two (2) blind corners and a park, the residents of River Hills 9th surely face drastically increased public safety hazards. V. Reference Material/Information: A. Mr. Peter Sorenson, Dakota County Traffic Engineer B. City of Eagan "Comprehensive Guide Plan", Section VI: Transportation, pages VI - 3,20 *Burnsville Clark, Metcalf & Lewis Court Residents 7 -4`1 PARKS 1 . Disadvantages of Cinnamon Ridge not having their own park. A. River Hills Park East (RHPE) has two entrances to the park which are not easily accessible to the Cinnamon Ridge proposed development, therefore children will have to travel up Metcalf Road which will be dangerous due to excessive traffic; or cut through existing homes that back up to the RHPE which do not want the traffic through their yards; how do you propose to stop this from occurring? The access to RHPE on Metcalf is. a blind access to cars contngyaround the corner and therefore would endanger children's lives even further. B. Eagan Park Board has stated that our unique park is adequate to housing up to three quarters of a mile away, however, I personally would not want my children traveling on foot that far in case of accidents; fighting, etc. Children the ages kindergarden through sixth grade need supervision which will be impossible three quarters of a mile away. C. Equipment is not adequate for the children in the 9th addition, let alone the "30" additional children from the 379 units/homes of Cinnamon Ridge. 2. What do you propose will be the size of the tot lots? Where will they be located? What equipment will they install? 3. The residents of River Hills 9th addition have spent countless hours planning the park area, drawing blue prints, purchasing and planting trees, shrubs; making and installing the entrance signs over the past several years. Funding for these activities has come from the residents' donations as well as from the profits of River Hills Days which was cooperatively agreed to by the Burnsville residents. Our records indicate that $1 ,550.00 has been donated for Park purposes from the residents. 4. Will the money that Zachman is contributing to Eagan as an alternative to putting in a park be used to upgrade our Park? E4gan Park Board has stated that that money will be used to build soccer fields, ball fields, etc., not within walking distance to Cinnamon Ridge or RHPE 9th addition. If the development goes ahead we feel that Zachman should donate money to RHPE for the necessary equipment. This could include a full size basketball court or other items which would expand the use of the park to the 3rd grade and up students who are now too big to use the present equipment. 2 - 5O • PONDING The existing natural terrain particularly on the southern edge of River Hills 9th addition is especially crucial . The existing pond on the southeastern edge of the development serves as the holding pond for the entire development. In addition to this, the existing gas line which runs under the power line easement has resulted in fixes as to which way the drainage adjacent to the homes must go. As was seen in the slides water even stands now after a dry winter. These homeowners are especially concerned that this needs to be addressed. In addition, the ponding area on the property is covered with trees wh,ch provide for a natural view. We hope this will be maintained and that wholesale destruction or removal of these trees will not be allowed. z - s l SET BACK ISSUES As citizens of Eagan, we are deeply ashamed that our City should so casually dismiss the promise of a previous Council to our neighbors in Burnsville. In the earlier days of this City, as was with most young towns, agreements and promises were made on a handshake or a verbal agreement, and they were binding. This City made such a promise to the people of Burnsville' in 1969 in front of a room full of witnesses and that promise was accepted in good faith. The people of Burnsville trusted Eagan to keep its word, to be honorable. At the very least Eagan has a Gentlemen's Agreement, a verbal promise, a moral commitment to these people, and we, the citizens of Eagan, expect this to be honored. z - S � IL noun March 31, 1981 Honorable Mayor & City Council City of Eagan Dear Mayor & Council: As you may be aware, the proposed development of the Cinnamon Ridge project has evoked certain specific 'concerns from both Eagan as well as Burnsville neighbors. If the retoric, that tends to cloud issues� s removed, , I believe the two primary (neighbor related) issues could be summarised as follows: 1. Metcalf Connection - this is the issue over which all the opposition from Eagan neighbors began. It is a perceived health/safety issue based upon the premise that if the connection were available, additional traffic would flow through the River Hills 9th Addition:_ neighborhood and thereby increase the safety risk to neighborhood children. 2. Border Setback - this is the primary Burnsvilleissue which relates to a. twelve year old condition placed on the original zoning of the property calling for a 150 foot setback to the Burnsville border. This issue is particularly cloudy since the condition reads "generally a 150 foot 'setback", and furthermore, no specific reason, other than neighborhood opposition, was cited in the minutes regarding the rezoning. as justification for establishing this unprecedented setback condition. At the March 24th Planning Commission meeting the above mentioned issues, as well,.as others, were discussed at length As the minutes will attest to, at the close of _discussion the planning commission voted to deny the project based upon two issues entirely unrelated to the neighbor _ concerns; that.. being, the inclusion of proposed office commercial & the lack of specific ordinance' lanquage to deal with the proposed single family cluster housing. Quite naturally, we left the meeting feeling dissapointed, though to an even greater extent, confused. Why,, when we were told by several members of the planning commission that we had prepared an excellent plan, would we be flatly denied? Why, in the face of so much opposition over one issue, would we be denied based upon another unrelated issue, with no mention of 7760 MITCHELL ROAD, EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 66344 (612)937-9520 March 31, 1981 Honorable Mayor & City Council City of Eagan Pg- 2 the first issue?, Viy, when the plan already includes substantial com- promises respectful of physical & politcal constraints, would we not be given an opportunity to respond further through additional -revisions to the plan? Since the planning commission's decision did not provide uswith sufficient guidance to permit clear cut issue response, we have attempted to collect up all of the seemingly independent issues (based upon our perceptions) and respond to each of them in an alternative project design. The fundamental revisions and rationale for change are as follows: 1. Metcalf Connection - The proposed alternative eliminates the connection of Metcalf Drive. Based upon a traffic study for our project itis clear that the connection is not essential for adequate traffic management. It is also clear that Metcalf would be an extremely expensive road to build to accomplish the limited emergency and maintenance service access role for which it is supported by City Staff. Finally, due to the constraints imposed by the pond and gas line the connection cannot be accomplished without significant disruption to trees and grades along the border adjacent to the existing pond area. While itisunderstandable that the City would like to have the connection (since it promotes a more ideal street system & direct access to all property within corporate-limits) there are clear sacrifices or costs associated with any benefits derived from the connection. Those s4drifices would appear to be of such magnitude that the 69 residents for whom the benefits are proposed, have now rejected the project in total in order to stop .the road connnection. 2. Border Setback - The alternative plan includes twin homes on extra deep lots placed along the Burnsville border. While we feel that it is extremely unfair for Burnsville residents to pressure Eagan in to setting unique standards for property adjacent its common border, utilizing deep twin lots, which provide over '100 feet of set back, is a compromise which we could live with. 3. Single Family Cluster lot sizes - all cluster lots have been sized to ensure that they meet the R-2 lot size minimum. ' While the average lot` size in the original proposal was nearly 50% greater than the miniumum re- quirement, a few of the clusters were slightly less than the miniumum. In rearranging'':the site design the remaining clusters were specifically designed to meet the specific requirements. Z' . e March 31, 1981 Honorable Mayor & City Council City-_of Eagan Pg. 3 4. Park/open Space Four park--areas have been created and designated. A concern voiced by the residents of River Hills 9th Addition involves the use of their park by new residents in Cinnamon Ridge. Though we have been able to show that very few children will result from the development and that we would be providing adequate open space areas, the disagreement over park needs has remained. Accordingly, in the alternative design we have selected several open areas for private park function and have 'designated them for such use. 5. office Commercial Land Use Nearly 3.8 acres of office commercial land use has been eliminated & replaced- by multiple family residential. This revision is intended to significantly reduce the office area but yet retain the minimum amount in a "band shaped" configuration _to provide the necessary impact protection for the adjacent residential uses. As explained in our previous submission documents, 'due to the natural topography of the site in relation to the depressed elevations of the new Cedar freeway and Cliff Rd., a noise barrier wall would appear tobethe only other protective measure available by which federal noise standards for residential could be meta While we recognize that our perceptions of issue significance may differ from those of others,we.do feel that we have been both receptive and responsive to the needs & concerns of the City and its residents. Through the proposed alternative design we wish to reaffirm the fact that we .are cooperative and understanding and that we are committed to creating a second project in the City of Eagan which meets the needs of today 's homebuyers and results in a long term asset _for theCityand its residents. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. Respectfully, ZACHMAN HOMES, INC. Stephen T. Ryan Director of Subdivisions STRzcjc