The URL can be used to link to this page

05/05/1981 - City Council Regular AGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL MAY 5, 1981 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:33 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. 6:35 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS e•�• A. Fire Department Q'� C. Park Department B. Police Department �%L D. Public Works Department IV. 6:55 - CONSENT ITEMS (One Motion Approves All Items) A. Approve Change Order #1, Contract 80-7 (Windtree, etc. ) B. Contract 80-10, Final Payment/Acceptance (Silver Bell/Wuthering Heights) ��t C. Project 302, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (494-Storm Sewer) Q�%PD. Approve Temporary Construction Easement to MnDOT - 35E & Black- hawk Road 16E. Approve Grading Permit - Rauenhorst Corporation (Eagandale Center #0 F. Contract 81-4, Receive Bids/Award Contract (St. Francis Wood Q2nd, et al, Utilities) G. Public Works Equipment, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Sewer Jet Q'� Cleaner) i ,1,0H. Project #333, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Pilot Knob Center) j Q 1,0I. Conditional Use Permit Renewal for Fish& Pet Store • J. Robert A. Jackson for a Temporary 3.2 Non-Intoxicating Malt 4•11Liquor License for Black & White Sports for 5-9/10-81 V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS A. I. R. Bond Financing for Yankee Square Office III in the Amount Q" of $1,403,480 VI. OLD BUSINESS I e.'l & A. Timberline Addition Street Lighting 'bLI BWendell Widstrom - Storage of Trucks 1'.51C: Preliminary Resolution for I.R. Financing for Safari Mall in the Amount of $3,801,000 D. William Meade for Waiver of Plat in Order to Subdivide a 5 Acre Q' Q Parcel Located in the SEZ of the NEIz of Section 31 '>9 E. Coca-Cola Corporation for Variance from the Height Limitation ` , and for Variance from the Parking Requirements for an Industrial Zoning District Located on Lots 4-14, Block 7, Eagandale Center Industrial Park in Section 3 Eagan City Council Agenda May 5, 1981 Page Two VII. NEW BUSINESS P•+0 A. Jeffrey Bloom for Waiver of Plat in Order to Split Lot 10, Block 3, Clearview Addition, into Two Single Family Lots f.+4 B. Preliminary Plat & Variance for Bicentennial 7th Addition ss' C. Emergency Medical Services Radio System &I D. Briar Hill 3rd Addition Final Plat rpty E. Joyce Addition Final Plat 6s F. Bicentennial 6th Addition Final Plat P' VIII . ADDITIONAL ITEMS C. 7 A. Contract 81-3, Plans & Specs & Order Bids (Burr Oak Pond Storm Sewer Outlet) P • 6 7 B. Emergency Preparedness Plan r6 7C. Sign Renewals �61D. Contract 80-25, Approve Plans & Specs & Order Bids (Wescott Rd. ) IX. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the Agenda) X. ADJOURNMENT p MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COLJN LMEMBERS b FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: MAY 1,, 1,981 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION MEMO After approval of the April 21, 1981 City Cqupcil minutes and the May 5,'; 1981 City Council agenda, the followin.$ items are in order for consideration: BUDDY POPPY DAY Chuck Big, representing .the .YFW, is asking that'' the City of Eagan proclaim May 15 and 16 as "Pop py Days'. Enclosed on page 2 is a copy of the proclamation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ,MATTER: To pxoclaim May 15 and 16, 1981 as "Poppy Uay 4 Al j _ t LL w ,d .,,. A PROCLAMATION WHEREAS: The annual sale of Buddy Poppies by the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States has been officially recognized and endorsed by governmental leaders since 1922; and WHEREAS: V.F.W. Buddy Poppies are assembled by disabled veterans, and the proceeds of this worthy fund-raising campaign are used exclusively for the benefit of disabled and needy veterans, and the widows and orphans of deceased veterans, and WHEREAS: The basic purpose of the annual sale of Buddy Poppies by the Veterans of Foreign Wars is eloquently reflected in the desire to "Honor the Dead by Helping the Living"; therefore I, Mayor of the city of do hereby urge the citizens of this community to recognize the merits of this cause by contributing generously to its support through the purchase of Buddy Poppies on the day set aside for the distribution of these symbols of appreciation for the sacrifices of our honored dead. urge all patriotic citizens to wear a Buddy Poppy as mute evidence of our gratitude to the men of this country who have risked thier lives in defense of the freedoms which we continue to enjoy as American citizens. Signed Mayor 2 r Agenda information Memo May 1, 1981 Page Two F FIRE DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department - There are no items to ;be considered for the Fire Department at this- time.: . x P0,LICE DEPARTMENT B. Police Department - There are no iters to # be considered for thy: Polite Department at this time.. PARC DEPART ENT l Park: Department -- Rid ecliffe Park - water an -- As ,a result cif an Advisory Park & Reereat on Qmmiee wor s p and neighborhood meeting, Brauer and Associates hav_e prepared p el:iminary drawings and a repast for the Ridgeclffe :masttr plaxi: Before the- drawings are prepared by the consultant, it is sp �priate to have preli minary approval. by the City Counc 1• . The preliminary plans for the park are enclosed. on 4pages �-through These will be presented as a whole to the A v sort' Park & R c ation Committee at their next meeting on May 7, 1981 , for theIr approval and/or' t revisions far recommendation to the City Council, However, at this time, it is necessary that the :City; .Gouncf�l. approve the part of the -plan which addresses sewer & .water sevvices in order to provide ;for future construction of rest room fac' I ties. The Parks Recre tion Director will further explain the.1,pians- at the City Council meetizi ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED :4N THIS MATTER•. To approve the preliminary. plan for_, sewer & water , services in order to provide for future construction of restrooms in Ridgecliffe Park, t F } r C R r '4�s � ss a April 30, 10 • City of Eagan Parks Department 3501 Coachman Road Eagan , Minnesota 55122 RE: Preliminary Report Ridgecliffe Neighborhood Park This document is a status report which represents the completion of the Phase I Preliminary Report for Ridgecliffe Neighborhood Park . Attached are the following : 1 . Existing conditions/general concept plate . 2. Facilities list with ranking. 3. Three sketch plan alternatives . 4. April 29, 1981 Neighborhood meeting summary. 5 . Approach or design process graphic . 6 . Round- table materials . First and foremost, Ridgecliffe is a neighborhood park intended to provide year-round informal recreational oppor- tunities for neighborhood residents within easy walking distance . Carried to an extreme, such park would require no parking. Being realistic , not everyone will walk to Ridgecliffe. Based on existing conditions ( neighborhood relationships and intrinsic suitability) , the 16.61 acre Ridgecliffe Neighborhood Park site can be broken down into three broad functional use zones . Because of its relationship to the neighborhuod and a preference for vehicular and pedestrian access to Covington Lane , this north facing is intrinsically best suited to serve as an Image/Entry Zone to the park. Its primary function is to accommodate passive recreational activities , while establishing an inviting image through which entry to the park is encouraged by design . The Active Recreation Zone is best able to accommodate requisite athletic facilities . It is somewhat more remote from existing and future residences which back to the park site and this area has already been substantially altered by construction . d The Conservation Zone is narrow, remote and it is topographically difficult to adapt it to active recreational uses . It is really more closely related to the Lebanon as Hill s County Park than to Ridgecliffe and it is best suited � f O passive recreational use . For these reasons , this area L° m 7901 Flying Cloud Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 ❑ (612) 941-1660 • 0 City of Eagan -2- April 30, 1981 should be left pretty much in its present state with the addition of a trail system. It is within this conceptual framework that the Consultant applied the neighborhood park program established by the APRC . The original facilities list was developed by the Consultant with input from City Staff ( see round- table attachments) . The list was reviewed and added to by the APRC on April 14, 1981 and facilities were scored to identify priorities . The alternative sketch plans , then were developed around those facilities scored highest by the APRC . The exceptions are found in Alternative 2 where the hockey rink was dropped and Alternative 3 where the combination football /soccer field was dropped. These departures from the facilities list were PP P done to better fulfill the general concept. What is a sketch plan? A sketch plan is simply a concept (without much detail ) , that establishes facility rela- tionships and linkages . Several such plans can be generated relatively quickly to allow for the comparative evaluation of alternatives . In essence, the sketch plan gets into enough detail to establish that all facilities are physi - cally able to be constructed without a strong commitment to detail . The sketch plan selected by the City will be detailed by the Consultant in Phase II . One major concern needing discussion is the connection of existing trail easements between lots in adjacent sub- divisions to the park trail spine. We have shown connec- tions in each plan alternative under the assumption that the City wants those easements used for pedestrian access . We do not feel that they are needed, given existing circumstances , and we know from experience that they can be a real source of conflict for homeowners on either side of such pedestrian ways . This will be further compounded if a trail connection is made between Ridgecliffe and the County park . On the other hand, we feel that it would be very desirable to provide such a trail linkage into the County park to provide convenient resident access for archery, hiking, cross-country skiing and snow-shoeing activities . Whichever plan ( and variations thereof) is selected by the City for further detailing in Phase II , that plan should be viewed as one to be constructed in phases as money is made available. Phasing of construction , beginning with site grading and seeding, will be addressed in Phase II . Also attached for review is a summary of comments received at the April 29, 1981 neighborhood meeting. These will be helpful to the City Council and the APRC in the screening of alternatives . S 4 r + • • A City of Eagan 3- April 30, 1981 We will look forward to moving ahead with the Phase II design . If you have questions or need clarification during the selection process , simply give me a call . BRAUER & ASSOCIATES LTD. , INC . Fre L . Hoisingto Principal -In-Charge mt Enclosures ta u i + rr l,� f•s♦s 444!'! ;A e e, • s ,� t� s44 � Alk db IL 4i +w4•+ �A ss�+R4 s r 14+ � t 44M ♦4+ wj`p•{44M i• ! r��'�'��•�*� Eft g 4 �r�li»r •�f i �e. 1 t R { a ' t w � *_r d � � f s w o-� • i APRC ROUND TOE SUMMARY • April 14, 1981 Ridgecliffe Neighborhood Park Each table was asked to score facilities as shown and scores were simply summed: 4 = ABSOLUTELY MUST BE ACCOMODATED 3 = very desirable 2 = desirable but expendable 1 = expendable 0 = ABSOLUTELY UNNECESSARY Total Table Scoring Score 1 2 Rank Order 8 4 4 . Ball diamonds ( baseball and softball ) 8 4 4 . Pleasure skating rink/warming house/ shelter/lighting 8 4 4 . Bike racks 8 4 4 . Tennis courts (2 ) 8 4 4 . Park Sign 7 .5 4 3 . 5 . Trailways connecting to peripheral trail & walkway systems 7 4 3 . Combination football /soccer field 7 3 4 . Play apparatus for pre- teens 6 .5 4 2 .5 . Conservation zone (west end) 6 3 3 . Sliding hill 6 3 3 . Restrooms/utilities 6 3 3 . Limited picnic facilities along trail 6 3 3 . Off-street parking ( limited) 6 3 3 . Informal area for lawn games ( frisbee , etc . ) 6 2 4 . An outdoor neighborhood social focus with benches , walkways & landscaping 6 2 4 . hockey Rink/Lighting 5 3 2 . Volleyball 4 2 2 . Horseshoes 4 2 2 . Picnic Shelter 3 2 1 . Hard surface basketball court 2 0 2 . A natural amphitheater for cultural events 2 2 0 . Tennis Practice Court !.till s' tItavos 3901a 'A 3)1VP --�I as /s// igOVI //af• i O l . _ 3 ; + I: g 2 'jsRrao Py ••I•• •... a Z PF 40 ZQ ( __MPY.-J..Afal__.rL_!FQC__��P_?r!_y V W3 T R Z a_l.Er.ftin.v- J U 0 ( .( nN ;rrr �t yQO aiA QQ J LU U) ag mva, i�G*b ono! ;,aus!'. II r, q$ QF i �a\ OY OC 3 LA.4c • I- i� r J •.09E 8 I� ® Q QZ S f0 b � J — ZQ Q � • t- WY 0 0 tRf N�f_J [f Al. rvv 30260 tiSrVr $44 -isaa9- � ♦ ' � c W �• ui y anw, •��'' cc V Q /�•r.R' 3.v.fwoN�y,. Of _ '.,♦.• • • r Rp.fN A , Z W ICL . J o! y/4+v:puM6 vrnOS fqr�f a rtn. ,w aV1�i•" •J -- ,� •0. m cc LU Id �. •; • f.-, a` 1b ♦Y� 500 n '., NA' g1 1\2 '1" O y so Ott o- )a Nrj/•w o 4r, tides = 1 a ^2 r b 1 - m J WM w z ZW/ IL CY01M 9_i �l5.61�1 d! c` I Q .•.a,�yn J9• R�aT Mpi: d sx �d .o n J _ WLLz LL O Z uj w r t .m;m •�' ? � g,i�y8! e+�+r°. 5 j� � ,r y�'�e _ 'r'$ '{` N ...�sr.sra-.,' ,� �� ; Y ra X. W. IUL Lu a t, 3 � ,c �r,•��ia��} � �' �-,gF5c en�E 'o U Q O ti /'� c� l��,� �� rd q fie.!!••• .'75�� .s Q �� N f rO� •1'�r / b.�Id ON '=a w fir iw e.u'w k so^'F S Rt`E^ »dn 2Y ..N $�' ..GTe,r! '� '• Of- !b 5 io !o! I r z nae - , c a6�,r�Q 'n OD JO — 99- /f f9 :`� -�,Q a 1+Z Al Ix .0 M t� 4d ANNWX + CIVON _ _3JOra Now M dx M/ .vw� I l I I I 3 Ti7QT,7-�.il.fAO.v Q ,�+'W J W OrRW O I , , r ri„ it :dvo� I;)k i aisfl.l. w Q f H J 2� AD O 1 , ry,d LL Z W �N I T Q cc W<2 WY < J Z FQ�-W (J , 2R. �z0> 00 �,� Q W `z Q t• 3�y Dc?=� C) $ J m W c aetiiee t N n _ o J C) `J U1 trA{ r e, Q O O (WyJQ pr as.Vc.if vovs'irt mF- � N t.Q Z W .1L N • -j a`Om F o pC C) ;e N o Q O + _ O it .1 W> g tl �t.w �siswevMp: T. '•;.'. stwsN s;% ••• CoIC cc up cc! jfJ iX'dir ,of L/,'•,i/ruw/vt s Mi J.U Iefl: Ift� w,rrl P U rob M/..,J.w„I 0411: R wq 'd1M lot tZ J I9Y�. t� Q�.•�i cc W _IL \ '~N p,1 ire 16 +, \ ti Ms- N •'•".• IL f 40 CL 000 P f1 Z 2 tI t NA•� tt F.. t� NM w•�� z It tw w m y ,o lW 1 e 1 NN ,S !f��':=�+ - "wwwa — W ;� TQC) ',.NN.irr ate, If t.+�CdJ j WZ' 4 a N 3.4 •1' a ,�!d�-f�'t o OzV� ui 41 lie c O S ' m e rs S° r+ltln J rolpy ~ b« `ly w �1• A Jos 01 to LL W Z • �, .err", `i ... ^d •« z fS tft, � .,�„" � a^^� � ., ire41 .` r O z ° U. ra ,t��s - rz •',.anco..,' t�`' •4i Y _ . 0`4 0 r �'' c?�% N�?': rrn Qw� Ati s� ,t.{ 4:r 4 •.a ti WO. . 0i• 9' _- , , ' Il•t! �� o-iQ .+1Y�w ! bll.It_ON _f Z w 0,65- It , CID OD rwm ,.i .�s+ ' �m'is�i^ ° n k: o $e �• ry4� Ss��S;N . N+J 3iif� Coe'_Np4t�' ;T rr 14r x w ; 3 - 9P f fi Nie W CC L a 39alU 3)IV3 m ANNH aero w1w x06 16.r r ec otos Z. 2 tor9, V � , � � � Dees' 40 W Q Grl e°, 'VN oco6 oer� Q W 3 31aa1� .:, 300 'i .Z 1 1 J4Q C J ^0f, oc 3 ) 3 o r pQ IC 3 ° �J � Co �.° W Zd 00 N n _ I JJ Q G� W W I Cm �Z Qm N pRU WF F•• to Q a 30y6..3 r�'4 �►— M ,a Ucci 101 zcc 110 01 •ir1Y" •,c R��6�� •r. 'Ix4 40 �� ,. i.X t0.+ — ,� $ .r •`i ' tc CCW. 96of y Y xrr• 6 'Jd :'i:;:}}ii Joe Z e6 urt rn e ' N N � / US i C. °s �' �� • IIscli 89 p ID IF z C, n ^' - � ,+'• to � N'r �; � //�.- /-' Z z LL Z •e is°'i� •p 'AAs :B � Qa (� O'w •i �,�� tY�l•t{� YET , 3 .fit � 1 1 ( ) Wz �Pr ��• // z U. 0 ems.•> ��A^B` °�. 4 �a 4aee'' M s4r •..'• oj�P(Pt • �:� Wa 26 +5�' a�"' '�.:f G ' �g"o► SP Z /•� sr n f•6. •s. � �-. � sem ZY is fe 8 a� • `,�6 iA� py 01— Q Q e r c 16 ts• i � '�,'. •,x is rec a"= -� * : 1< ,. •}.\ N � MLU till � O a n n Z � rnrn No > � Or a � rn o S ° 1 g s S 3 • m s m ; 2 F c CO) N s „ O $ 0 0 � 0 CL n nM s cn N s r r co n r . • BRAUEROPD ASSOCIATES LTD., INC. MARCH 11, 1981 PHASE I , Meet w/Stall Site AnalyNs Preliminary Neighborhood Present *Program tiput ' Photography Report Meeting to PrelanMery Defdg*M • Ideal h bdmh- • Program Evaluate Report to • Constraints sk SuRdAty •Alternatives Alternatives Staff for •Recom Selection •Collect Deta Constratets mendations "o 14—u-MMMENO Meet w/ A Orrin Thompson RE: ScheduN PHASE 11 Recahre Prepare ease Directions me"and RE Preferred Prey ARer"We Master Plan R ( t � RIDGECLIFFE REIGHBORH8111 i 4i K Advisory Parks A RecreatibA Commission Round-Table Session April 14, 1981 7:00, p ,m. 7:00 p .m. convene/Back round/Introductions, Ken Vraa, L "Di red tor,71of Parki& Recreatioii ..Purpose, of Session/Definitions Background . In trodpce 'Consul tants 7 : 1Q p .m. The Process., Fr=ed. Hoisington, Breuer (Associates Ltd. , JiTc. 7 :15 p.m 0 portuni ties & Constraints, George Matson, BrauerA ssoc a es .., . Inc. 7:25 p .m. Questions 7 : 35 p .m. Small 8rou;p Session 1 . Instructions .Facilities ` Selection 8:05 p .m Table Reports, Additions to List 8: 15 p.m Sma1lGroup Session 2 . Instructions .Scoring of Facilities ry~ 8:40 p .m,. Record Scores on Master Chart 8:40 p .m. Summary _m s 8:45 p .m. Recess SMALL GROUP SION 2 - FACIII.TIE:S SEtEItApril 14, 2981 COMPREHENSIVE FACILITIES LISi - it''ID6 ., fi ..;NEIGHBORHOOD PARK These facilities are suggestions wh#;+, a�►6l ved from the data review, the site and area analysis and a programming session between City Staff and the Consultant. The list only repre- sents a starting point for discussions. Discuss each item in small group to be sure everyone understands .it,. then add any facilities you wish to the list. Do not eliminate items from the list since the scoring in small group ;sess`ion ,2 will serve that purpose. Return the green "master copy as the record of your group's findings. Con-ServAtion zone (west end) . sliding hill Trailways connecting to peripheral trail & walkway systems. Bike racks Ball diamonds (baseball and softball ) . 'Pleasure stating rink/warming house:/s.hel ter . ,Combination football/soccer field ,P Restrooms./util i ties 'tennis courts (2) with practice court . Hard surface basketball . court Play apparatus for pre--teens 1 Lim#ted picnic facilities along trail Off-street parking . , A natural amphitheater for cul tural events Informal area for lawn games (frisbee, etc. ) . An outdoor neighborhood social foto$ with benches , walkways A landscaping . Other se Mer s i,de necessary. Please return the, yellow mash copy as off;ic.ia1 recordo-f .your table' s findings WNW SMALL GROUP SIOW - SC4R, April 14, 1981 FACILITIES SCOR1.04 40,0't ON PARK Score facilities as a group as fol taws; t BSOLUTELY MUST BE ACCOM'ODATED 3 very desi rabl e 2 desirab a but ekoendable 1 Opendable Score O ABSOLUTELY UNNECESSARY Conservato-n, lone (west end) . -S1 fling hilt « Trailways connect-i ng to peripheral trail A 'wa-lkway systems' Bike racks . Balt diamonts' 1-baseball and softball ) Pleasure skating, rinklw`arming house/she1 ter n ,4 Combination fare tbaII tsooce0 iRi'eld Re s tr.00mslu,,ti t i ti e s . Tennis courts (2 ) , with. practice court Hard surface basketball court Play apparatus for pre�teens L#mi tedpicnic facilities alo#g ,tra� t Off-street parking . A natural am=phi thea ter, fvr . cultural events Inforualarea for l awn "#;tnos tf isbee, etc. ) . An outdoor neighborhood sod:ial" .fe61 with benches ,.. walkways & landscaping . Other s . o . e side necssary« Please return t# : ,..green mas to upy as tho .off#c i a1 record of your table' s findinga . �� COMMENTS RECEIVED AND QUESTIONS ASKED AT THE APRIL 29, 1981 RIDGECLIFFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK MEETING : 1 . In light of the fact that alternative three does not have a full size combination football /soccer field , can pick- up games still be accomodated with that alternative? Yes . The informal play area will be sufficient in size to serve that purpose . 2 . A concern was expressed over the lighting level for hockey as perhaps inconsistent with the neighborhood park concept. 3 . A concern was also expressed regarding the noise asso- ciated with hockey. 4. In response to the above concerns , Roger Martin explained that the hockey rink lights are turned off at 9 : 00 p .m. 5 . Will any restrictions be imposed on the use of the hockey rink for league play? Since the facility will not be constructed for some time, no immediate answer could be offered. 6 . One resident expressed the opinion that Alternative 2 seemed to be more appealing and consistent with the neighborhood park concept. 7 . Another stated that the park should remain as natural as possible. 8. A suggestion was offered to fence the hockey rink for neighborhood use only. It was explained that this kind of limitation could not be imposed. 9. A question was asked regarding the possibility of a hard surface basketball court perhaps at the end of a tennis court. Roger Martin explained that such facilities are usually not used to a degree warranting their construc- tion and that that was the reason for the APRC having scored basketball relatively low. 10. Is there any possibility that a hockey rink could be added to the park at a later date in the area now designated for general skating? Ken Vraa explained that that is a possibility but that it is preferable to establish a plan which includes everything now rather than to have to reconstruct the park site at a later date . 11 . How can the neighborhood decide on one of the three alternatives? Ken Vraa explained that the Council will make the ultimate decision and will base that decision in part on the comments received at the neighborhood meeting. 12. A major concern was expressed about noise and traffic on Covington Lane . The questioner asked whether traffic could be slowed on Covington in the vicinity of the park? It was explained that warning signs may be able to be used as a deterrent to fast traffic . 13. A question was asked about the size of the buffer area at the edges of the park and George Watson of Brauer & Associates explained that higher noise areas should be landscaped to minimize impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. No specific dimension has been developed as of this time. 14. A question was asked about phasing and it was explained that phasing will be established in Phase II . 15. A question was asked if there would be additional meetings and if the neighbors could be informed of said meetings? Yes . 16 . Ken Vraa was asked whether the staff would recommend one of the concepts to the City Council on May 5, 1981 . He explained that the staff would not make a recommendation at that time. 17 . One neighbor asked about the possibility of adding a wading pool . It was explained that one could be added but that these entail high construction and maintenance costs . 18. A concern was stated for the crossing of Johnny Cake Ridge Road by children seeking access to the park . 19 . Another comment was made about keeping the park as natural as possible and not having it transformed into hard surfaces and fencing. Generally, the nine or so attendees were pleased with the concepts presented. Meeting was adjourned at 8: 05 p .m. a, Agenda' Information Memo May 1, 1981 Page Three PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR'T'MENT D. Public Works Department All public works, items will now be placed under Additional Items to " allow more time for other Department Head Business or informal issuds' .',to be addressed by the City Council between 6:'30 and 7:00 P.M. ,1 There-. .areten ' (10) items on the,..agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one : (1) motion by the. City Council. If there is any Item which -the City Council would, like to discuss in further detail, .. that item should be removed frd ',.,the Consent Items and placed under Additional Items 'unless the di uAsiort required is brief. This will allow the Mayor toproceed with Public Hearings as legally noticed at 7.00 p.m. { CON =": SO--7 A. Approve Change Order ,#1 Co4tract 80-7 , - Contract 80-7 provides N for the installation of utilities in the Windtree W£ndcrest and Uuckwod Trails Additions: B :case there were problems with the developers completing . the requirigrading in the time frame anti- cipated under the City's contract' the, ,contractor` was not able to install: the utilities in a timely 'tttanner. Consequently, the rough :gradin and gravel base, 3.nstallatin has been delayed in all three (3 subdivisions. A Contract for the construction of , the streets is presently out for bids which will incorporate this final `;grading': and gravel base installation crginally ,anticipated to be ' installed with the utility .cbntract. Therefore, this change order ' prouides for the deletion ,from -the utility contract , of the subgrade -preparation and the , gavel. `base installation (deduct $23•,632) . In, addition, because the contractor' could not proceed as originally anticipated, this change order' provides for an extension of the completion date; ..to stay 15-1, 1981. ACTION TO, BE CONSIDERED ON TH1 MATTER. To approve Change Orders #1 to Contract' 804 providing fear {a deduct of` $23,632 and an,exten- son of the completion date :d�f , h ts' 3'3- e Agenda: Information Memo May 1, 1981 Page Four CONTRACT 80-10 B. Contract 80-10`, Final Payment/Acceptance (Silver Bell/Wuthering Heights Utilities) -= 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 certified by their firm and ,our maintenance division. The final dons itruction cost underran the revised contract amount by 8.8% ($5,400) . All costs associated with this project will be assessed in the near future. ACTION° TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER To approvethe third and final payment for Contract '80-10 to 'Encon Utilities, Inc. , in the amount: of $14,959 and accept for:,perpetual maintenance. PRa TECT 302 C. Project 302, ,Recei've =Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing 4 I-494 Trunk Storm Sewer Outlet) -- With the ' forthcoming con- struction of I-494, a trunk , storm sewer outlet from Pond . FP-1 .(O'Neill , Pond) is required. During ` 1980,, a preliminary engineering report was prepared by our- consulting ' engineering firm comparing the feasibility and economics Associated with a `gravity storm sewer Ys a lift station for this required storm sewer outlet. As a result ,,of this report, on January 20, 1981 the City Council approved the gravity outlet concept. Subsequently, the staff has been working with MnDOT to prepare theappropriate cost participation agreement necessary to allow for this construction under MnDOT contract for the construction of I-494. The method' of this storm sewer outlet having been resolved in addition ' to determining the financial responsibilities -of its construction, a feasibility report for Project 302 has been prepared and is being presented to the '< City Council for review: ` ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER. To receive the feasibility report ; for Project 302 ( I-494 Storm Sewer Outlet) and order the public hearing to be held on June 2; 1981. y. _• CONSTRUCTION .BASEMENT ;FSR MnDOT D. Approve Temporary Construction Easement to MnDOT (I-35E/Black- hawk Road Trail Construction) -= -With the I-35E Freeway` progressing north to Cliff Road, it ' will 1.* necessary for MnDOT to construct' { a pedestrian trailway crossing over the new freeway at the intersec- tion . with the 200 foot trailway .easement under the NSP' power' line. In order for this trailway ` ovepass to -be constructed, MnDOT will have to perform construction activities within the park property , dedicated within the\ 200 foot, TSPpower - .iine easement. This r n Agenda information Memo May A , 1981 Page Five temporary ;construction easement will expire on December 1, 1986. Attached on page is a copy of a sample resolution to be con- sidered by the Council which authorizes .the City Clerk and Mayor to execute the temporary construction easement for the City of Eagan. r ACTION TO `BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve the resolution for temporary construction easement and authorize th+e Mayor and City Clerk to execute the resolution. 14 s i a;. x*x a _ .: W4 ` x� CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION Tenporary Construction Agreement to MnDOT Trailway Construction - 35E/Blackhawk Read WHEREAS, MnD(7I' will be constructing I-35E through the City of Eagan; and WHEREAS, the construction of this Interstate freeway requires the installa- tion of a pedestrian/bikeway overpass to allow continuation of the City's High- line Trailway; and WHEREAS, the construction of this trailway overpass and its connection to the existing trailway constructed by the City requires construction activity within present park land under the jurisdiction of the City of Eagan; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eagan hereby authorizes MnDOT to perform the necessary construction within the specified limits of the construction permit and hereby authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the necessary docm-ents required by MnDOT for this construction. DATED: CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN Attest: By: Beatta Blorquist, Mayor By: Gene VanOverbeke, City Clerk CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota County of Dakota City of Eagan I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a Resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan at a regular meeting of May 5, 1981 Gene VanOverbeke, City Clerk Agenda information Memo May 1, 19$1 'age Six* GRADING PERMIT; - EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK #1 , E. Approve Grading .Permit for Eagandale Center Industrial Park #I (Ra4enhorst' Corporation)' - The City has received an application for agrading permit from Rauenhorst Corporation to place fill -in Lots 1 through 4, Block 1, Eagandale Center Industrial ,Park #1 which is located in the northeast of the intersection of the Eagan Industrial Road with Pilot Knob Road. All appropriate bonds., insurance certificates and grading plans have been submitted, reviewed and approved by the City"staff. — ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER,: _ To .approve the grading .permit for \Lots 1 through 4, .Blank 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #1 (Rauenhorst Corporation) CONTRACT` 81-4 F`. , Contract 81-4 Receive Bids/Award. Contract -- At 10:30 a.m. w° on April 301 bids were received for contract" 81=4. enclosed on page } is a bid tabulation. These bids will be reviewed and a forma—f recommendation will -b .made by the Publi€. forks Director at the' City Council meeting'.on May k ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER.-,,'. To receive the bids for Contract 81-4 (St. Francis Woods). -,.�nd' 't- al Utilities} and award the contract to the lowest resp©risible bidder. u Y - F i n: t w, a " OUR FILE NO, 49215 ST. rRANCIS WOOD 2nd ADD'T?ON etc, P2OTECTS 307 329, 328, & 324 CITY CONTRACT 81-4 EACAN, MINNESOTA A. E".3Gi:1 .T2'S ES=ryTE --- $503,000 B. FEASIBILITY ESTLk7tTE --- $473,353 % low bid underran "A" 17.7% ETD T'If! 10!30 A. M. , CDST % low bid underran "B" 12.5% B*_D DATE- Thursday Apr, l 30, 1981 CONTRACTr2S TOTAL ETD PASE 1. Northdale Construction 414,053.75 2. Richard Knutson 417,620.50 3. Mueller Pipeliners 426,769.75 4. Erwin Montganery Constructim 427,607.50 5. Fischer Construction Co. 431,025.05 6. Austin P. Keller 431,585.00 7. Parrott Construction 433,279.19 8. Encon Utilities Inc 439,344.00 9. Fredrickson Excavating 441,040.30 10. Minnerath Inc 444,275.00 11. Lametti & Sons 446,865.00 12. Barbarossa & Sons 457,992.50 13. Fraser Const. Co. 464,775.75 14. Tom Montgomery Const. 465,251.50 15. Nodland Assoc. 467,263.00 16. G.L.Contracting 483,787.15 17. Dawson Construction Co 487,465.00 18. Centennial Contractors Corp 505,006.00 19. Progressive Contractors Inc NO BID 20. C.W.Houle Inc NO BID 21. American Contracting NO BID" 22. Sandm:iark Const. Inc NO BID 23. C. S. McCrossan Inc NO BID 24. C. Wayne Erickson NO BID 25. Julean M Johnson '- NO BID 26. Forley Contracting Inc. NO BID 27. Winona Plbg. C. Inc NO BID r Agenda Information Memo i May 1, 1981 Page Seven SEWER JET CLEANER G. Public_ Works Equipment, Receive Rids/Award Go'ntract -- At 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, April; 30, the City received the bids for a sewer, jet cleaner' for the Public Works Maintenance Division. Enclosed on page is a copy of the bid tabulation A review of the bids wail a performed by the _staff .with a formal recommendation being made by the Public Works' ' Director At . the Council meeting on May. 5. The- equipment iter is to, be purchased out of public ; enterprise funds, specifical;ly ,the sewer fund. v AGTI(}l# TO RE G0145IDEREI ON' THIS �lAT�ER: To receive the bids and award the contract to the lowest. responsible bidder for the sewer ,, jet cleaver. i IN L e r 3 r y, r Y 5. ' 1 PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR ME24T BID TABULATION 1981 Sewer "Jet" Cleaner (Trailer Unit) BID TIME: 3:00 PM CSDI' BID DATE: THURSDAY, APRIL 30, 1981 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE: $16,000 BIDDERS AMOUNT BID 1. Maden Equipment 1981 FMC New Unit $19,915.00 Alternate #1 1980 FMC Demo Unit 14,550.00 Alternate #2 1973 Truck Unit 18,700.00 2. Flexible Tool Co. 1981 Myers Smaller Unit 16,695.00 Alternate #1 1981 Myers New Unit 18,270.00 3. Frebs Enterprises 1981 FMC New Unit 17,778.55 Inc. Agenda Information Memo May 1, 1981 Page Eight PROJECT 333 H. Project 333, Receive the Feasibility Resort/Order the Public Hearing (Pilot Knob Center) - On March 31, 1981 , a petition was submitted requesting the installation of streets and utilities to service the Pilot Knob Center located north of Duckwood Drive. This petition was presented to the City Council on April 7, with subsequent action directing staff to prepare the feasibility report. The report is completed and is available for review and information. ACTION`; TO BE- CONSIDERED ON THIS'.MATTER: To receive the feasibility report for Project 333 (Pilot Knob,' Center)' and order the public hearing to be scheduled for 'June 25 1981. CONDITIONAL USE PP.PA Et AAL FOR YISH & .PET STORE I Conditional Use Permit Re wsl ' for Fish & Pet Store -- A year ago when the conditional use ,'Permit renewal was considered for the Fish & Pet Store,` complaints were; acknowledge regarding the odors that were given, off by - the keepin of birds, dogs and other small animals within the . store. ' . The tonditional use 'permit renewal was , tabled for one meeting, the City ,Administrator investigated the matter and it ,was agreeabl to the ;owner to further clean the store :area and take additioiha2 measures to control unnecessary ©dor. There have been no 'complaints made to City Hall regarding the Fish & Pet Center. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON 'THIS MATTER: To approve the conditional use permit renewal for the' Fish & Pet Store located at Cedarvale Shopping Center. 3.2 Beer License Black & White Sports A. Robert A. Jackson for a Temporary1.2` Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License for Black & 'White Sports. for 5-9/10-81 -- An appli- cation for a non-intoxicating malt ; Liqu©r. License in the name of Robert J. Jackson for :Black &. White Sports is in order for con- sideration. The license application is for May 9/10, 19$1 for A softball tournament at Univac•,.Field. Chief of Police DesLauriers has reviewed the application and; 'has given his approval per the Application form. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON TH'W ATTER: To approve the application for a non-intoxicating malt liquor license: in the name of Robert Jackson. IAr 1z0 s Agenda Information Memo May 1, 1981 Page Nine -_YANKEE SQUARE OFFICE III A, I. R. Bond Financing for Yankee Square Office III in the Amount of $1,403,480 -- A public hearing has been officially noticed in two newspapers to consider an application ,for industrial revenue financing as proposed, by a partnership (Mr. Martin and Vernon Color) in the' name of Yankee Square Office III. The amount of industrial revenue financing requested is $1,403,480. It is estimated that 4y 210 new jobs will be .created at an estimated payroll of $3,780,000. The City has approved two previous industrial revenue pri ate place- ments for the Colons, referred to as Yankee Square Of ice I and YankeeSquare Office II. Since: those projects were approved in 1980, I have asked that a letter be furnished to the City that -provides a current update on their financial status and further that an explanation be given as to how they plan to place the in- dustrial revenue financing` if, the application is -approved by the City Council. A copy of that letter' and the application for indus- trial revenue financing are enclosed on pages ' through Under New Business, Item B is the preliminary plat and var ance for Bicentennial Seventh Addition. Concerns were raised At the Planning Commission meeting concerning Block 1 Lots 2 and 3, as proposed on ` the` original preliminary plat of this addition. Some variances were being requested and there were concerns raised ;by the Director of Public Works regarding the variances and other coordination of their proposed , development. The APC also was con- cerned' about allowing -enough fl'exibilty` for a motel` to be located -on that site. When this ite* was handled early in the evening at the Planning Commission meeting,' due ' to , the above reasons, the preliminary plat of Bicentennial Seventh Addition was continued. Mr. Charles R Bartholdi had presented' "the Bicentennial 7th pre- liminary plat. Later in the evening, Mr. Vernon Colon appeared with Mr. Bartholdi and asked that the., preimnary .plat of Bicenten- nial 7th . Additon be approved with Block 1, Lot 1, allowing the Colons to proceed the office building III on that lot and that Block 1, ' Lots 2 and 3, be referred to' . as Outlots' A and ;B. Lot 1, Block 2, was to remain apart of "the" ,preliminary plat of Bi- Seventh Addition. Thisway, further discussion can be handled regarding the potential motel .site and also by treating those , lots as outlots resolved' the-' concerns of the Director of ; 1'ubl.ic Works In cons idering,_' action ' on' this industrial revenue - . financing, the publric hearing can be held and consideration given to the tax exempt: financing; however, <'action should be suspended Agenda Information Memo May 1 , 1981 1 -Page Ten until after. Item B of New Business is considered. This will allow the City Council to pact first -on the preliminarily plat and variance and then take ;formal "action on the I.R. financing as listed 'above. , If any member of the, City Council wants additional financial infor mation or any other informationregarding thin' application, please feel free to contact this office at any time. w ACTION` TO BE CONSIDERED ON T*IS` MATTER: To approve or deny indus- trial revenue 'financing for Yaxfkee Square Office III after action ; 'is taken on Item B", New ,Business A 7 r r _ <a , r LL F i i i • ;7aeud aeamd MENDOTA HEIGHTS FINANCIAL CENTER • 750 SOUTH PLAZA DRIVE • SUITE 208 • MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA 55120 Telephone: 452-3303 April 30, 1981 Mr. Thomas Hedges, City Administrator Eagan City Hall 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Mn. 55122 RE: Tax Exempt Financing Approval for Yankee Square Office Building III Dear Mr. Hedges, On April 29, 1981, you requested a statement from Federal Land Company specifying the amortization period and who we are working with regarding placing financing on Yankee Square Office III. Please be advised that Federal Land Company is working with the Towle Company, 600 2nd Avenue S. , Minneapolis, Minnesota regarding the financing. We are looking for a long term financial commitment (in excess of 20 years) , rather than a short term commitment. You also requested that revised financial statements of the parties involved in the transaction be provided to you, or in the alternative, a statement that no substantial changes in the financial conditions of T the parties has occurred. I have made inquiry regarding this matter. Please be advised that there have been no substantial changes in the financial conditions of the parties involved in this transaction since the approval of Yankee Square Office Building I. May you need further information regarding any of the matters discussed in this correspondence, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely yours, Cha les R. Bartholdi In House Counsel Federal Land Company CRB/ap 2 2� CITY OF EAGAN, 'MINNESO* - - 3795 Pilot Knob Road _ .. Eagan,. MN 55122 - -. APPLICATION FOR INDUSTRIAL REVENUE FINANCING REVIEW BUSINESS NAME: - Yankee Square Office TTT MINIMUM SIZE $500,000 -.LOCATION: 750 So. Plaza Drive , Suite 208 I-AND226 ,380 (Equity� $ t.Un) Site Pre- BUSINESS. FORM: repBUSINESS. FORM: Partnership BUILDING: $ 97 , REPRESENTATIVE: Martin Colon EQUIPMENT: $ - 0 - PHONE:. 452-3303 OTHER: $ 175, 000 NATURE OF BUSINESS: Real Fgtata TOTAL: $ 1 , 403 , 480 Development — Comm. Date: 3/ /81 -- DETAILED COST BREAKDOWN: Land Acquisition & Site Development $ • 26 , 500 + (226 ,380 Equit Contsibu�ion Construction Contracts $ 975 . 600 Equipment Acquisition & Installation$ • - 0 - Architectural & Engineering Fees $. 40 ;000 ' — Legal Fees $ 10 ,000 Interest During Construction $ 60 , 000 Initial Bond Reserve $ -0- Contingencies $ 30 ,000 Bond Discount $ 32 , 500 Other $ 2,500 HISTORY OF APPLICANT 1. Have you ever been. in bankruptcy? No 2. Have you ever defaulted on any bond or mortgage..'commitment? No 3. Have you applied for - conventional financing? Yes - No Success . 4. What are your future plans? To continue with the overall P.U.D. as agreed with City. 5. List financial references: 'a. Noy4-hwestern National Bank of nols _- Wallace But1Pr b: ' Dakota County• State Bank of Mendota Heights 6. When will the construction period begin? Start: May 11, 1981 !L 1t Finish: June 1 , 1982 7. Other comments: Land will be treated by Yankpp Yanksquare OffirP TTI as an equity contribution to the project. INFORMATION CONCERNING APPLICANT' S PROPOSED PROJECT 1 . PROPOSED LOCATION (ADDRESS AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION) �; n^- ; .1 7th Addition S:E. Quadrant of Federal Street and washincton Drive 2. NEW FACILITY OR EXPANSION? New Office Buildinc 3. INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL/RETAIL?,-' Commercial 4. ESTIMATE NUMBER OF NEW-JOBS 210 ESTIMATED PAYROLL $3 , 780 , 000 S . IS THIS SITE PROPERTY ZONED & ARE UTILITIES AVAILABLE?' Yes 6 . ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL SALES Office Use 7. POTENTIAL OTHER USES OF FACILITY . 8. WILL THERE BE MORE THAN ONE PHASE IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT? No - Only one Phase 9. EXPLAIN HOW THI$ FACILITY WILL NOT COMPETE WITH OTHER LOCAL COMPANIES ' There are -no office buildings of this size and character in .aaan except Yankee Sauare Office I & Yankee Square Office II 10. WHAT WILL FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS BE; WILL THE FACILITY BE A -LIMITED PARTNERSHIP?` No Limited Partnership - Financing will be -a 15rivate sale of Revenue Bonds. AN E SQUARE OF IC Z Date: March /I, 1981 Signed: Vernon Colon (Title): Partner Agenda Information Memo May 1, 198 Page Eleven + :1 TIMBERLINE,ADDITION STREET LIGHTING A. Timberline Addition Street Lighting -- At the City Council meeting of April 7, 1981,, it was determined that, a letter explaining the street light installation . to the Timberline Addition would be sent to each resident affected within that additionby the potential ° assessment for street lights; and, also, ballots were sent out with .this information to each property` owner. ' Enclosed on pages :" through is a copy of the .letter and ballot that was sent• to each of trie, resdents. Also enclosed on page is a copy of the survey analysis regarding, the responses were received 'by the staff regarding the. proposed street lights. It is clear, after reviewing the response, those persons g responding do not wish to have Street lights at this" time. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the installation of street lights for the 'Timberline Addition for Pro- Y ject 325. y 40 s- µ t e , w Y.:,7 '• � 3 BEA BLOMQUIST THOMAS HEDGES MAYOR *� - CITP ADMAISTRA10R CITY OF EAGAN EUGENE OVERBEKE THOMAS EGAN CITYTY CLERK MARK PARRANTO JAMES A.SMITH THEODORE WACHTER 3795 PILOT KNOB ROAD COUNCIL MEMBERS EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE 454-8100 April 17, 1981 y TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE OSIM)-TDSERL NE ADDITION - PRQTECI' 325 RE: Public Hearing for Consideration of Street Light Installation I . On November 18, 1980, the City Council officially received a petition from approxi- mately 42 property owners requesting the City to perform a feasibility study regarding the possible installation of street lights in the Oslund-Timberline Addition. On February 3, 1981, the City Council received the feasibility report and ordered the public hearing to be held on March 3, 1981. Legal notices of this public hearing were then sent to all property owners who would be assessed if this proposed street lighting plan were approved at the March 3rd public hearing. On March 3rd, the City staff pre- sented the feasibility report which proposed the installation of 13 street lights in the Timberline Addition. Because the Timberline Addition lies within the NSP jurisdic- tion, there were two policies available for the installation of street lights. The first provided for the installation of overhead street lights fed by an overhead wire distribution from the existing overhead electrical distribution of the Addition. Be- cause this would be handled by NSP at a nominal cost, the estimated per lot assess-ent was $17.00 with a proposed annual energy rate assessed to the individual properties of $14.00 per year. The second alternate provided for the installation of underground wiring and an ornamental street lighting system similar to other areas of the City. Because NSP does not have a policy pertaining to the installation of ornamental street lights, the City would have to prepare plans and specifications and contract with a private electrical firm for their installation. The estimated assessment cost per lot for this alternate was $234.00 per lot with an annual energy rate of $8.00 per year. At the March 3rd public hearing, there were several questions pertaining to the loca- tion of the street lights, the effective illumination range of these street lights, the cost of the City's proposal as cal- mred to individual yard light installation and questions pertaining to additional street lights over and above those presented in the feasibility report. Subsequently, the public hearing was continued until April 7th to allow staff an opportunity to hold a neighborhood meeting on March 19th at City Hall to answer these and any other questions in an informal atmosphere. A formal petition form was then prepared to be circulated to all affected property owners by the Timber- line Homeowner's Association. This petition was then presented to the Council on April 7th with several concerns by the property owners as to its validity and practicality in using it as a determining factor for the Council to approve or deny the proposed street lights. At this April 7th meeting, the City Council agreed with the suggestion to send out individual ballots to all affected property owners to be individually returned to eliminate any potential peer pressure either for or against the proposal. a� THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMPAUNITY Public Hearing for Consideration of Street Light Installation in the Timberline Addition April 17, 1981 Page two In an existing developed subdivision, it is iffpractical to expect unanimous approval for any particular system. Therefore, the Engineering Department has to evaluate the needs of the neighborhood and propose a layout conforming to overall commmdty stan- dards. Two additional alternates were discussed and appear feasible and can be in- cluded if the majority response so dictates. (#3 and #4 on response section) Therefore, we are asking your "vote" pertaining to the street light proposal as origi- nally submitted at the March 3rd public hearing. Please ccnplete the attached "survey" form and return to City Hall no later than noon on Thursday, April 30, 1981. If there is a majority of the prcperty owners in favor of a singular alternate not discussed in this report, I am sure the Council will give it proper consideration in the possible approval of the overall street lighting plan. If you have any questions pertaining to the past sequence of events that have led up to this notice, or possible future action, please feel free to contact the Engineering Department at 454-8100. A copy of the feasibility report is on file at City Hall and available for review Monday-Friday, 8:OO A.M. to 4:30 P.M. Z e1 , A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jac cut on line PRCUECT 325 4-21-81 TIMBERLLNE ADDITION STREET LIGHTS 1. Do you want street Lights installed in your neighborhood as YES NO discussed at the public hearings on March 3rd and April 7th? ❑ ❑ 2. If YES on #1, do you want overhead or ornamental? OVERHEAD ORNAAa',?TAL ❑ ❑ 3. If YES on #1, do you want two additional ornamental lights YES NO on the existing brick pillars at Woodlark & Lone Oak Road (Add $18.00/lot)? 11 El 4. If YES on #1, do you want the new "Halophane" fixture head YES NO providing greater illumination (Add $18.60/lot)? ❑ ❑ COMMENTS: NAME (Print) ADDRESS p PRCUF.CT 325 TIMBERLINE ADDITION STREET LIGHTS Survey Analysis An explanation of street lighting alternatives were mailed out to all potentially- assessed property owners on April 17, 1981 with a response requested by Noon on Thursday, April 30, 1981. As of Noon on April 30, 1981, the following responses were received by staff at the City Hall via the U. S. mail: YES NOI NO RESPONSE TELEEoHa Question 1 - Do you want street lights installed in your neighborhood as discussed at the - - - - - - -public hearings on March 3 & April 7?- - - 27_ _44 - - -40 _ _ - _2_-NO Question 2 - If Yes on #1, do you want ornamental? 26 1 Question 3 - If Yes on #1, do you want two addition- al ornamental lights on the existing brick pillars at Woodlark & Lone Oak 15 12 - - - - - - Road (Add_$18_00/lot)? - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ - - - - - Question 4 - If Yes on #1, do you want the new "Halo- phane" fixture head providing greater 21 4 2 _ _ _ _ _ _ _illumination (Add $18.60/lot)? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ There was a total of 71 written responses received with 2 responses being received over the telephone. Of the written responses received, 27 (38%) voted "Yes" and 44 (620) voted "No As a percentage of the total 113 lots to be as the same 27 who VOtE "yes" represent 24% and the 44 who voted "no" representMI-of all property owners affected by this report. ✓� Of those requesting street lights, all but one preferred the ornamental street light installation with a great percentage requesting the new luminaire fixture providing fox greater illumination. Of those responding in the positive for the street lights, ap- proximately 55% (15) requested two additional street lights to be installed on the existing entrance brick pillars at the intersection of Woodlark and Lone Oak Road. The staff feels that every effort has been made by the City to try and obtain the opinions of the people pertaining to the installation of street lights in the Timber- line Addition under Project 325. It is recd Trended that a final disposition on this project be resolved at the City Council Meeting of May 5, 1981. TAC/jac a� lie Agenda Information Memo May 1, 1981 Page Twelve WENDELL WIDSTROM ,B Wendell Widstrom, Storage of Trucks --- At the last City Council meeting, a request � Made by Wendell Widstrom, (letter enclosed on page 76, ;April 21 � " 1981 C.G: "packet) was continued until the May 5 1981 meeting to. allow for citizen response by official notifica= tion of. all residents on Trail Is End Road that this extension is being considered b the .City Council. Ene-1 sed on page 3 is a- letter that was mailed to ,al; property owners" on Tra s nd ,Road on April 23., 1981. Thoseparsons notified are as follows : Widstroms, Lenz, Mary, Bra u ; p ins, Lundstdn, Weckop, Wescott Mills Townhouse, Oswald, Wertie;,' Aaiining and Yankee Doodle Develop- ment Company. An application voas:. submitted to the City. requesting truck parking forhree. unt"s ox. 8eptembe:r 2 , 1978. A conditional ,T use permit was considered; by the Cf ty Cotn;l l due an objection of an ad-joining property owner. The= Advisory', Planning Commission recommended that the :appl. cat ,o be) denied the basis of the objections ,, that. were submitted 4M the fact that it did not appear to be an appropriate location for a trucking business.- The City Council fallowing the recg r art on of the AFC1took action to ,.grant 'a conditional use peri :to. 4pera.te three trucks to and from the premises which "ahould gfve aequte time for the applicantYJ tca close or move lois business.'' Later the mot-ion was amended to specifically grant the; permit: until June ":1; 1979. After an ex= tensi dn, this item went to coin on the part of the Widstroms and gas a result of the court prQceedin nebtiations transpired between the City and the attorney rep esentirig._ the Widstroms and it was agreed- that theWidstroms could1. " rema;in at their location until June 1, 1981. TheCity of EgA ta = to t the best knowledge of the f. City Administrator's Office, has :,trot received any complaints re- garding the starage .,of the truck or operation of the trucks since the co ►ditional use.psrmft was fixst`,ganted by theC .ty Council ACTION TD RE CONSIDEREII_ ON. THIS` MA'1TER:,, '"boy either apP rove or den y ; a specified , extension 'of time as. reteated by Mendell Widstrom to keep trucks on hisproperty escbs 356 } 'frail' s End Road. t F !1 y s;4 f a" ' rn : �" ]] 1 BEA BLOMQUIST THOMAS HEDGES MAYOR CITY ADMINISTRATOR CITY OF EAGAN EUGENE TY C OVERBEKE THOMAS EGAN CITY CLERK MARK PARRANTO JAMES A.SMITH THEODORE WACHTER 3795 PILOT KNOB ROAD COUNCIL MEMBERS EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE 454-9100 April 23, 1981 Re: Extension of Conditional Use Permit to Allow for the Storage of Industrial Trucks on Lot 3, Block 4, Wescott Garden Lots Dear Trails End Road Property Owner: The City received a letter from Mr. Wendell Widstrom of 3560 Trails End Road requesting a one (1) year extension to the June 1, 1981 expiration date of a conditional use permit to keep trucks on said property. The Widstroms indicated in the letter to the City and also at a regular meeting of the City Council held on April 7, 1981 that they have tried continuously for several months to find a suitable location for their business; however, due to interest rates and the price of property, it is not possible for them to consider the relocation. The City Council asked that all residents residing on Trails End Road be officially noticed that a one (1) year extension as requested by Mr. Wendell Widstrom to store trucks on his property will be considered at the next City Council meeting to be held on May 5, 1981. The City Council will consider your comments regarding the request for an extension at that meeting. If you have any questions regarding previous City Council action on this matter, please feel free to contact this office at any time. Sincerely, (L*Aji,6�4 Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator TLH/hnd 3 � THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. s f Agenda Information Memo May 1 1981 Page Thirteen Y SAFARIMALL SHOPPING CENTER I.R. FINANCING C. Preliminary . Res'oWtion for I. R. Financing far Safari Mall Shopping Center in Amount of $3,801,000' -- A 'public hearing was. held at the April` 21, 1981 City Council, meeting to consider the in—trial revenue financing for Safari Mall Shopping Center #' for the,, purpose of canstruetIng an 83,000 square foot shopping center generally referred to Safari Mall Center. The shopping ` center willi include a Red Owl-, -,storel Snyder Brothers , Drug and Coast to Coast which represent 2204403 square feet, 15,000 square feet and 7,,1300 square feet respectiVely. ; Small, tenants would comprise approximately, 37,8£ 0- square ��eet. � -The estimated payroll is $3,000-000 based o1 200 new ,_jobs. . "Rothchi:i d Financial did- provide information did provide Anfor tion regarding the proposed industrial revenue "fin�€,ncing which was included, in,each City Council packet without page numbering. ` o specific concerns were raised by theCity Council. : s 1. A financial analysis , m4 t1_ a included by Miller .& Schroeder Municipals, Inc.. A copy :et that review wa-s performed and w a copy of the report is enc los ! page _ 2.= Concerns and questit�ns,. mereei:`sed regarding the short term financing, speciictly Grp year temporary vs. a guaranteed take out for, ;A a eeptable amortization. Roth- child Financial ° has addressed phis issue in a letter which is attached on pages through . The letter presented ta; the City 'by .the fiscal consultant has raised a concern regarding the fixed .assets shown, 6n Mr. O'Neill' s finan- cial statement. The City' s cri ter3.a &PO,4 ,fic,ally states that land is not. financed by the issuat a t�� , t 1' 1 revenue placement;, - and, " therefore, Rothchild F�naricial . "been ; asked to clarity whether the land is ,a free" .and .clear d,in-g of the applicant or e whether there is come ;consideration t once that as a part of the shopping center ccnstruction. ,., `;A ;ite'r s' -to be received on Monday: offering additional clam ftt � ' if there are any addi.- tional questions regarding , this a enda ` item, pleases feel free to *: contact the City Administrator at any tie. ACTION' TO BE CONSIDER OAT —W S ATTER: To approve or deny an industrial, revenue or Safari Mall in the amount of : $3.,801 000• v; 1 Toll Free Minnesota(800)862-6002 Toll Free Other States(800)328 6 i 22 Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. 170 Northwestern Financial Center,7900 Xerxes Avenue South,Minneapolis,Minnesota 55431 -(612)831-1500 April 30, 1981 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges, City Administrator City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re: Safari Mall Shopping Center Financing Dear Tom: Our firm has completed its review of the above project's tax exempt financing request. Based upon the information made available to us, and subject to re- view by the Planning Commission and Council, we report the following: 1. Financial Statement of Mr. O'Neal: A. Deduct $700,000 in Fixed Assets for Safari Mall, this is not financed and developed as yet and no liability for borrowing is presented. B. There are a lot of non-current assets. 2. As far as we can determine, there is only an option on the land involved. It does not appear the land is free and clear. 3. The temorary financing request is understandable, but, a "take- out" should be arranged along with it. 4. The feasability of the project should be in the hands of the lending institution. Very truly yours, MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC. (6z! zi, Ernest L. Clark, Vice President ELC:ps 33 Headquarters:Minneapolis.Minnesota-Branch Offices:Solana Beach,California-Northbrook,Illinois-St.Paul,Minnesota-Naples,Florida Member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation MORTGAGE BANKERS Sincel885 April 24, 1981 4940 VIKING DRIVE EDINA,MN 55435 TELEPHONE(612)835-7511 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges 11 12 City Administrator 1 City of Eagan APq'rnr �'� N 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Industrial Development Revenue Bond Application CA Safari Mall Eagan, Minnesota 9 �� Dear Tom: As we discussed on the phone, the intent of this letter is to explain the most probable financing structure that the subject project will take under the proposed intermediate term financing and the reasons behind the selec- tion of this method. I believe that it is appropriate to mention that if, in fact, lonq term tax exempt permanent financing were available today at terms that the project could live with, it would be Eagan Associates` desire to pursue that vehicle. Unfortunately that is not the case today. We in the financing as well as the development fields are faced with un- precedented rates, terms and structures of financing. This pressure on the market affects conventional financing greatly and severely restricts the long term tax exempt market. Overall the lona tern markets response to the high inflation we are experiencing is to greatly escalate rates, from what we have grown accustomed, and reduce the length of term drastically. In addition, as an inflation hedge investors are requiring varying forms of participation in ownership. Within their own companies, long term mortgage lenders have to compete with bond departments for funds. The bond market has seen a voracious appetite from corporate entities for funds on a short term basis. All one has to do is read the Wall Street Journal to realize the phenominal rates paid by corporate credit entities for short term cash. Because of this competition within investor companies for the limited cash pools, the long term mortgage market is temporarily dead. Typical terms for mortgage financing without equity participation on either a tax exempt or conventional basis today would range from 5 to 7 years and 7 to 10 years on a mortgage with an equity participation. These terms closely resemble the terms found today in the short term bond market. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY LENDER 13 01 050" �l�c✓�S.fifi/- l.:irrrt�iu� �'rr�trrtr� Mr. Thomas L. Hedges April 24, 1981 Page two It is most probable that the intermediate term financing for the Safari Mall project will have the following structure: A 5 to 7 year term standby to mortgage loan will be obtained from a large credit institution. This standby to mortgage loan will be in a bankable form. ` That is to say, a local commercial bank will be able to fund its interim loan against this permanent take-out. With the Council 's approval for tax exempt status the interim or construction loan will take the form of a two year tax exempt mortgage construction loan. The constructionlender will be lending on the same security as if he were lending in more conventional times against a permanent take-out. In fact, the only difference in structure of the typical permanent loan take-out and the standby loan take-out is the length of time the interim lender could hold -the loan (potentially two years for the standby and varying lengths, depending on size and complexity of construction, for the typical permanent loan) and the fact that the standby lender will release his right to fund the loan if a suitable replacement can be found, to the mutual agreement of the developer and commercial bank that has purchased the intermediate term bond. If another take-out is not found in the two year period, the construction lender has a buy-sell agreement signed between the standby lender and itself that will cause funding of a permanent loan by the standby lender just as it would with a typical permanent lender. Projects such as Safari Mall and the shopping center proposed on Pilot Knob Road in Eagan are examples of projects that would be financed on a real estate basis. The lenders look primarily to the underlying value of the real estate as their primary security for the loan. The developer's exper- tise and track record are also looked at to see if he has been successful in developing the type of real estate proposed. In many cases the loan will be given on a non-recourse basis where the lenders only security is the real estate itself. In discussions that occurred at the prelininary hearing it was mentioned that an intermediate term bond was given preliminary approval for a project for Carson Pirie Scott. When an investor looks at a project for that type of corporate entity, they are looking primarily at the credit of the company and only secondarily at the real estate, if they look at it at all . There really is no direct relationship between a Carson Pirie Scott project and a real estate project like Safari Mall . The potential investors for each project are looking for different things and each would be structured differently than the other. 3S �1�c�%ir�r�i/-�rrrrrrrcrcrl�(!cr�icrtr� . Mr. Thomas L. Hedges April 24, 1981 Page three The following is a comparison of the different risk factors the Council perceives by the intermediate term bond method versus the more conventional current permanent tax exempt take-out. The terms assumed are what is available today on a typical real estate project. Permanent Standby Financing during Financing provided by Same construction period commercial bank (tax exempt) Financing after Permanent take-out Commercial bank could completion of lender would purchase hold loan up to two construction loan from commercial years. At some point bank in time (up to this 2 year period) the commercial bank would sell its bond by its agreement either to the standby lender or to a tax exempt take-out lender arranged during this 2 year period. Term of permanent 5 to 7 years (with- 5-7 years [with standby take-out out participation) take-out (worst assump- 7 to 10 years (with tion) ] participation) If an assumption was made that the Safari Mall Shopping Center could be financed either way and the construction period would be one year, the overall length of terms by the two methods would be: Permanent 6-8 years (without participation) 8-11 years (with participation) Standby Method 7-9 years (assuming using the complete interim period) As you can see, the security of overall term is basically a toss up between the standby method I have described and the permanent tax exempt method. The question then becomes why would a developer-owner decide to proceed on the standby basis versus obtaining, at current market rates and terms, a perman- ent tax exempt mortgage if it were available. The current market rate for a -3 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges April 24, 1981 Page four permanent tax exempt mortgage without participation would be in the 122 to 13% range. The terms would probably consist of a call option or Straight call provision by the lender in the 5th year. If a borrower could get enough money to make the project economically feasible (which is doubtful ) and accepted such a commitment, he would be at the mercy of the lender. If the market rate has moved up by the 5th year and the lender decides to call the loan, the developer in refinancing would lose the tax exempt status and would have to go to the market at whatever the current conventional rate would be. If the market rate would go down substantially in the 5 year period, the lender wouldn't call the loan and therefore the developer would lose substantial cash flow that he might have if he could refinance at the lower rate. This additional cash flow could go towards upkeep of the center if the developers had the opportunity to keep it. The developer choosing the intermediate term bond is looking for the market to hopefully recede or at the least, stabilize, to permit a longer term and/or lower rates on a permanent tax exempt mortgage. The downside of this projection is that the market will remain highly volatile, in which case he has arranged a standby mortgage in which the terms are known up front as protection if such circumstances do occur. I believe the statement made by Councilman Smith at the April 21 Council meeting was very apropos. The statement referenced the fact that a shopping center at some point in time will be constructed on the Safari Mall site; if tax exempt financing provided the opportunity to the developer to make the project more appealing to the community, it would definitely be a positive asset to the community as well as the City. The project in its design phase has not cut any corners in its attempt to provide a pleasing exterior to the neighborhood as well as designing in its internal structure a very high de- gree of energy efficiency. If tax exempt financing were eliminated as a potential form of financing, the development entity would be forced to cut corners in construction costs to maintain the economic viability of the project. I believe very strongly, Tom, that the Safari Mall project would be a positive addition to the community. I have tried to detail that the approach we are anticipating taking in financing is nothing more than an adaptation to the market and provides equal security in its potential term to what is available today in the permanent tax exempt market. By using this method we are leav- ing open the opportunity for the developer to potentially improve his position by waiting out the market. If this happened it would only improve the viability of the center. -3 -7 •�Ic�lt.irf'iti✓. �rir{rxcrcrl((Or.r�rorcr� Mr. Thomas L. Hedges April 24, 1981 Page five I would be more than happy to meet with you, your staff or members of the Council to answer any questions you might have regarding this letter or the project in general . Sincerely, ROTHSCHILD FINANCIAL CORPORATION Stan J annes Assist` t Vice President SJ:nj � 8 b e Agenda Information Memo May ,1 , 1981 Page Fourteen - y r. VILLIAM MEADE -_WAIVES OF<PLAT D. Wt,11iam ,Meade far Waiver of Prat in r•Ordeto Subdivide a Five Acre Parcel - 'At' the last City Council meeting, a recommendation of the' APC to ,consider ,the' approvalof a waiver_ of plat for . a five acre parcel located in ' Section 31 and applied for by William Meade was continued due to the .,, fact that the applicant was not present at the meeting. The ' Ci ty 'Administrator has gent a letter to the applicant as a result Iof the lslw` City Council meeting asking that he please make arrangements q'. attend . the City Council, , meeting . scheduled for 5-5-$1. For, saiit ©nal ' information on this agenda item, please refer' to" the PI a I:ng Internrs report found on pages 51 through 55 and. °a. copy of the: -APC minutes, on page cket56 of the 4- 21-81 pity Council pa . - Inyber of the City Council is missing this informaton, please ,etact this 'office and the infor- m,ation` will be provided. with the: . inistrative Packet. ANION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS. TTER=• To approve or deny the recommendation of the' ARC to A-pprove the waiver of pkat in order to subdivide a five, acre parcel orned by William Meade. COCA--COLA - HM MKINC VARIANCES " E. Goca-Cola' Corporation for, A ' '�1 dance from Height Limitation r and a Variance, fret Parking a ` lrement for an Industrial Zoning District located on Lots thresh` 14, Block 7, Eagandale Center Industrial.- Park _ At the hast .�C1��.'.�Couneil meeting, a recommenda= tion of the APC to consider , appioval �of variance for height and . parking requirements for �c'a.-Co`l.a Corporation was continued . due to ,the fact that the applitnt was, not present at the meeting. : The City 'Administrator has seat, 'a letter ,ta -`.the applicant as a result of last City . }Council � irtg asking` that he please make arrangements to ' att the City ,Chun meeting scheduled for 5- -81. : For additional `lnformatian cin this ,agenda item, please refer , to the Planningk 'Intern' s reports and tet minutes found on pages 63=72 of the 4-21- 81 City Counci. packet. I£ ani member of the fi City. Council is missing` this info ti+� p3:ease `contact this office and the information will beprsVded,:with .the Administrative Packet. ACTION TO BE CONSID U ON TRiS `-, ATTft0 To' approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to app Ve the. varl.ances for . height and parking limitation re, rements fob °soca-Cola Corporation. s o e Agenda. Information Memo' May 1, 1981 . Page Fifteen f W �i� i WAIS QF .PLAT JEFFREY BLOOM, A. Jeffrey ' Bloom fer, Waiver: Plat in Order to Split Lot 109 Block 3, Clearview Addition - A public hearing was first considered at the , Advisory Planning Commission meeting. t►n March 24, 1981 to consider an 'application by R.R. Bloom for a waiver of plat to divide Lot 10, -$lock 3, Czle,4rview Addition, Oto two (2) single family lots. This item w;.s .continued until the April 28`, 1981 APC meeting due to a confLidt of the appl .6411tto appear at the meeting. The Advisory Plannip ,C��ssion is recommending approval of. the waiver of plat to the.,City Council .. , For ;additional informa- tion on the matter, Blease v Ofiar to the Planning Ihtern'ss report i a copy of whichM is enclosed . on ,pages "! through For additional information regarding action taken by the , `C those � minutes will be enclosed in the:;A.drninistrative packet on Monday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THR"s MA. To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve the waiver of plat for Jeffrey R. Bloom as described. _ r t n d ? CITY OF EACAN SUBJECT: MU-VM OF PIAT APPLICANT: JEFFREY R. BLOOM LOCATION: LOT 1:0, BLOCK 3, CLEARVIEw ADDITION, SECTION 29 EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MARCH 24, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: MMKH 18, 1981 REPORTED BY: KURTIS G. ULRICH, PLANNING ASSISTANT APPLICATION SUBMITTED, An application has been'sutmitted for a waiver of plat in order to divide Lot 10, Block 3, Clearview Addition into two single family lots. COMMENTS The applicant has requested a waiver of platting in order to split a 52,500 square foot lot into two approximately equal. portions. The applicant has also indicated that he wishes to construct, residence upon one of the newly- created lots. The newly-created lot would be approximately 26,250 square feet and would be well above the minimum lot size requirements. Additionally, there are about three or four other similar lot splits in this addition. If approved, the waiver of plat shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. A single access shall be provided off of Cliff Road to serve both lots. 2. All necessary utility easements shall be provided. 3. The newly-created lots shall meet all City ordinance requirements. 4. Approval shall be obtained from Dakota County before accesses gained to Cliff Road. 5. An additional 25' right-of-way dedication for possible future Cliff Road expansion shall be provided. 6. A cash park contribution shall be provided on the newly-created lots. 7. The applicant shall accept all existing easements. KGU/jac 41 CITY OF EAGAN T,,A= OF PLAT JEFFREY R. BIOCM MARCH 24, 1981 PAGE TWO ENGI,iEERING RECCHMMATIONS 1. Additional sewer and water service must be provided to the west half of Lot 10. 2. All assessments providing benefit to this lot for streets and utilities must be agreed to and/or paid. 3. In addition to the 5/10 foot drainage and utility easements adjacent to property lines, a drainage and ponding easement must be dedicated across the north portion of Lot 10 to incorporate the 928.0 elevation contour. 4. Sufficient right-of-way be dedicated to provide for a 75' half right-of- way along Cliff Road (County Road 32) . TAC/jac • 0 TO: PLANNING COV1 IISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLADRQER FROM: THOMAS A. COLBER'T, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: MARCH 19, 1981 RE: WAIVER OF PLAT - LOT 10, BLOCK 3, CLEARVIEW ADDITION (JEFFREY BLOOM) Public Works Department has the following ocrnents to make in consideration of approval of the above-referenced request: STREETS AND UTILITIES Improved street,- sanitary sewer, watezmain and storm sewer have been installed to provide proper service to Lot 10 Block 3. However, the sanitary sewer is installed across the easterly 501 feet of Lot 10. An extension of this sanitary sewer will have to be provided to insure service to the proposed west half of Lot 10. In addition, water service to Lot 10 is in the form of a 1" copper water service at the same location of the sanitary sewer. This exis- ting 1" water service is sufficient to handle one resident. Therefore, the westerly proposed lot will have to obtain a secondary water service from the trunk watermai.n located on the southside of Cliff Read. EASEti=S/ROW Additional right-of-way will have to be dedicated to provide for a 75' half right-of-way along Cliff Road. In addition, the normal 5' drainage and utili- ty easement should be dedicated adjacent to all c run property lines and 10' drainaqe and utility easement dedicated adjacent to public right-of-way. A drainage and ponding easement should be dedicated across the northern portion of Lot 10 to incorporate the 928.0 elevation contour. ASSESSMENTS All trunk area and lateral assessments have been levied against this parcel under previous projects.. However, the sanitary and water area trunk assess- rents were levied on a per lot basis. Therefore, an additional per lot tn:nk area assessment s:-b-culd be required for the newly-created lot proposed by this lot split. Also, there has been a reluctance by the property owner to accept the street assessment associated with the upgrading and improvement of Cliff Road. Therefore, it is recommended that as a condition of approval of this waiver of plat, that all related and required assessments be paid. I will be available to discuss in further detail and answer any questions pertaining to this report at the Planning Ccoudssion Meeting on March 24, 1981. Respectfully submitted, Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jac Ma - •,,i.e 5" 7066 URURSQN o8 -ynw,v '�:, •..E. ;,; NQINitRINO (I`_a,H,ns Mnso;a55432 C" .Wu ,pd E osyW y�f 0,so�th:�f Rod Ifice 8H0 -65ip n�ureruy�Sal ?'Wray�Lenl Sur •Land P �® 8urntv,de. M,nnesota 55337 Certificate of Survey for /ber Almyndson /89.00 EAST T, o � o II I 11AIL To I3E f SET oM I f I AppRo✓AL I / I I I t 50 I O o� is zoo.oo , 0 jt. ..� r =9l.7B-- �� 93.78 /87.56 wE'ST Cfiffh Woad Rearin Shown Are Assured Lof 10, B�oCh 3.VODenoti:� �:xisting iron mi.,nume * Denota's iron monument set. Clear��'Iow , DaA�exl, , Cour 1 hwreby certify that this Is w frttq awr cwrrras• VY rNrrlsontOtlew Of • wrwy of the bownAwrles of the wbew dwserib*d lepra,en1 w1 th. rrlewttrn r!1 ll Iswilritt9s, thus• A. rn4 •14 v'ribl� Onc.oashrtta.irat if any, frern or an trllA lever. As wrveyr,A by me this�rey wf��s A•O. 1 - A SUIROURSAN iNGIN,a" lnwrwwNt � S r ►y 001 i r +IL ./ ':-:':-:7 . .. . . . .. .. ii7 r' . . / N . . . . . . . . . . . _ 0. y _ SRN:• / S1i4TES PQW 1 . UTILITY 01 i� �>�^' �� jiiil + I rl:��i• p �:I it ��Ir ��,'_ 11 ••c«.+'�,1� ('// �� Y IiIII�f. -�jb. i '; I I �®r w it ' I i;�, Ill if �i � ��/ �/� � ��' •�/�,, ' ti �. �.—'r~� LE RIVER 32 EST ZEN TE P, I , aJ LLU / SLt ed: i To ICU i �7�•, it ".I,J•' .N'� •�• "• �`�i,/•�•�'/� J.1� �"r'.,:,�'/ - ,� � T ��`•.• ;7 i•J �� •/ �'i .J 1.:`�/ .%..r' !.J' J.I. ' `-�- / -_ lJ}� � .i. J •�} i�Ja � �:.i 3,/ is � ��"+� .t�'••• l Sof J`i.�...• .� j'1 `', 1J„'-.�,''- 1��)l..J �' :f _ r /I •„j..I � � v.7 .r •/�� J `1 3 f 77 J -.i./ •,lj ./. ./r .� Z�^r."(•J 7`x.1. .�� -r �� r .i i. 1J.i `tr j �) ' j.J � ' `1.1 j''�J�•7��r./.'? ?.:�/ .j,J� �i,j i��:1 J ,l✓ � '` ) �J. �/ .�.� .t.sJ�.4 i.a•J � J^'! C i ••r '_-,��J' ,.� Y•i.�:".r"7 `��-iJ 7".,, -•�r•J �s.� 7.r, `• i •'.�..j �'.1` ;J 'l' J' r ')., •�J / �•� , p •j 'J• 1•,'.i J 1+ . `r y Agenda Information Memo May 1, 1981 Page Sixteen PRELIMINARY PLAN & VARIANCE FOR BICENTEiNIAL 7th ADDITION _ L B. Preliminary P1A' 4 Variance for Bicentennial 7th Addition 1 A public , hearing was heed at--the April ,28,, i981Planning. Commission meeting to consider, talo , applications, one for a preliminary Plat for Bicentennial , 7th Ac�i.ton which consists, of approximately 16'.21 acres, containing four hats --,and an eutlot;, -and the second application is a request Jot � width variance "for Lot 3, Block 1, Bicentennial 7th Add on .. ,-t. he.- APC -is )rec,ommeriding approval of a revised portion .of the Bicentennial . 7th .Addition preliminary plat to the City Council. As ,tWted' under. Item, A of Public Hearings the Advisory Planning Commis�t' c,n . viewed' :the pretimir►ary plat and, specifically, the variances as was conceirnod about (1 ) enough land area to allow 'for a motelplan s' ned: far several years in the original. PUD agreement, concerns., of the engineering department as they cel"ate to' ?the"'variancesoptsed in the Bicenten- nial 7th Addition. The main reason fob p1ing the Bicentennial 7th Addition at this-time wa'� to:al 1, te.,"+Colons to proceed with Yankee Square Office Buildi * 11 rhich i 'p oposed as Lot 1 , Block 1 ; of the original proposed plat . In. order to avoid a delay in the consideration of " the pre- I as. .well as industrial revenue financing, the 'Colons 4a*d ' the APC ;to consider "a revision in the 'Bicentennial 7th Additii preliminary plat which eliminates - k;of s 2 and: 3 of B lock 1 and sh wa" them as, Out l of s A and B. Thos e are the only changes to the prelim�:niry plat of Bicentennial 7th Addition. The Director of Public< torks and City Administrator i have met with, the Colons sint,e ` " ,e ''Planning Commission meeting and feel the Ioriginal concerns addrassin this prelim nary plat have been, 'adequately addressed a they 'ro atq to Lot 1' Block 1, and Lot -1 Bleck For 'it "Lnformation . ,pan, this .agenda item, ,please refer; to " the ty , # lanner's report, ik copy, of which is enclosed on pages thrr ugh for your reference. Enclos'Od,� but not._; en ad page 0UM6;i1 arger drawing of Bi- 70, -41 7th Add tiAn.� A .copy:, cif Che APC action regarding this tem will ,be enclosedn the Adminl +arratalre� Packet on Monday. ACTION:°�TO BE CONSIDERED ON SIS. F � ,w` o . either approve or deny Che pnreliminary plat, ase rvised ,ler v ice? -vial 7th Addition.' Special Note: It will he 'necaaa to take ection regarding the l• _R. financing for Ya e4� Squaa�e Mice $uildi,ng SII at this time on the agenda. , . i umn z 4 t 4 f Fn c 6 4 4 ' ':.. i', CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PREL=-ZM PLAT AND UARRIANCE - BICE<VTENN'IAL 7TH ADDITION APPLICANT: FEDERAL LAND COMPANY (11ARTIN COLON) LOCATION: PART OF THE NFr4- OF THE N54- OF SECTION 16 EXISTING ZONING: PD (CanVEFCIAL UNDER A PLANK® DEVELOPmEDlE r DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 28, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 23, 1981 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKI.E, CITY PIANNER ;APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been sutmitted for a preliminary plat, Bicentennial 7th Addition which consists of approximately 16.21 acres and will contain 4 lots and 1 outlot. The second application submitted is a request for a lot-width variance for Lot 3, Block 1, Bicentennial 7th Addition. LADED USE The subject parcel is presently zoned PD (Planned Development District) with a canTercial use designation. The Eagan Land Use Guide also designates the en- tire parcel as NB (Neighborhood Business District) . The proposed plan is in conformance with the zoning district and the Corprehensive Land Use Guide. The Bicentennial 7th Addition is the last portion of the Bicentennial Planned Development to be platted. The proposed plat will consist of 3 lots which will contain office buildings and one lot for a motel facility. The outlot which is being platted is the area which will be purchased by Minnesota Depax trent of Transportaticn for the 35E right-of-way. It is the staff's understanding that this alignment has been reviewed by MiDO T. Ordinance 52.07, Subdivision 14 does not require any square footage require- ments for ca?r.ercial lots. The lot size is determined by the setbacks, the amount of lot coverage and parking requirements for the facility. At the present time, the applicant does not have detailed plans for each of the pro- posed lots. Therefore, site plans will be reviewed at the time they are sub- mitted tomake sure that the building and site plan conform to all ordinance requirements in Ordinance 52. Ordinance 52.06, Subdivision 4 states that lots shall have a minimum of 60' of frontage on a public street. Lot 3, Block 1 will have 28.9' of frontage on Washington Drive. Therefore, a variance of 31.02' will have to be approved by the City. The applicant is proposing a stovepipe lot which has 28.9' of 7 CITY OF FAGAN PRELL`n-.NARY PLAT AND VARIANCE FOR BICI=ZaAL 7TH ADDITION APRIL 28, 1981 PAGE TWO frontage on Washington Drive. This will provide access to the office building which is proposed on Trot 3. There shall also be a cross easarent from Lot 2, Block 1 in order that both lots would be able to use this driveway. At the present time, there have been no grading, drainage or utility plans submitted for the Bicentennial 7th Addition. These exhibits shall be submitted and approved prior to final plat. If approved, the plat should be subject to the following conditions: 1. The Bicentennial 7th Addition shall be subject to the MnDCfr's review and int, because the proposed addition abuts State rights-of-way. 2. The City shall review each detailed site plan for each of the buildings to make sure lot coverage, parking requirements and green space is pro- vided for each lot. 3. No buildings shall be constructed prior to the approval of the final plat for Bicentennial 7th Addition. 4. Grading, drainage, utility and erosion control plans shall be submitted and reviewed by the City prior to the approval of the final plat. 5. A 31.02' variance will have to be approved by the City for Lot 3, Block 1, Bicentennial 7th Addition. 5. Cross easements shall be submitted be-tween Lot 2, Block 1 and Trot 3, Block 1 for the ammon driveway. DCR/jac ENGPNEERING PBC T� =ATIONS 1. 5' concrete sidewalk must be installed along the south and east side of Washington Drive with the development of each lot or June 15, 1983, whichever occurs first. 2. Standard drainage and utility easements must be dedicated adjacent to all public right-of-way. 3. All drainage must be directed towards the storm sewer located within Washington Drive. 4. Proposed future drvieway access locations must be submitted and ap- proved by staff prior to final plat approval. TAC/j ac TO: THE ADVISORY PLANNING C M IISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PIA'�R FPCM: THOMAS A. 0OLBERT, P.E. , DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: APRIL 23, 1981 RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT - BICEN=IAL 7TH ADDITION (FEDERAL LAND CD) The Public Works Department has the following eannents to offer in con- sideration of the above-proposed plat: UTILITIES Sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities of sufficient size and depth to handle this proposed development is available within Wash- ington Drive. STREET'S Improved streets to City standards have been installed providing access to all proposed lots of this plat. GRADING AND DRAINAGE During the acquisition of right-of-,way for the intersection of I-35E with Pilot Knob Road, permanent and temporary easements had to be obtained frau the Federal Land Co. along the southeast portion of this proposed plat. As a condition of minimizing the amount of pezmanent right-of-way required, this developer is required to insure that all drainage be directed onto Washington Drive instead of towards the newly-acquired right-of-way for I-35E. Sufficient internal storm sewers will be required and reviewed upon the develoFment of each individual lot of this proposed addition. The major grading for this plat has been performed and minor site grading will be resolved upon individual lot development. EASEMENT S/RI MTS-OF-G 1AY All major right-of-way has been dedicated for Washington Drive and I-35E. Standard drainage and utility easements adjacent to all public right-of- way must be dedicated. ASSESS= All assessments for streets and utilities have been assessed under previous projects. SITE PLAN The developer shall be required to install a 5-foot concrete sidewalk l` inside the public right-of-,way along the south and east side of Washington Drive as a condition of the building permit and development of the individ- ual lots affected by this requirement. The developer must submit a site plan showing proposed driveway accesses for all lots involved to insure proper location of future driveway openings. S--o , ENGI.`VEERING REPORT - BICEN'I'E IAL 7TH ADDITION PAGE TWO I will be available to address any items discussed in this memo at the Planning Carmission Meeting of April 28, 1981. Respectfully submitted, Thanas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jac c. Z ` RB GB GMF------------- Ind. i ! - CCMMERC!AL _ R 1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT .i i ii f31. - Ind,_ Ind LB R4i - - -- - _ - „`' Ind - ---,-. - r Ge e R IV Pa Ind. ' • Rk � R� g � - - `JP Inc. Ind. - - ` N8 LB_ RAI , L8 R-II R•,II - R-4 R-111 _ t -M CSC P - d r LE MR6 ,n fi�lll i.+;• R-I - �� R-11 p -- R 11 -- - Ind. P R-1 R-! E r R-IV -~' ? R i R-Iu ^ - P HALL R-41 - >•.- R I - R-1 R-I �. y/ v _ _.._ R-11 .__ - HS - N RI _ R - ■_ `. _ P R-11 E ° 77; ,e R-I �p R-i p - RIS ' R-II _ R-11 R-IIID R-II ~ \ LB M -- E r8 R-I R•lu �E R_:p _ R-111 ° •r R-III CSC/GB/ I4 i__ -- - NS ' t . P ,. ,: •�'`tel. R4LS - p RB P LB = R-I c R-I ,J _R-i G; R-I , ' ,�.o o ma= 4n. R-11 F t P R-N1 • sp R-►" P a. C-S �ROSEMOUt . _`� ��—�.� �.:��--•rte�� —--�-��—_�� • I ZLA C � r Ll— _ c_rr-- � ��'�' J ` '`' ,`,� t - .�• � � _'�� 'C�" �\ /'ems', - r, I o rrI lk VT zo l� / i [; _'`_+•�ir.'r�t fr j t'.r+-�: t{ I , � t?�'� � + + f.�°� ` 4' v � � I � -- - `e. :Z ; fL '.it :3 � �� ice•. I 2 •t t rr il, !�!! i CI � �I ' � �� I ; _� •.s rt t _ ''_ _` til ".-' _ 6-i•' I :�� I � � , ! e:'= - -i!" Ott: �i j.i`{:-'- .� �{� •I I 1� � ':..'�-t'zi 1$� � -�` \ \� �• i*��:t:ii_,'_[_.' it t•ii-i i'= -! -� �.� I\ \ _ �,��,��„' 't � It � � \t't�r •�i:".il i �:, ie•- s I I j.\ \�.• 1�a�,'� ?, t :.. mlw7r AtMO AG 7w s 'lip tG Bfar r-f- a SIBLEY T MINA RD L 1; R-1 _ R-4 - (NDUSIRIA PARK 19 . ADDITiG R-j R- 4 NB r H O G 8" : f .s a� �L� PK` A 'f A RIDGE r A y Y G8 NE R-4 .s R-4 N B A kC G8 RB ' • //-'tel I ' _ - r l/ r Y F.F A.3 CS PCO Fi, 4 R - 4 A ` Ilk A T cs L8. lro _ G �IC,GE•'IEW E.W. as � R '- � A R TION aC Q E S - 1� A . z I _ 4 JCNr- - F CROFT EiaCK04A — -- ti R _� -- , ACREIS HILLS �I ,c Cir• 8 C, R -1 '4" �i I PF R -2 'Sq Kll _ r / . 77-2 / A A R Agenda Information Memo May 1 , 1981 Page Seventeen E.M.S C. Emergency Medical Services Radio System -- The Dakota County Human Services Board is soliciting comments from hospitals, health centers and ambulance providersandmunicipalities within the County regarding a proposal for an emergency medical services radion com- munications system for this county as well as Ramsey and Washington Counties. The Metropolitan Council has requested that Dakota County as well as Ramsey and Washington , Counties indicate by May 15, 1981 whether they will participate in the system and form a joint powers board for purposes of ongoing system management and financing. All of the cities that have responded to the County are in support of the E.M.S. system. A representative of Divine Redeemer Hospital appealed to the mayors at a recent Mayor-Manager Breakfast in Dakota County that if this system is not implemented by Dakota County, Divine Redeemer Hospital could be in jeopardy of losing their ac- creditation. The ambulance system as provided in this part of the Metropolitan Area by Divine Redeemer Hospital would not receive any outside funding and therefore the per capita cost to the City of Eagan would be considerably higher. Enclosed on pages through bis a summary of the proposal for an EMS radio communications system for the three counties. The Dakota County Human Services Board and County Commissioners are merely looking for support from the municipalities. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To either approve or deny support for Dakota County to proceed with funding the emergency medical services radio communications system as presented. SS" 0 • SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL FOR AN EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES RADIO COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM FOR DAKOTA, RAMSEY, AND WASHINGTON COUNTIES March, 1981 System Design The proposed system design is the minimum design which would best support and meet the present and future EMS communications needs in the East Metro- politan region. It consists of four major equipment components to improve UHF radio signal coverage (Ultra-High Frequency communications primarily used to support Advanced Life Support operations) and VHF communications capability (Very High Frequency communications most often used by Basic Life Support ambulance services) . They are: (1) Radio transmitter/receivers to relay signals from ambulances to hospitals and vice-versa. Proposed three locations are: (a) Downtown St. Paul (American National Bank Building) , (b) Burnsville municipal water tower, (c) Northern States Power Plant, Oak Park Heights. These locations will be connected with each other and St. Paul-Ramsey Medical Center by microwave equipment. Microwave equipment is more reliable and costs less to operate on a continuing basis than leased telephone circuits, the other alternative (see Attachment A for geographical coverage map) . (2) Medical Resource Coordinating Center (MRCC) at St. Paul-Ramsey Medical Center to coordinate the use of radio channels used by ambulances. The MRCC will also be able to communicate directly with the MRCC for the West system at Hennepin County Medical Center. The system will permit primary use of four of the eight available channels, and the capability to borrow channels from the West system when needed. Equipment in the two systems will be compatible. Ambulances from one system will be able to communi- cate with hospitals in the other system. (3) Radio equipment at hospitals to receive signals from ambulances and transmit medical instructions. St. Paul-Ramsey Medical Center, St. Paul, and Divine Redeemer Hospital, South St. Paul, provide medical control (instruction for medical care) to advanced life support (ALS) ambulances. These hospitals will have equipment that enables them to talk to ALS ambulances and to receive telemetry data from them. Other health centers/hospitals in Dakota County (Sanford and Regina Hospitals and Ridges Health Center) , at their option, can have equip- ment that enables them to talk directly to basic life support (BLS) ambulances, to listen to voice communications between the medical control hospitals and ambulances, or tp monitor bio-medical telemetry transmissions from ALS ambulances. (4) Radio equipment installed in ambulances and carried by paramedics. The UHF system design is based on the use of the mobile repeater. A mobile repeater is located in the ambulance, and rebroadcasts signals from a radio carried by the paramedic to a receiver, and from a transmitter to the radio carried by the paramedic. The paramedic would be out of the ambulance providing care to a patient, and the ambulance would be parked in the immediate vicinity of the paramedic. An equipment option is available that allows the paramedic to change channels remotely on the mobile repeater, located in the ambulance, from a portable radio carried ,by the paramedic. System Costs The total cost of the proposed minimum regional system, excluding costs for ambulance equipment and remote channel selection option, is estimated to be $466,110. The Minnesota Department of Health has allocated $362,000 for development of an EMS radio communications system for Dakota, Ramsey, and Washington Counties. The estimated shortfall is $104,110. It may be possible to realize a discount by competitive bidding for the equipment, however, due to fluctuation in prices, it is not possible at this time to accurately pro- ject this amount. The detailed cost breakdown of radio, microwave, and maintenance equipment for the regional system are itemized in Attachment B. The ambulance equip- ment costs, which are to be borne by the individual ambulance providers, are also presented. _Recurring System Operating Costs The three recommendations for the recurring system operating costs are: (1) The recurring maintenance and operation costs of radio equipment in the possession of and used by individual hospitals and ambulance services should be the responsibility of the hospital or ambulance service. (2) The recurring maintenance and operation costs of regional radio equip- ment used by a number of hospitals and ambulance services should be an inter-county responsibility. Management for the communications system should be provided through a joint powers agreement between Dakota, Ramsey, and Washington Counties. The first year of operation, projec- ted to be fully operational August 1, 1982, is estimated to be $164,709. This includes staffing at the MRCC, St. Paul-Ramsey Medical Center, maintenance of regional equipment, lease for radio transmitter/receiver sites, and leased telephone lines between St. Paul-Ramsey Medical Center to Divine Redeemer Memorial,Hospital. Detailed inter-county cost breakdowns are found in the complete report. -2- (3) The regional operating costs of the system should be shared by the county governments in Dakota, Ramsey, and Washington Counties. The costs should be allocated among the counties based on the population receiving optimal radio coverage. Dakota Count's share of the annual operating costs ($164,709) would be $39,530 (243)-, excluding the east central/south central area (20,200 population) not benefitting from the system. The additional mill rate to raise dollar share would be .0004. Ramsey County would pay 61% ($100,473) of the operating costs and Washington County 15% ($24,706) . System Management The five recommendations for system management are: (1) Management for the communications system should be provided through a joint powers agreement between Dakota, Ramsey, and Washington Counties. The management functions include ownership of regional equipment and administration and supervision of system operations. (2) The policymaking body for the joint powers agreement should be a board made up of county commissioners for each county. (3) There should be a committee composed of EMS providers and other representatives or organizations involved in EMS to advise the commis- sioners on system operations. The current EMS Communications Sub- committee should advise the joint powers board until the system is operational. (4) The joint powers board should develop a plan for equipment replacement that describes what equipment should be replaced, when it should be replaced, and how the replacement should be funded. (The radio equip- ment has an estimated life span of 10 years and the microwave equip- ment, 15 years.) (5) The Metropolitan Council should provide staff assistance to the joint powers board until the communications system is operational. It is also recommended that before any decision is made on the need for additional equipment for expanded signal coverage, the proposed system should be implemented and extent of actual signal coverage determined. Based on operation of the system, the next priority for system improvement and expansion should be east central/ south central Dakota County. -3- • . Attachment A 0 PROPOSED ' DESIGN r_.OG�743H_TC COVERAGE ; �� I .•- +�� — _. __ _ _ _ ._ , OF TR NS`lITIERS/ ti >wE� �.. 1 �CS1VF'?S c.tlTti i / � PROPOSED DESIGN i 4 tiI K�A 1 PC EST wEMf i I I 1 1 —A I _ 1 ' I INA S_iNGTC'N C-4 - IL 1 \ '•.ter I ��/' I� -AM-EYI 1 ,:/ ___ _ I Win:., .• 1 .- 1''11 I I i 1 • 1 -67- -7 J CAKOTA i � + • • Attachment B SYSTEM COSTS This section describes system development and operating costs, as well as proposed allocations for sharing costs of operating the system. COSTS OF EQUIPMENT ACQUISITION AND INSTALLATION Total costs of thAe proncsed system, exclusive of costs for ambulance ecuipment and a remote channel selection option, are estimated to be $466, 110. REGIONAL EQUIPMENT 1. Radio Ecuinment • American National Bank (St. Paul) $98 ,760 • Burnsville 'dater Tower 17, 500 • Oak Parc 3eights NSP Plant 50,070 * St. Paul-Ramsey Medical Center 105 ,070 (M-RCC) Subtotal: $271, 480 2. Microwave Ecui=ment • American National Bank/ Burnsville ',dater Tower/ Oak Park 'Heights- NSP Plant $128 ,700 • St. Paul to St. Paul-Ramsey Medical Center 45 ,930 Subtotal: $174, 630 3. Maintenance EQuicment e Spare parts, test equipment, and maintenance technician training 520 ,000 Subtotal: $20 ,000 Total: $466, 110 XHBULANCZ EQUIPMIENT 1. Ambulance Radio with Mobile Receater Installed in Ambulance $7,750 2. Portable Radio Carried by Paramedic •5 , 570 Total: $13, 320 3. Option for Re«ote Channel Selection $2,050 • • Agenda Information Memo May 1 , 1981 Page Eighteen BRIARHILL 3RD ADDTION FINAL PLAT D. Briarhill 3rd Addition Final Plat -- Enclosed on page is a copy of the Briarhill 3rd Addition final plat. The development agreement and all other pertinent information is in order for consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the final plat for Briarhill 3rd Addition. 'O ' BRIAR HILL 3RD AD E � r•^ i :� \\\� � r 262. i Z r-•- g ��I tF � �� 26 .. 4' 28 sem• � �24�, ' • 30 t{6 C w yTUTr {•A%EMK `a•ai ¢*. -. . 7 ��, Z : 9., i � e2 3k , a a 0,040 22 31 .CQ� 'P,t 21 r... 32 r.--. 1 :I N 7M.OD • M 1T 120D W 20 ?) 104.L2 L O.'so"Aw N.E6'3o 4% ` O19 r 14 34 33 17 8CJ f h� OUTLOT151 Me o 14 n J ;,�� ` `1 r•I1. rf" ;...;..4;., � h J�.`� _ SAVER _ ROAD i y v � LOSITE CATION \�4—sc°y�?`b 'i NW 1i4 NE k4 0 25 50 100 ISO SCALE IN FEET • SW 1/4 SE%4 O-INDICATES 3A3 a16'IRON MON'I SET 9 MARKED WITH REGISTRATION 5332 r THE NORTH LINE OF THE N.W.IA3 OF SEC.20, SECTI ON S041P27,RANGE Z3 HAS ANA59-WDBEARING OF S89'59'54'E KEY MAP Q1� NO SCALE • • Agenda Information Memo May 1 , 1981 Page Nineteen JOYCE ADDITION FINAL PLAT E. Joyce Addition Final Plat - Enclosed on page 6 T is a copy of the Joyce Addition final plat. The development agreement and all other pertinent information is in order for consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the final plat for Joyce Addition. 63 q i aa w v 1 77 ca er, EP. 1H M-1 1 ----------- <f i�h. Eli u 1; 21 IN F.,IF: Fs no:) LC 3 3.1 or ..... 5 ————________J Nq C) Lu • • Agenda Information Memo May 1 , 1981 Page Twenty BICENTENNIAL 6TH ADDITION FINAL PLAT F. Bicentennial Sixth Addition Final Plat -- The final plat for Bicentennial 6th Addition is in order for consideration. The bond calculations are being completed by the City staff and, therefore, the development agreement is not complete to date. It is antici- pated that the development agreement will be in order for considera- tion, assuming acceptance by the developer. If there are any pro- blems , the staff will bring this to the attention of the City Coun- cil while reviewing this item. A copy of the plat is on page ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the final plat for Bicentennial 6th Addition subject to the development agreement. 6 5" 1. Q \ Y Agenda Information Memo May 1 , 1981 Page Twenty-One Inb 6 CONTRACT 81-3 A. Plans & Specs and Order Bids -- The plans and specifications for Contract 81-3 which provides for the installation of utilities in the Joyce Addition (Project 327) , the installation of storm sewer, catch basins in the Yankee Square Shopping -Center complex (Project 318) , the trunk storm sewer outlet for T.H. 55 (Project 182R) and the trunk storm sewer outlet for Burr Oak Pond (Project 319) . All easements necessary for these projects have either been acquired by the City, right of entry has been obtained or the neces- sary condemnation action has been initiated for the specific date of right of entry being specified in the contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: Approve or deny the plans and specifications for Contract 81-3 and order the advertisement for bids with the bid opening scheduled for 10: 30 a.m. , May 28, 1981 . EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PLAN B. Emergency Prepardness Plan -- The City staff has met on several occasions with the City Administrator to review an old civil defense preparedness plan for the City of Eagan. Through the efforts of a former intern, Steve Mielke, Civil Defense Director Doug Reid and the other department heads, the emergency plan for the City of Eagan has been updated and is in order for consideration by the City Council. The City staff has spent considerable time working with this plan and would like for the plan to be approved as the official emergency plan for the City. This plan will require revision at least on an annual basis . A copy is enclosed for your review and information without a page number. The City Administra- tor will explain in further detail at the City Council `meeting how the emergency plan works and, further, what this plan means as an operating tool to the City Council, City staff and community. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the emergency plan as prepared by the City staff for the City of Eagan as presented. SIGN RENEWALS C. 1981 Sign Renewals -- There are 253 sign renewals in order for consideration. This item would normally be a Consent Item; however, the consent portion of this City Council packet was already completed upon addressing this item. The Building Inspector's Department has reviewed the sign renewals and finds the 253 as recommended to be in order for consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the 253 sign renewals. 6-7 Agenda Information Memo May 1 , 1981 Page Twenty-Two CONTRACT 80-25 D. Contract 80-25, Approval of Plans and Specifications/Order Advertisement for Bids (Wescott Road) -- The plans and specifica- tions for Contract 80-25 (Project 305 ) provides for the construction of Wescott Road from Denmark Avenue to Lexington Avenue as part of the agreement between the City and County for consideration of the new Dakota County Library. This project was initiated in 1980, but was delayed due to condemnation proceedings and necessary right of way construction revision due to the Williams Bros. pipe- line location. A right of entry date has been set and other problems resolved. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny plans and specs for Contract 80-25 and order advertisement for bids with the bid opening scheduled for 10:30 a.m. June 11, 1981 . l�1 ity Administrator 69