Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
08/04/1981 - City Council Regular
A � �. Y4�las14�..r M.17�AM1iY.• AGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL AUGUST 4, 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 ` C. Park Department e. ► B. Police Department a Z D. Public Works Department IV. 6:55 - CONSENT ITEMS (One motion approves all items) �. 2 A. Approve MnDOT Trail Maintenance Agreement 3 B. Approve MnDOT Plans & Specifications for T. H. 149 C. Approve MnDOT Final nlans & Specifications - 1-494 - T. H. 13 to T. H. 55 e. 3 D. Approve MTC Bus Shelter Location and Cost Participation Agreement 4.6 E. Change Order #1 for Contract 81-2 (Windcrest Streets) F. Project 348, Receive Request/Order Feasibility Report (Four Oaks � 6 Streets. �. � G. R. E. Ferguson for Temporary Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License and Temporary Bingo/Gambling License for the District 53 DFL Fund Raiser for August 15, 1981 V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS e. 7 A. Project 340, Windcrest 2nd Additi,In Utility & Street Improvements q,a,'1 B. Project 341, Windtree 2nd Addition! Utility & Street Improvements V.,43 C. Project 346, Cinnamon Ridge 1st Addition Utility & Street Improvements 62 D. Vacation of a Portion of Old Dodd Road Alignment Adjacent to Overhill Farm Addition VI. OLD BUSINESS Q. 63 A. Consideration for Renaming of Wildwood Lane (County Road 30) 1 to Diffley Road B. Proposed Ordinance #E52 (Zoning Ordinance) Amendment Regarding 1, Requirement for Conditional Use Permit to Operate a Day Care Center '� 71 C. U Haul for Sign Permit Eagan City Council Agenda August 4, 1981 Page Two VII. NEW BUSINESS 4�$� A. McDonald's Corporation for a Conditional Use Permit for a Drive Thru Facility to be Added to the Existing McDonald's Restaurant located at 1995 Silver Bell Road B. Edward A. Gagnon for a Variance from Side Setback Requirements for a Garage to be Built Closer to the Side Lot Line T•100 C. Final Plat for Twin View Manor 2nd Addition j01 D. Final Plat for Cinnamon Ridge Addition ;:164E. Special Use Permit for a Trailer for Joyce Meissner 106 F. Special Use Permit for a Trailer for Elmer Scott G. Special Use Permit for Construction Trailer for Countryside 4•��$ 1st Addition VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS . 110 A. Receive Bids/Award Contract, Imp. 81-8, Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition ! et al Streets p.1lZ B. Receive Bids/Award Contract, Imp. 81-9, Tomark Addition Utilities e.114 C. Approve Plans & Specifications, 81-5, Cinnamon Ridge 1st Addition et al Utilities e ,114 D. Approve Plans& Specifications, 81-10, Coachman Land Company 1st Addition et al Streets 1i5 E. Approve Utility Easement for Cooperative Power Association Appoint Member to Advisory Parks & Recreation Committee to Fill Unexpired Term 4.131 G. Preliminary Plat Extension - Overhill Farm Addition � p 131 H. Set a Public Hearing to Consider Industrial Revenue Financing ` for a $1,310,000 Issue for the C. A. Roberts Company IX. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) X. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JULY 31, 1981 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of ; the July 21 regular City Council minutes and adoption of the August 4, 1981 City Council agenda, the following information is in order for consideration: FIRE DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department There are no itemsto be considered for the Fire Department at this time. POLICE DEPARTMENT B. Police Department -- There are no items to be considered for the Police Department at this time.. PARK DEPARTMENT C. Park Department -- Removal of Dutch Elm or Oak Wilt Diseased Trees on Public Boulevard -- A policy fias never been establIshe regarding the removal o Dutch Elm diseased or Oak 'Wilt diseased trees on public boulevards <throughoutthe City. It is estimated that approximately 200 to 400 elm and oak trees remain in the City on public boulevards within the shade tree disease control area. Currently, it is estimated; that there are 30 diseased trees on existing, owner occupied residences. According to the Director - - ---- - of Parks and Recreation and City -Tree Forester, the City would be required to remove approximately ; 80 to 100 trees over the next two years. ' The Director of Parks and Recreation has given con- sideration to the potential time commitment his department could make toward the removal of trees that are tagged and cited for removal on public boulevards. The City is not equipped properly with the equivalent equipment to a cherry picker and, therefore, is restricted to the size of tree -which could be removed safely by City crews. Of the 50 trees cited for removal on an annual basis, it appears the ' City could remove approximately ' 30 trees while the remaining trees could be contracted by an outside company. The cost projected by an outside company is estimated at $6.00 an inch which converts to approximately $150 for the average; size tree considered for removal in the City. Considering that approxi- mately 150 trees will be removed over the next several years, the total amount of trees is quite low in comparison -with many Communi- ties. The 'City has received several cauls from residents inquiring as to who has responsibility for the removal' of diseased boulevard trees. The City Administrator and the Director of Parks and .Recrea= Agenda Information Memo July 31 , 1981 Page Two } { tion are recommending that a policy be established that will : 1. Designate the Park & Recreation Department to remove as many trees as workloads will allow and the remainder of trees would be removed by the low bid provided by an in dependent contractor. 2. The second alternative is to require that the adjoining property ownerbe responsible for their own boulevard trees. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: ` To approve and adopt a policy for the removal of Dutch Elm and Oak Wilt diseasedtrees on public boulevards. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT D. Public Works Department — There are no items to be considered for the Public Works Department at this time. There are ' seven (7) items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council. If there is any item which the City Council would like to discuss in further detail, that item should be removed from the Consent Item list and placed under Additional Items unless the discussion required is 'brief. This will allow the Mayor to proceed with Public Hearings as legally noticed at 7 :00 p.m. MnDOT TRAIL MAINTTENANCEAGREEMENT - - A. Approve MnDOT Trail Maintenance Agreement No. 60508 -_- A copy of a formal agreement has been received from IMnDOT pertaining ' to perpetual maintenance of the eight' (8)' foot recreational ' trail to be constructed along the south side of I-494 from Pilot Knob Road to the east side of the T. H. 13 overpass bridge. From this point across the Minnesota River, the DNR will assume the main- tenance responsibilities. This segment of City maintenance' require- ments is the result of maintenance limitation boundaries designated by the DNR and MnDOT. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve MnDOT Bikeway Maintenance Agreement No. 60508 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement. 2W Agenda Information Memo July 31, 1981 Page Three T.H. 149 PLANS & SPECIFICATI,ONS B. Approve MnDOT Preliminary Plans (Layout No. 1) for T.H. 149 (I-494 to T. H. 55) -- The preliminary plans for the proposed up- grading of T. H. 149 from Blue Gentian Road to T. H. 55 have been submitted by .MnDOT for formal approval by the City. These pre- liminary plans (Layout No. 1) are the result of incorporating the Council's review and comments of a proposed layout submitted on October 21, 1980. This doesnot constitute` final approval and _these plans will be resubmitted in the future when final detailed plans have been prepared. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the resolution for Layout No. 1 approval for preliminary plans for T.H. 149 (I- 494 to T. H. 55) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said resolution. I--494 PLANS & -SPECIFICATIONS C. Approve MnDot Final Plans & Specifications - I-494' T. H. 13 to T. H. 55 -- Detailed plans and specifications have been submitted for formal approval` by the City of Eagan for the grading, surfacing, and bridge construction for the I-494 freeway from Trunk Highway 13 - to T. H. 55. All comments made by the City upon review of the preliminary plans have been incorporated in these final plans and specifications. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the resolution, for final plans and specifications I-494 (T. H. 13 to T. H. 55) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk. to execute said resolution. MTC BUS SHELTER LOCATION D. Approve MTC Bus Shelter Location and Cost Participation' Agree- ment -- At the January 20, 1981 Council meeting, the City approved MTC site plans for shelter locations at. three of the four designated sites. The remaining location to be approved was the City's number one priority, the Valley View Apartment site. That plan was returned to MTC withtherequest that the site be relocated to the west side of Rahn Road to provide access for the Valley View Apartments and to take advantage of the existing sidewalk along the west side. This relocation request was in response to the written ob 'ection from the Mt. Calvery Lutheran Church. In addition, � the site plan is approved for the Valley View Apartment location, the MTC would like to enter into a formal financial cost participation agreement with the City. This agreement provides for a 10% ($500 maximum) contribution on the part of the City for y Agenda Information Memo ` July 31 , 1981 'Page Four r\ each shelter location due to thel below standard load counts at our requested locations. The MTC will pay the entire cost of all MTC bus shelters when the load counts meet or are higher than than All. t . the required minimum standard. he sites that were proposed in the City of Eagan have load 'counts that are less than the minimum standard; and, therefore, in order to receive abus shelter, the City must contribute 10%0 of the. cost. The reason for the participa- tion' is that the MTC receives a number of bus' shelter requests throughout the metropolitan area, and if there were no load count standards, bus shelters would be erected to satisfy two or three people in various locations. The ;City will be responsible for all routine maintenance (litter, snow removal, window cleaning, mowing, etc. ) . The MTC will be responsible for construction and structural maintenance requirements-* Attached on page l is a copy of Site Plan C-1355 for your information. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve MTC Site Plan C-1355 (Valley View Apartments) and authorize execution of the financial cost participation agreement for the installation of the bus shelters. n rN W to W L w o O W < � M F- m = I-- V) O Z N 1 >- J G U U N O i f� J F- J Z w O m U � 1 Z L o� S a Z1 U , I`�9L m � 5-I u w N SII N ¢ 2 i Q Z I >' co Sm N � lt1J M 7� N w .. CD m O i Q rr Lt. b-4 , w F- i--- cr- W ¢O Z N m S Z N ( a w F- O w w 3 v Fi- H co U S O J v � -j N Q, _ wwz tN; lNOO toU J 3 1 Z v 0' N W - ! Z i LLLI X NC Z 1, I ~ W WZ. >- Q LLJ —4h .--r N GGu) O � ~Ouj m C) I �� Ali ¢ _� ¢ dnf � UDU + OIW ' ~ s ca ¢JCG � J IZ � �� ]G O G ¢ F-- � � Z O C) J c- 1-F-(-) _D W aNZ 3 N In < = -j woC) w o t� ►-� wd i > CMw w ►-+ 00 •• .-4NCV) .;r• id IO N Q� N S N a O .~� O O Z Q co N Z O Z � Q j a it 0 U i o CC w z , O ! � z ac Agenda Information Memo July 31, 1981 Page Five CONTRACT 81-2 E. Change Order #1 for Contract' 81-2 (Windcrest- Streets) - Because the City had - 'to terminate the contract for the installation of j utilities to the Windcrest_ Addition under Contract 80-7 due to i the contractor going bankrupt, it is necessary to approve Change I Order #1 for Contract 80-2 to the subsequent street contractor within this subdivision providing for correction of faulty work .f necessary to allow the continuation of the street construction. This work consists of replacement of a faulty sewer lateral along with miscellaneous clean up. work. This will be done on a time and material basis with all associated costs forwarded to the bonding company under Contract 80-7 for reimbursement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve Change Order #1 to Contract 81-2 (Windcrest Streets) in the estimated amount of $13,000. PROJECT 348 F. Project 348, Receive Request/Order Feasibility Report (Four Oaks Streets) Due to the recent construction of the Coachman Oaks apartment complex on the southwest corner of, Four Oaks Road and Coachman Road, severe continuing erosion has been occuring along Four Oaks Road from T. H. 13 to Coachman Road. This fact, combined with the pending improvement of Coachman L'nd Company First Addition along the. north side of Four Oaks Road, will create continued severe erosion problems. Therefore, staff is requesting authorization to prepare an engineering report' discussing `the feasi- bility - of easibility of upgrading Four Oaks Road with concrete curb andgutter from T. H. _13 , to Coachman Road. All required utilities ` are presently in place along this , section of roadway. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To authorize the preparation of a feasibility report for Project 348 for the upgrading of Four Oaks Road from T. H. 13 to Coachman Road. Agenda Information Memo July 31, 1981 Page Six FERGUSON FOR NON-INTOXICATING �T< LIQUOR & BINGO LICENSES x G. R. E. ' Ferguson for a Temporary Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License and Temporary Bingo/Gambling License for the District 53 DFL Fund Raiser for <'August 15, 1981 _- Applications for both the non-intoxicating malt liquor license and bingo and gambling license have been reviewed` and- found to be in order for consideration as ; applied for by Robert Ferguson who resides at ' 855 Cliff Road. The location for the event .is Rahn Park. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the temporary licenses as applied for for August 15, 1981 to Robert Ferguson. PROJECT 340 A. Project 340, Windcrest 2nd Addition (-Utility/Street Improve- ments) -- As a result of a petition received on May 15, 1981, a feasibility , report was prepared and presented to the Council on s July 7, 1981, with the ,public hearing- set for August 4 to consider the installation of streets and utilities for the Windcrest 2nd Addition. All legal notices have been .. sent, to affected property owners and published in the legal newspaper. A copy of the feasi- bili,ty report is enclosed for your information on pages _ through - -ACTION .TO .BE CONSIDEREDON THE MATTER: To close the public hearing and either approve or deny `Project 340 for the installation o streets and utilities in the Windcrest 2.nd Addition. x. TJ • REPORT ON WINDCREST SECOND ADDITION UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT No. 340 FOR EAGAN, MINNESOTA 1981 C""dZwpC Spaw Mdn �ol'a O t � • Glenn R.Cook,P.E. Keirh A.Gordon,P.E. Otto G. Bonestroo, P.E. Thomas E.Noyes, P.E. p Robcrt W. Rosette, P.E. Richard W.Foster, P.E. Joseph C.Anderlik,P.E. Robert G.Schunicht, P.E. .2335 V. 7aw4 ary�`�������36 Itradlord A. Lemberg. P.E. llarrin L.Son•a(a, P.E. [� //11 '1•""^'7 Richard E. Turner, P.E. Donald C. Burgardt, P.E. .91, P.,d, Af ....o&55ff3 Jarnes C. Olson. P.E. Jerry A.Bourdon,P.E. � Q a A.Hansom,P.E. /16a..:6f2-636-4600 / \ Charles LeA A.£ricksnn Leo A1. Puwelsky Of( 1956 — 264 — 1981 David E. lsonn uid E. Osnn June 23, 1981 d �� nni versary' Honorable Mayor and Council _ City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Mn. 55122 Re: Windcrest Second Addition Project 340 Our File No. 49232 Dear Mayor and Council: Transmitted herewith is our report for Windcrest Second Addition, Project 340. This report covers street and utility construction for Windcrest Second Addi- tion. We will be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested parties at a mutually convenient time to discuss this report. Respectfully submitted, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark R. Rolf MRR:1i This is to certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the St9te of Minnesota ^ Mark A. Hanson Date: June 23, 1981 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by: Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works Date: 4753a • • WINDCREST SECOND ADDITION SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer and streets to serve Windcrest Second Addition, Windcrest Second Addition consists of 14 lots containing 56 quadrominimum units located in the NW 1/4 of Section 22, FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The project is feasible and is in accordance with the Master Utility and Street Plans for the City of Eagan, The project as outlined herein can best be carried out as two contracts, Contract I pro- vides for construction of all utilities and the placement of an aggregate base on a properly prepared subgrade, Contract II provides for the construction of the remaining portion of the aggregate base, and a bituminous surface in conjunction with the concrete curb and gutter, DISCUSSION: CONTRACT I A. SANITARY SEWER: An 8 inch sanitary sewer is proposed along the centerline of the proposed streets within Windcrest Second Addition, and along an ease- ment located between lots 12 and 13 and lots 11 and 14 of Block 1 in Windcrest Second Addition to provide continuity of service to the proposed Dakota County Library, The sanitary sewer will connect to an existing 8 inch sanitary sewer located on Deerclif.f Lane, B, WATER MAIN: A 6 inch water main is proposed to be constructed within Wind- crest Second Addition The water main will connect to an existing 6 inch water main located on Deercliff Lane, It is proposed to loop the water main in Page 1, 4753a the Windcrest Court cul-de-sac by constructing a 6 inch main along the lot dine between Lots 27 & 30 and Lots 28 & 29, Block 1 and connecting to an ex- isting 12 inch trunk water main located on the south side of Wescott Road. C. SERVICES: This construction provides for the installation of sanitary sew- er and water main services only to 15 feet beyond the property line. Sanitary sewer services are 6 inch and water main services are 1-1/2 inches to serve 4 units. A 1 inch water service is proposed to service 2 units. D. STORM SEWER LATERALS: It is proposed to construct a 24 inch storm sewer from the existing 24 inch plug located on Deercliff Avenue to the intersection of Deercliff Avenue and Windcrest Court. Storm runoff will be collected at this intersection with a system of catch basins and manholes. A storm sewer system is also proposed to be constructed along the western boundary of the Windcrest Plat south of Windcrest Avenue in order to collect storm water runoff from Windcrest Avenue. The storm water runoff would be conveyed to holding pond JP-6 as identified in the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan. E. STREET (Grading/Aggregate Base): This construction provides for the proper grading of the subgrade surface after installation of utilities and the place- ment of a 4 inch aggregate base. CONTRACT II F. STREET (Surfacing): This construction provides for the placement of the remaining portion of the aggregate base and the bituminous surface in conjunc- tion with surmountable concrete curb and gutter. Page 2. 4753a AREA TO BE INCLUDED: Assessment Area Construction Area E 1/2 of NW 1/4, Section 22 E 1/2 of NW 1/4, Section 22 Parcels: 014-26 Parcels: 014-26 Windcrest 1st Addn. Outlot A Windcrest 1st Addn. Outlot A COST ESTIMATE: Detailed cost estimates are presented in Appendix A at the back of this report. A summary of these costs are as follows: CONTRACT I Sanitary Sewer $ 31,640 Water Main 34,310 Services 26,320 Storm Sewer Laterals 28,740 Street (Grading/Agg. Base) 13,350 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST - CONTRACT I . . . .. . . $134,360 CONTRACT II Street (Surfacing) $ 54,250 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST - CONTRACTS I & II. . $188,610 The total estimated cost for Contract I and II including contingencies and all related overhead is $188,610. Overhead costs are estimated to be 25% and include legal, engineering, administration and bond interest costs. EASEMENTS: Easements are required for utility construction within the Wind- crest Second Addition. These easements are listed as follows: 1. A permanent easement is required to loop the water main between Wescott Road and the cul-de-sac at the north end of Windcrest Court. 2. A permanent easement is required to construct the sanitary sewer between Windcrest Court and the sanitary sewer service from the Dakota County Li- brary. Page 3. 4753a 3, A permanent easement is required along the western boundary of the Wind- crest plat for future construction of a storm sewer to convey runoff from the Dakota County Library and Windcrest Avenue, The above easements are anticipated to be acquired in conjunction with fi- nal approval of the plat, It is assumed that no cost will be required for their acquisition, ASSESSMENTS: Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited property located within Windcrest Second Addition and against the Dakota County Library. The proposed lots within Windcrest Second Addition will be assessed for lateral sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, and street im- provements. The Dakota County Library will be assessed for their portion of the later- al sanitary sewer between Lots 11 & 14 and Lots 12 & 13, Block 1, as part of this project, It is proposed to assess Dakota County Library for the required sanitary sewer manholes and a major portion of the sanitary sewer line between Lots 12 & 13 and Lots 11 & 14 of Block 1, Trunk sanitary sewer for Windcrest Second Addition has been previously as- sessed under Project 488, Trunk water main and trunk storm sewer for Wind- crest Second Addition have not been previously assessed and are therefore pro- posed to be assessed as a part of this project, Base rates in effect at the time of this report for trunk water main and trunk storm sewer are as follows: Trunk Water Main $770/Acre Trunk Storm Sewer - Multi-Family $0,0468/sq,ft, Page 4, 4753a /,3 A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this report. Fi- nal assessment rates for construction of lateral facilities will be determined by final costs and be assessed to each benefited property. REVENUE SOURCES: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows: SANITARY SEWER Trunk Fund Project Cost Revenue Balance Lateral $ 31,640 Lateral Assessment (Windcrest) $ 26,440 Lateral Assessment (Dakota Co.) 5,200 TOTAL $ 31,640 $ 31,640 0 - WATER MAIN Lateral $ 34,310 Lateral Assessment $ 34,310 Trunk - 0 - Trunk Assessment 5,624 TOTAL $ 34,310 $ 39,934 +$ 5,624 SERVICES Service Stubs $ 26,320 Assessment $ 26,320 TOTAL $ 26,320 $ 26,320 - 0 - Page 5, 4753a Trunk Fund Project Cost Revenue Balance STORM SEWER Lateral $ 28,740 Lateral Assessment $ 28,740 Trunk - 0 - Trunk Assessment 14,890 TOTAL $ 28,740 $ 43,630 +$14,890 STREET Grading/Agg, Base $ 13,350 Surfacing 54,250 Street Assessment $ 67,600 TOTAL $ 67,600 $ 67,600 TOTAL ,,,,,,,,,»,,,»,,,,,,, +$20,514 The trunk fund balance for water main and storm sewer is +$5,624 and +$14,890 respectively, No revenue is proposed from City trunk funds for util- ity or street construction, PROJECT SCHEDULE Contract I Contract II Present Feasibility Report July 7, 1981 July 7, 1981 Public Hearing August 4, 1981 August 4, 1981 Approve Plans and Specifications Fall, 1981 Winter, 1982 Open Bids Fall, 1981 Spring, 1982 Award Contract Winter, 1982 Spring, 1982 Construction Completion Summer, 1982 Fall, 1982 Assessment Hearing September, 1982 Fall, 1982 First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes May, 1983 May, 1984 Page 6, 4753a APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE CEDAR CLIFF ADDITION (PHASE III) PROJECT 340 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING A. SANITARY SEWER 1,100 Lin. ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary sewer, 10'-12' dp, in pl. @ $10.00/l.f. $ 11,000 165 Lin.ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary sewer, 12'-14' dp. in pl. @ $12.00/l.f. 1,980 100 Lin. ft. 8" PVC, Sanitary sewer, 14'-16' dp. in pl. @ $14.00/l. f. 1,400 6 Each Std. MH w/casting @ $800.00/each 4,800 17 Lin.ft. MH depth greater than 8' @ $70.00/l.ft. 1,190 21 Each 8" x 6" wye branch in pl. @ $70.00/each 1,470 1 Each Cut into existing MH @ $200.00/each 200 2 Each 8"Plug in pl. @ $100.00/each 200 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5.00/ton 500 1,365 Lin.ft. Mechanical Trench compaction @ $1.00/l.f. 1,365 Total Estimated Construction $ 24,105 +5% Contingency 1,205 $ 25,310 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 6,330 TOTALSANITARY SEWER .... . . . . . ... . ... .... .. 0 . 00 . .0 .. . . .. $ 31,640 Page 7. 4753a // B. WATER MAIN 1,400 Lin.ft. 6" DIP, water main @ $11.00/l.f. $ 15,400 4 Each Hydrants in pl. @ $800.00/each 3,200 5 Each 6" Gate valve & box @ $300.00/each 1,500 2,000 Lbs. Fittings in pl. @ $1.00/lb. 2,000 1 Each Connect to existing 6" plug @ $150.00/each 150 1 Each Wet tap to existing 12" water main @ $1,000.00/each 1,000 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5.00/ton 500 0.5 Acre Seed @ $2,000.00/acre 1,000 1,400 Lin.ft. Mechanical Trench compaction @' $1.00/l.f. 1,400 Total Estimated Construction $ 26,150 +5% Contingency 1,300 $ 27,450 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 6,860 TOTALWATER MAIN . . .. . .. .. . . .. .. .. . ... . .. ... .0........ . ... $ 349310 Page 8. 4753a C. SERVICES 1,000 Lin.ft. 6" CISP, Sanitary sewer serv. in pl. @ $9.00/l.f. $ 9,000 560 Lin.ft. 1-1/2" Type K copper water service @ $8.00/l.f. 4,480 440 Lin.ft. 1" Type K copper water service @ $6.00/l.f. 2,640 12 Each 1-1/2" Corp. stop in pl. @ $70.00/each 840 9 Each 1" Corp. stop in pl. @ $20.00/each 180 12 Each 1-1/2" Curb stop and box @ $90.00/each 1,080 9 Each 1" Curb stop and box @ $60.00/each 540 800 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/l.f. 800 100 Ton_ Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5.00/ton 500 Total Estimated Construction $ 20,060 +5% Contingency 1,000 $ 21,060 +25%Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 5,260 TOTALSERVICES . . . .. .. . . .... ......... ..... . $ 26,320 Page 9. 4753a /f D. STORM SEWER 410 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, Storm sewer, 0'-8' dp. in pl. @ $15.00/l.f. $ 6,150 100 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, Storm sewer, 8'-15' dp. in pl. @ $16.00/l.f. 1,600 70 Lin.ft. 18" RCP, Storm sewer, 0'-8' dp. in pl. @ $19.00/l.f. 1,330 185 Lin.ft. 24" RCP, Storm sewer, 8'-15' dp. in pl. @ $24.00/l.f. 4,440 1 Each Std. MH w/casting @ $850.00/each 850 2 Each Std. CBMH w/casting @ $800.00/each 1,600 1 Each Double CB w/casting @ $1,100.00/each 1,100 2 Each Std. CB w/casting @ $600.00/each 1,200 1 Each 12" Energy Disapator @ $500.00/each 500 1 Each Connect 24" RCP to existing 24" Plug @$300.00/each 300 5 Ton Grouted rip-rap in pl. @ $60.00/ton 300 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5.00/ton 500 0.5 Acre Seed @ $2,000.00/Acre 1,000 764 Lin.ft. Mechanical Trench compaction @ $1.40/l.f. 1,070 Total Estimated Construction $ 21,900 +5Y Contingency 1,090 $ 22,990 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 5,750 TOTALSTORM SEWER .. . . .. . . .. .... ...... . . ... $ 28,740 Page 10. 4753a / 9 E. STREET (Grading/Aggregate Base) 500 Cu.yds. Subgrade correction @ $2.00/cu.yd. $ 1,000 4,900 Sq.yds. Subgrade preparation @ $0.30/sq.yd. 1,470 1,200 Ton Cl. 2 crushed limestone @ $6.00/ton 7,200 1 Each Barricade SP-68 @ $500.00/each 500 Total Estimated Construction $ 10,170 +5% Contingency 510 $ 10,680 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 2,670 TOTAL STREET (Grading/Aggregate Base) $ 13,350 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING I. Sanitary Sewer $ 31,640 Water Main 34,310 Services 26,320 Storm Sewer 28,740 Street (Grading/Agg. Base) 13,350 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT - CONTRACT I $134,360 Page 11. 4753a CONTRACT II F. STREET (Surfacing) 4,700 Sq.yds. Base Preparation @ $0.25/sq.yd. $ 1,175 600 Ton Cl. 2 Crushed limestone @ $6.00/ton 3,600 375 Ton 2331 Bituminous binder course @ $12.00/ton 4,500 375 Ton 2341 Bituminous wear course @ $13.00/ton 4,875 38 Ton Bituminous Material for Mixture @ $210.00/ton 7,980 2,300 Lin.ft. Surmountable concrete curb & gutter @ $5.50/l.f. 12,650 14 Each Adjust MH & CB @ $200.00/each 29800 5 Each Adjust Gate valves @ $150.00/each 750 1.5 Acres Seed w/mulch @ $2,000.00/Acre 31000 Total Estimated Construction $ 41,330 +5% Contingency 2,070 $ 43,400 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 10,850 TOTAL STREET (Surfacing) $ 54,250 Page 12. 4753a 42 APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT 340 WINDCREST SECOND ADDITION Cost/Unit Total Assessment (56 Quad Units) A. Sanitary Sewer $ 26,440 $ 472 B. Water Main 34,310 613 C. Services 26,320 470 D. Storm Sewer 28,740 513 E. Street (Grading/Agg. Base) 13,350 238 F. Street (Surfacing) 54,250 969 G. Trunk Water Main 5,624 100 H. Trunk Storm Sewer 14,890 266 TOTAL .. .. . . ... .. . ...... . ... . . .. . $203,924 $3,641 DAKOTA COUNTY LIBRARY Total Assessment A. Sanitary Sewer $ 5,200 Page 13. 4753a �� Q � O � AL c J T Q IT O r y 2 1 y 3 4 V 34 35 6 5 1 33 36 30 9 w/ r 7 8 rf 2L,40 •�1 2 7 2 _ 8 7 25 26 16 13 12 g g 5 4 1 5 6 23 24`21 0 17 15 14 11 10 7 6 3 2 4 3 22 19 18 2 1 WINDCREST 2nd ADDITION WATERMAIN PROJECT NO. 340 TRUNK & LATERAL ASSESSMENTS 493 49232 MOUNT A i AWWX., . Scale: I" = 200' On O � Anue c " J 4) /% f Q v O A 2 1 h q 3 4 .�� 34 35 q) 6 5 V � I f33 � 383 h 9 W 7 O 7-tf 37 40 27 2 8 7 25 26 24 21 20 17 16 13 12 9 8 5 4 I 5 6 15 14 11 10 7 6 3 2 4 3 23 22 19 18 2 1 WINDCREST 2nd ADDITION SANITARY SEWER PROJECT NO. 340 LATERAL C'- ASSESSMENTS ONLY 49232 �ONFST�UO, NOW*, ANDOM & A&M. W. Crnia: I = 2Cl(1 • H Dn ok A nue c r /if Q o r 2 : j h 3 4 V 34 35 V1 33 36 38.4 6 .51 C h 9 W� 7 8 0 rt 37, RO 27 2 8 7 26 25/ 5 6 24 16 13 12 9 8 5 4 I 23 21 20 17 15 14 II 10 7 6 3 2 4 3 22 19 18 2 1 WINDCREST 2nd ADDITION STORM SEWER PROJECT N0, 340 TRUNK 8. LATERAL ASSESSMENTS 49232 wu mi!asjImua ROSM ANDGM & ASSO!'., NIC. Scale. C = 200' On o � A nu c J .I I 35 3 4 34 I 33 36 6 5 .0 h 30 f /' 7 9 37 .4� !.. , 25� 26 5 6 2421 17 16 13 12 9 8 5 4 1 22 23 19 18 15 14 II 10 7 6 3 2 4 3 2 1 WINDCREST 2nd ADDITION STREETS PROJECT NO. 340 STREET olle ASSESSMENTS 94 49232 scale, 1 ► " = zoo' f AgendaInformation Memo July 31 , 1981 Page Seven g PROJECT- 341 B. Project 341, Windtree 2nd Addition (Utility/Street Improvements) ' -- In response to a petition submitted- on May 15, 1981, a feasi- bility report was prepared and submitted to the Council on July 7, 1981, with a public hearing being scheduled for August 4' to consider the installation of streets and utilities for the-Windtree 2nd Addition. All legal notices have been sent to affected 'property owners and published in the legal ' newspaper. A copy of the feasi- bility report is enclosed for your information on pages through ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To close the public hearing and approve or deny Project 341 for the installation of streets and utilities in the Windtree 2nd Addition. e 1 e REPORT ON WINDTREE SECOND ADDITION UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT No. 341 FOR EAGAN, MINNESOTA 1981 e�&"? Paul, Mtaeala 28 /.J�� / •�(r1�PrIt4/ i •� f�f /T�� - /_,F .//��i Glenn R. Cook P.E. Kie{�� • Keil!A. Gordon. P.E. 0110 G. Bone;lroo,11,E. 7-hontns E.Noyes, P.E. O Raberr If', Rosenc,P.E. Richard W. Foster; P.L. J-scrh C. Anderlik P.E. Robevl G;Sc/u ni(hi, P.L'. 2335 `7.,,,4-4 g fanln L."San'ala, P.E. �y-^�-�7 36 Ilnallord A, Lemberg, P.E'. ,�L /{few,..-4 55113 Richard:E. Turner,P.G', Donald C.Burgardi,P.E. James C.Olson. P.E. Jerry A. Bourdon P.E. /)4,.. 612-636-4600 Afark A.Hanson P.E. .lune 1 t 1981 Charles A.Erickson Leo Af. Pawelsky 1956 — 5th —"V1981 Malan M. Olson Do,id E Olson Honorable Mayor and CouncilT nniversary' City of Eagan ---- 3795 Pilot Knob Road Fagan, Mn. 55122 Re: Windtree Second Addition Project 341 Our File No. 49233 Dear Mayor and Council: Transmitted herewith please find our Report for Windtree Second Addition, Project 341. This report covers street and utility construction for Windtree Second Addi- tion. We will be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested parties at a mutually convenient time to review this report. Respectfully submitted, ONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. �et Mark R. Rolf.s � MRR:li I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesp�a. t . Mark A. Hanson Dater June 1, 1981 _ Reg. No. 14260 4._ Approved by; Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works Date: a r 29 WINDTREE SECOND ADDITION SCOPE: This project provides for construction of sanitary sewer, water main, house service stubs, storm sewer, and street improvements within Windtree Second Addition, Windtree Second Addition consists of 27 single family lots. This report assumes that the grading of the street will be done by the devel- oper. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The project is feasible and is in accordance with the Master Utility and Street Plans of the City of Eagan. The project as outlined herein can best be completed in two contracts, Contract I provides for the construction of all utilities and placement of an aggregate base on a properly prepared subgrade, Contract II provides for the construction of the remaining portion of the aggregate base and bituminous surface in conjunction with the concrete curb and gutter, CONTRACT I A,) SANITARY SEWER An 8 inch sanitary sewer is proposed along the centerline of Windtree Court, Windtree Circle, Windtree Drive, and a portion of Ridgewood Drive, The sanitary sewer will connect to the existing 9 inch sanitary sewer located along the centerline of Elrene Road, B.) WATER MAIN: The proposed water main for Windtree Second Addition con- sists of a 6 inch water main located on Windtree Drive, a 6 inch water main looped individually through each of the two cul-de-sacs and a 6 inch water main stubbed along Ridgewood Drive, It may be more cost effective to obtain an easement in order to loop the water main between the two cul-de-sacs. The 6 inch water main on Windtree Drive will cut into the existing 16 inch water main located along Elrene Road, 30 Page 1, 4381a C.) SERVICES: This construction provides for the installation of sanitary sewer and water main services in common trench extending from the street to the property line. Sanitary sewer service consist of 4 inch plastic pipe, and water main service consist of 1 inch copper pipe. D.) STREET (Grading/Aggregate Base) : This construction provides for the proper grading of the subgrade surface after installation of utilities. Also included is the placement of a 4 inch crushed limestone base. CONTRACT II E.) STREET (Surfacing) : This construction provides for the placement of the remaining portion of the aggregate base followed by placement of a bituminous surface in conjunction with surmountable concrete curb and gutter. Also in- cluded is the widening of the east lane of Elrene Road from 12 feet to 22 feet, and B618 concrete curb and gutter. AREA TO BE INCLUDED: Construction Area Assessment Area SW 1/4 Section 13 SW 1/4 Section 13 Parcels: 012-50 Parcels: 012-50 010-51 010-51 COST ESTIMATE: Detailed cost estimates are presented at the back of this re- port. A summary of these costs are as follows: CONTRACT I Sanitary Sewer $ 70,540 Water Main 50,340 Services 21,450 Storm Sewer 4,900 Street (Grading/Aggregate Base) 20,230 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST - CONTRACT I . . . . $167,460 CONTRACT II Street (Surfacing) $102,320 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST - CONTRACT I & II .. . . . $269,780 Page 2. 4381a The total estimated cost for Contract I and Contract II including contin- gencies and all related overhead is $269,780. Overhead costs are estimated at 25% and include legal, engineering, administration and bond interest. EASEMENTS: No easements are required as part of this project. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments for utilities and streets are proposed to be levied against the benefited property in Windtree Second Addition. Trunk sanitary sewer and trunk water main have previously been assessed under Project 58. Trunk storm sewer has not been previously assessed and is therefore proposed to be assessed as part of this project. A preliminary as- sessment roll is included at the back of this report. Final assessment rates for construction of lateral facilities will be determined by final costs and be assessed to each benefited property. Base rates in effect at the time of this report for trunk storm sewer are as follows: Trunk Storm Sewer - Single Family REVENUE SOURCES: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows: Trunk Fund Project Cost Revenue Balance Sanitary Sewer Lateral $70,540 Lateral Assessments $70,540 TOTAL $70,540 $70,540 - 0 - Page 3. 4381a 32 Trunk Fund Project Cost Revenue Balance Water Main Lateral $50,340 Lateral Assessments $50,340 TOTAL. $50,340 $50,340 - 0 - Services Lateral $21,450 Lateral Assessment $21,450 TOTAL $21,450 $21,450 - 0 - Storm Sewer Lateral $ 4,900' Lateral Assessment $ 4,900 Trunk - 0 - Trunk Assessment $24,086 TOTAL - 0 - $28,986 +$24,086 Street Grading/Agg. Base $ 20,230' Surfacing 102,320 Street Assessments $122,550 TOTAL $122,550 $122,550 - 0 - No revenue is required from the City's trunk fund for utility or street construction. A positive trunk fund balance of $24,086 is included for trunk storm sewer. PROJECT SCHEDULE Present Feasibility Report July 7, 1981. Public Hearing August 4, 1981 Page 4. 4381a 3.3 Contract I Contract II Approve Plans and Specifications Aug, 1.8, 1981 Feb, , 1982 ' Open Bids Sept, 10, 1.981 Spring, 1982 Award Contract Sept, 1.5, 1981 Spring, 1982 Construction Ctm--pletion Nov, 30, 1981 Summer, 1982 Assessment Hearing Feb. , 1982 August, 1982 First Payment clue with Tical. Estate Taxes may, 1983 May, 1983 Pale 5, 4381a APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE WINDTREE SECOND ADDITION PROJECT 341 CONTRACT I UTILITIES AND GRADING A. Sanitary Sewer 1,000 Lin,ft, 8" PVC, Sanitary sewer, 8'-15' dp, @ $12,00/lin,ft, $ 12,000 500 Lin.ft, 8" PVC, Sanitary sewer, 15'-20' dp, @ $15.00/lin,ft, 7,500 480 Lin,ft, 8" PVC, Sanitary sewer, 20'-25' dp, @ $22,00/lin,ft, 10,560 13 Each Standard Manhole w/casting @ $900,00/each 11,700 80 Lin.ft, Manhole depth greater than 8' @ $70,00/lin, ft, 5,600 14 Lin,ft, Outside drop @ $75,00/lin,ft, 1,050 27 Each 8"x4" PVC wye in pl, @ $50,00/each 1,350 1 Each Cut into existing sanitary sewer @ $300,00/each 300 20 Ton Bituminous material for patch @ $60,00/ton 1,200 1,980 Lin.ft, Mechanical trench compaction @ $1,00/lin,ft. 1,980 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5,00/ton 500 Total Estimated Construction $ 53,740 +5% Contingency 2,690 $ 56,430 +25% Legal, Engrng, , Admin, & Bond Interest 14,110 TOTAL SANITARY SEWER , , , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, $ 70,540 B. Water Main 2,550 Lin,ft, 6" DIP, Water main @ $10,00/lin, ft, 25,500 5 Each Hydrants in pl. @ $800,00/each 4,000 4 Each 6" Gate valve and box @ $350,00/each 1,400 4,000 Lbs, C.I. Fittings @ $1,00/lb, 4,000 Page 6, 4381a ar 1 Each Cut into existing 16" DIP Water main @ $400,00/ea, $ 400 2,550 Lin.ft, Mechanical Trench compaction @ $1,00/lin.ft. 2,550 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5,00/ton 500 Total Estimated Construction $ 38,350 +5% Contingency 1,920 $ 40,270 +25% Legal, Engrng, , Admin, & Bond Interest 10,070 TOTALWATER MAIN . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ... . .. ... . .. . . $ 50,340 C. Services 1,100 Lin.ft, 4" PVC Sanitary sewer service @ $6,00/lin,ft, $ 6,600 1,100 Lin.ft, 1" Type "K" copper water service @ $5,00/lin,ft, 5,500 27 Each 1" Corporation stop @ $20,00/each 540 27 Each 1" Curb stop and box @ $60,00/each 1,620 82 Lin,ft, 4" Riser pipe @ $12-,00/lin,ft, 984 1,100 Lin.ft, Mechanical Trench Compaction @ $1.00/lin,ft, 1,100 Total Estimated Construction $ 16,344 +5% Contingency 816 $ 17,160 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin, & Bond Interest 4,290 TOTAL SERVICES „ , , , y. . . . .. . , $ 21,450 D. Storm Sewer 40 Lin.ft, 15" RCP, Storm sewer, 0'-8' dp. @ $18,00/lin.ft, $ 720 32 Lin.ft. 12" RCP, storm sewer, 0'-8' dp. @ $16,00/lin.ft, 512 1 Each Std. C.B. @ $600,00/each 600 2 Each Std, CBMH @ $850,00/each 1,700 25 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $5,00/ton 125 75 Lin.ft. Mechanical Trench Compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft, 75 Total Estimated Construction $ 3,732 +5% Contingency 188 $ 3,920 +25% Legal, Eng, , Admin. & Bond Interest 980 TOTAL STORM SEWER , ,, , , , , , , . ,, , , ,,, , , , , , , ,, ,, , , , , , $ 4,900 Page 7. 4381a 36 E. Street (Grading/Aggregate^Base) 250 Cu.yds. Subgrade correction @ $2.00/cu.yd. $ 500 8,700 Sq.yds. Subgrade preparation @ $0.30/sq.yd. 2,610 2,050 Ton Cl, 2 crushed limestone @ $6,00/ton 12000 Total Estimated Construction $ 15,410 +5% Contingency 770 $ 16,180 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 4,050 TOTAL STREET (Grading/Aggregate Base) $ 20,230 CONTRACT I Sanitary Sewer $ 70,540 Water Main 50,340 Services 21,450 Storm Sewer 4,900 Street (Grading/Aggreg. Base) 20,230 TOTAL CONTRACT I . . .. . .. . . . ...4. .. $167,460 CONTRACT II F. Street (Surfacing) 1,000 Cu.yds. Common borrow @ $2.00/cu.yd. $ 2,000 7,300 Sq.yds. Base preparation @ $0.30/sq.yd. 2,190 1,270 Ton Cl. 2 Crushed Limestone @ $6.00/ton 7,620 765 Ton Bituminous wear course @ $13.00/ton 9,945 650 Ton Bituminous base course @ $12.00/ton 7,800 72 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $210.00/ton 15,120 3,600 Lin.ft. Surmountable concrete curb & gutter @ $5.50/lin.ft. 19,800 880 Lin.ft. B618 concrete curb & gutter @ $6.00/lin.ft. 5,280 13 Each Adjust manholes @ $200.00/each 2,600 4 Each Adjust gate valves & boxes @ $150,00/each 600 3 Acres Seeding w/mulch @ $1,500.00/Ac. 4,500 1 Each Permanent barricade @ $300.00/each 300 1 Each Catch basin removal @ $200.00/each 200 Total Estimated Construction $ 77,955 +5y Contingency 3,900 $ 81,855 +25% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 20,465 TOTAL STREET (Surfacing) $102,320 Page 8. 4381a APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL WINDTREE SECOND ADDITION PROJECT 341 Cast/Lot Total Assessment (27 Lots) A. Sanitary Sewer $ 70,540 $ 2,613 B. Water Main 50,340 1,864 C. Services 21,450 794 D. Storm Sewer 4,900 182 E. Street (Grading/Agg. Base) 20,230 749 F. Street (Surfacing) 102,320 3,790 G. Trunk Storm Sewer 24,086 892 TOTAL $293,866 $10,884 Page 9. 4381a 39 N W W >o n M �+ o yam mra p CL m N �I CL �m N vm3 Zi�Z Zy� m y Zlid LJ �d 1-3> OD C) > rn d O y r / N J► / CAD !A / C � 1 ELREN F x _ S n�—�—=Jr � � N 1\ OD N �\ \ OD 4 / \ N \ N 1 I U O 0) N o j � N D REE= N I OD W W N _ O N -4 N A, co �D �� �y RCE W o OD . N A N \� Ol v / OCD OD N 0 _ 01 OD DRI R� E D 001 N 4 OD r W m —� N 0 % D N i W .A W N cr D cr _ — "D REE OR vE OD -4 cD tint, A N 1�1 :Er Z W ZDO 1 omn mam M o rnr n N m n DD -Q �tiN O o ! acorn N� cnN O� Q, ornm y z-n Ntl m z y O 0-3 y �d P-] tid o It t3d tz OD �d c� z d . y y = � Zo W CAD W o�e�mo`% ELRENEx N N \ co (A 4 (M N tr Ul N 0 \ - o U C-) o - - N E I (-4 I -4 CD OD N / N UD \ O CA aD I tD ~ ;Ln LisI DF?/ � �. � O — 40 / — r W m \ / -4 % w N O N 0 `p aD W N 4 ? / Ln D -4cn W W N — p °D A N F�1 W � W M z C Ozr v c ��� m> qzi i n O n! --�— CL CL r.z l J D z v ►�I /�1 _D y 0 y Z0. Fq y �d OD tl �d d DOITO 2 N Js W N C ELRENE I m N n .i Iw -1 w `' a \ N tp N00 I W O OD 0 0 Itoo o� - N — 01 / O OD '' DR! E Cn A o A R1 E 00 D oo w �, r wrnI� _ m N W U DN I OD - _ _ v _ W N D 4 01 5 --I—----'//VD REE �R vE W _ _ _ v -4 0) 0 W N — O � aD A W `L N W m-4 m N —_O ry cn O — N �a OLU) m t� CL vZ vz oT Z Z y N t2d b � �d OD O d Ell� � 0 y ~ y = x O • N A tT CAD ELRENE OD N W OV N C Uj CD N N W co �, �q % CRC E \ W p ao o _ O — l0 p � N aD I cD OD - N W DRI E /" 00 OD N DN I w O W N j Ul D IND R� pR VE W _ —4 Z-0 _ N — O � OD 1 Agenda Information Memo July 31, 1981 Page Eight 3 PROJECT 346 C. Project 346, Cinnamon Ridge 1st Addition (Streets & Utilities) -- In response to a petition submitted on June 16, 1981, a feasi- bility report was prepared and submitted to the Council on July 21 , 1981, with a public hearing being scheduled, for August 4 to consider the installation of streets and utilities in the Cinnamon Ridge First Addition. All notices have been sent to affected property owners and published in the legal newspaper. A'-copy of the feasibility report is enclosed on pages 44 through for your information. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To close the public hearing and ,approve or deny Project 346 for the installation of streets and .utilities for the Cinnamon Ridge lst Addition. t • REPORT ON CINNAMON RIDGE FIRST ADDITION UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT No. 346 FOR EAGAN MINNESOTA 1981 /3oked�oo, �cade�e, fYhcc�h�r�t � f /ddo��ed, Jtc. A pa" M&"" 44- 4"s T low. Keith Conk,P.E. A..Gordon.P.E. Ono G. Boncstroo, P.E. Thomas E.Noyes, P.E. 4 p Robert W. Rnsene,P.E. Rkhard W.Foster,P.E. v Joseph C. A nderlik,P.E. Robert G.Schunlcht,P.E. 2336 V. *74,.4.1l""�� w""""36 Dradlnrd A. Lemberg, P.E Marvin L.S,,rvala,P.E. yA f Richard E. Turner, P.E. Donald C.Burgardt,P.E. �1. Aa..l Mww�sla 66113 James C.Olson. P.E. Jerry A.Bourdon,P.E. Mark A..anion,P.E. PAaMb•612-636-k600 Steven M.Qu+nrty Charles A.Ericksno 4 1956 — t1L — 1981�� Leo M.M. welsky OlsonHarlan M.Alton d David E.Olson July 8, 1981 0l1 nni versary' Honorable Mayor and Council City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Mn. 55122 Re: Cinnamon Ridge First Addition Project 346 Our File No. 49238 Dear Mayor and Council: Transmitted herewith is our report for Cinnamon Ridge First Addition, Project No. 346. This report covers street and utility construction for Cinnamon Ridge First Addition. We will be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested parties at a mutually convenient time to discuss this report. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, .�A►NDDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson C VVV MAH:li I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of he State of Minne ta. Mark A. Hanson Date: July 7, 1981 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by oma;- A. Colbert Director of Public Works Date: 5023a 4s r • CINNAMON RIDGE FIRST ADDITION SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer and streets to serve Cinnamon Ridge First Addition. Cinna- mon Ridge First Addition consists of the following: Single Family - 10 units Single Family Cluster - 14 units Twin Homes - 32 units Condominiums - 68 units Cinnamon Ridge First Addition is located in the SW 1/4 Section 30. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: This project is feasible and is in accor- dance with the Master Utility and Street Plans for the City of Eagan. The project as outlined herein can best be carried out as two contracts. Contract I provides for construction of all utilities and the placement of an aggregate base on a properly prepared subgrade. Contract II provides for construction of the remaining portion of the ag- gregate base, and a bituminous surface in conjunction with the concrete curb and gutter. DISCUSSION: CONTRACT I A. SANITARY SEWER: A 10 inch sanitary sewer is proposed to extend from an ex- isting manhole located on the westerly right-of-way line of Trunk Highway 77 to the easterly street within Cinnamon Ridge First Addition. An 8 inch sani- tary sewer is proposed to extend within the First Addition as indicated on the drawing at the back of this report. The existing sanitary sewer under T.H. 77 is 12 inch reinforced concrete pipe. Page 1.. 5023a 146 B. WATER MAIN: A 6 inch water main is proposed to be constructed through Cin- namon Ridge 1st Addition. An 8 inch water main will be stubbed on Slaters Road. The 6 inch water main will connect to an existing 12 inch plug located on the north side of Cliff Road at Slaters Road. C. SERVICES: This construction provides for the construction of sanitary sew- er and water main service. It is proposed to construct services 15 feet be- yond the property line to each single family unit and each double family unit. Service construction to each single family cluster unit is proposed to be constructed 15 feet from each building unit. Services for single family units, single family cluster units, and double family units are 4 inch PVC for sanitary sewer and 1 inch type K copper for water. Service construction to each condominium complex is proposed to be constructed 15 feet from each building and consists of 6" PVC for sanitary sewer and 1-1/2 inch Type K cop- per for water. D. STORM SEWER LATERALS: It is proposed to construct 30 inch and 18 inch storm sewer as indicated on the drawing at the back of this report for Cinna- mon Ridge First Addition. Storm runoff will drain over land to a future pond- ing area designated as Pond AP-21A. This pond will be considered a dry pond and be constructed a part of the Second Addition. The future outlet for Pond AP-21A will be a 15 inch storm sewer constructed to Pond AP-21 which has an existing 21 inch storm sewer serving as its outlet. The outlet for Pond AP-21A will be constructed as part of the Second Addition. To naturally drain Pond AP-21A to Pond AP-21 prior to construction of the Second Addition requires the pond to rise to an elevation of 905.7 before draining to Pond AP-21. The natural drainage of Pond AP-21A to Pond AP-21 is contained completely within the Cinnamon Ridge Development. Page 2. 5023a 4-7 E. STREET (Grading/Gravel Base) : This construction provides for the proper grading of the subgrade surface after installation of utilities and the place- ment of a 4 inch aggregate base. CONTRACT II F. STREET (Surfacing) : This construction provides for the placement of the remaining portion of the aggregate base and the 32 foot wide bituminous sur- face in conjunction with surmountable concrete curb and gutter. No surmount- able concrete curb and gutter is proposed to be constructed outside the right- of-way of the proposed streets within Cinnamon Ridge First Addition. AREA TO BE INCLUDED: Assessment Area Construction Area SW 1/4 Section 30 SW 1/4 Section 30 Parcel 012-50 Parcel 012-50 COST ESTIMATE: Detailed cost estimates are presented in Appendix A at the back of this report. A summary of these costs are as follows: CONTRACT I: Sanitary Sewer $105,050 Water Main 80,720 Services 45,680 Storm Sewer 56,900 Street (Grading/Gravel Base) 26,590 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST - CONTRACT I $314,940 CONTRACT II: Street (Surfacing) 112,450 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST - CONTRACT I & II . . . . $427,390 The total estimated cost for Contract I and II including contingencies and all related overhead is $427,390. Overhead costs are estimated to be 27% and include legal, engineering, administration and bond interest costs. Page 3. 5023a 4 T EASEMENTS: Easements are required for looping of water main and sanitary sew- er extenions. It is anticipated easements for utility construction will be acquired through final approval of the plat at no additional cost. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited property located within Cinnamon Ridge First Addition. The proposed lots and units will be assessed for lateral sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer and streets. Lateral storm sewer is considered to be storm sewer pipe 24 inch in diameter and less. Trunk storm sewer larger than 24 inch will be assessed a 24 inch equivalent rate. Trunk area charges for sanitary sewer and water main have been previously assessed as part of Project 254. Trunk area charge for storm sewer has been assessed under Project 186. A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this report. Fi- nal assessment rates for construction of lateral facilities will be determined by final costs and will be assessed to each benefited property. REVENUE SOURCES: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows: SANITARY SEWER: Project Cost Revenue Trunk Fund Bal. Lateral $105,050 Lateral Assessment $105,050 $105,050 $105,050 - 0 - WATER MAIN: Lateral $ 80,720 Lateral Assessment $ 80,720 $ 80,720 $ 80,720 - 0 - Page 4. 5023a "�.O SERVICES: Project Cost Revenue Trunk Fund Bal. Service Stubs $ 45,680 Service Assessment $ 45,680 $ 45,680 $ 45,680 - 0 - STORM SEWER: Lateral $ 50,070 Lateral Assessment $ 50,070 Trunk 6,830 Trunk Assessment - 0 - $ 56,900 $ 50,070 -$ 6,830 STREET: Grading/Gravel Base $ 26,590 Surfacing 112,450 Street Assessment $139,040 $139,040 $139,040 - 0 - TOTAL -$ 630830 The trunk fund balance for storm sewer is -$6,830. This balance is pro- posed to be drawn from City Trunk Storm Sewer Funds. PROJECT SCHEDULE CONTRACT I CONTRACT II Present Feasibility Report July 21, 1981 July 21, 1981 Public Hearing August 4, 1981 August 4, 1981 Approve Plans and Specifications August 4, 1981 Spring, 1982 Open Bids August 27, 1981 Spring, 1982 Page 5. 5023a I-ro Award Contract Sept. 1, 1981 Spring, 1982 Construction Completion Nov. 13, 1981 Summer, 1982 Assessment Hearing Spring, 1982 Fall, 1982 First Payment due with Real Estate Taxes May, 1983 May, 1983 Page 6. 5023a �-r • APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE CINNAMON RIDGE 1ST ADDITION PROJECT 346 CONTRACT I 350 Lin.ft. 10" PVC Sanitary Sewer, 20'-25' dp. in pl. @ $20.00/lin.ft. $ 7,000 3,060 Lin.ft. 8" PVC Sanitary Sewer, 10'-20' dp. in pl. @ $14.00/lin.ft. 42,840 17 Each Standard Manhole w/casting @ $800.00/each 13,600 64 Lin.ft. Manhole depth greater than 8' dp. @ $70.00/lin.ft. 4,480 30 Lin.ft. 8" D.I.P. outside drop @ $40.00/lin. ft. 1,200 65 Each 8" x 4" wye branch @ $60.00/each 3,900 1 Each Cut into existing manhole @ $250.00/each 250 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $6.00/ton 600 1.0 Acre Seed with topsoil @ $1,500.00/acre 1,500 3,410 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 3,410 Total Estimated Construction $ 78,780 +5% Contingency 3,940 $ 82,720 +27% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 22,330 TOTAL SANITARY SEWER . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . .. . . . . $105,050 B. WATER MAIN 210 Lin.ft. 8" DIP Water Main @ $12.00/lin. ft. $ 2,400 3,880 Lin.ft. 6" DIP Water Main @ $10.00/lin.ft. 38,800 7 Each Hydrant in place @ $800.00/each 5,600 1 Each 8" Gate valve and box @ $450.00/each 450 6 Each 6" Gate valve and box @ $350.00/each 2,100 4,500 Lbs. Fittings in place @ $1.00/lb. 4,500 1 Each Remove existing 12" plug @ $500.00/each 500 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $6.00/ton 600 1 Acre Seed with topsoil @ $1,500.00/acre 1,500 4,080 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 4,080 Total Estimated Construction $ 60,530 +5% Contingency 3,030 $ 63,560 +27% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 17,160 TOTALWATER MAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 80,720 Page 7. 5023a S;Z.— e • t C. SERVICES 2,140 Lin.ft. 4" PVC Sanitary Sewer service @ $4.50/lin.ft. $ 9,630 400 Lin.ft. 6" PVC Sanitary Sewer service @ $5.00/lin.ft. 2,000 400 Lin.ft. 1-1/2" Type K copper water service @ $6.00/lin.ft. 2,400 2,270 Lin.ft. 1" Type K copper water service @ $5.00/lin.ft. 11,350 5 Each 1-1/2" Corporation stop @ $35.00/each 175 56 Each 1" Corporation stop @ $30.00/each 1,680 5 Each 2" Curb stop and box @ $100.00/each 500 56 Each 1" Curb stop and box @ $70.00/each 3,920 2,600 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin. ft. 2,600 Total Estimated Construction $ 34,255 +5% Contingency 1,715 $ 35,970 +27% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 9,710 TOTALSERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . . ... . . .. .. .. . . . $ 45,680 D. STORM SEWER 640 Lin.ft. 30" RCP Storm Sewer @ $35.00/lin.ft. $ 22,400 250 Lin.ft. 18" RCP Storm Sewer @ $21.00/lin.ft. 5,250 120 Lin.ft. 12" RCP Storm Sewer @ $16.00/lin.ft. 1,920 5 Each Standard manhole w/casting @ $900.00/each 4,500 1 Each Standard catch basin manhole w/cstg. @ $800.00/each 800 1 Each Double catch basin w/cstgs. @ $1,000.00/each 1,000 4 Each Standard catch basin w/cstg. @ $600.00/each 2,400 1 Each 30" Flared end w/trash guard @ $700.00/each 700 12 Cu.yds. Grouted rip rap @ $50.00/cu.yd. 600 100 Ton Rock stabilization below pipe @ $6.00/ton 600 1.0 Acre Seed with topsoil @ $1,500.00/acre 1,500 1,000 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 1,000 Total Estimated Construction $ 42,670 +5% Contingency 2,130 $ 44,800 +27% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 12,100 TOTALSTORM SEWER . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .... .. . . . . .... . . . . . $ 56,900 Page 8. 5023a �3 E. STREETS (Grading/Gravel Base) 400 Cu.yds. Subgrade correction @ $2.00/cu.yd. $ 800 10,800 Sq.yds. Subgrade preparation @ $0.30/cu.yd. 3,240 2,650 Ton Class 2 crushed limestone @ $6.00/ton 15,900 Total Estimated Construction $ 19,940 +5% Contingency 1,000 $ 20,940 +27% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 5,650 TOTAL STREET (Grading/Gravel Base) $ 26,590 CONTRACT I A. Sanitary Sewer $105,050 B. Water Main 80,720 C. Services 45,680 D. Storm Sewer 56,900 E. Street (Grading/Gravel Base) 26,590 TOTAL CONTRACT I . . .. . . . . . . . . . ... $314,940 CONTRACT II F. STREET (Surfacing) 10,800 Sq.yds. Subbase preparation @ $0.30/sq.yd. $ 3,240 1,310 Tons Class 5 aggregate base @ $6.00/ton 7,860 820 Ton 2331 Bituminous binder course @ $11.00/ton 9,020 820 Ton 2341 Bituminous base course @ $12.00/ton 9,840 82 Ton Bituminous material for mixture @ $210.00/ton 17,220 450 Gals. Bituminous material for tack coat @ $1.20/gal. 540 5,400 Lin.ft. Surmountable concrete curb & gutter @ $5.00/lin.ft. 27,000 6 Each Adjust gate valve and box @ $100.00/each 600 24 Each Adjust manhole &D catch basin @ $150.00/each 3,600 3 Each Permanent barricade @ $300.00/each 900 3.0 Acre Seed with topsoil @ $1,500.00/acre 4,500 Total Estimated Construction $ 84,320 +5% Contingency 41220 $ 88,540 +27% Legal, Engrng. , Admin. & Bond Interest 23,910 TOTAL STREET (Surfacing) $112,450 Page 9. 5023a S-1 APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL CINNAMON RIDGE 1ST ADDITION PROJECT 346 LATERAL ASSESSMENT COST BREAKDOWN METHOD 1 - Single Family Unit = 0.7 - Single Family Cluster Unit 1 - Twin Home Unit = 0.6 - Single Family Unit 1 - Condominium Unit = 0.35 Single Family Unit A. SANITARY SEWER Total Cost Cost/Unit Single Family (10 units) $ 16,728 $ 1,673 Twin Homes (32 units) 32,117 1,004 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 16,393 1,171 Condominiums (68 units) 39,812 585 TOTAL $105,050 B. WATER MAIN Single Family (10 units) $ 12,854 $ 1,285 Twin Homes (32 units) 24,679 771 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 12,596 900 Condominiums (68 units) 30,591 450 TOTAL $ 80,720 Page 10. 5023a �.fr Total Cost Cost/Unit C. SERVICES Single Family (10 units) $ 7,274 $ 727 Twin Homes (32 units) 13,966 436 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 7,128 509 Condominiums (68 units) 17,312 255 $ 45,680 D. STORM SEWER Single Family (10 units) $ 7,973 $ 797 Twin Homes (32 units) 15,308 478 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 7,813 558 Condominiums (68 units) 18,976 279 TOTAL $ 50,070 E. STREET (Grading/Gravel Base) Single Family (10 units) $ 4,235 $ 424 Twin Homes (32 units) 8,129 254 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 4,149 296 Condominiums (68 units) 10,077 148 TOTAL $ 26,590 F. STREET (Surfacing) Single Family (10 units) $ 17,906 $ 1,791 Twin Homes (32 units) 34,380 1,074 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 17,548 1,253 Condominiums (68 units) 42,616 627 TOTAL $112,450 Page 11. 5023a d-6 LATERAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY Single Fam. Single Fam. Twin Home Cluster Condominium Sanitary Sewer 1,673 1,004 1,171 585 Water Main 1,285 771 900 450 Services 727 436 509 255 Storm Sewer 797 478 558 279 Street (Grading/Gravel Base) 424 254 296 148 Street (Surfacing) 1,791 1,074 1,253 627 TOTAL LATERAL ASSESSMENT 6,697 4,017 4,687 2,344 Page 12. 5023a 1�5 7 l'1 A r N W - W N cKi w 0-4 � ►�z _ \ y Z �y A 11�� y N ✓'' 7j 0 w O y N bh d a o O -< d � x y O a oo trJ x rn U N w All N m U) m D —I m M N D z !Z! v CG {N o " 0 32 -4m s Co. .4 N N 3 m z N � r CLI FF ROAD A m c0 .. N W — m n cj Ulf -- C C�D 0 z f� a _ ± bL p�� N 0-4 OD W 0 a H PE Z c ` x w DO m 0 Ca A N rn (n w m rn cn X' � cn 7— t> N rn z y Ln G A G Pr o _ 32 -� O rn a Z D CO. T J CLI FF _ ROAD t» :} •?in IT D 1ro 0 T cc W � NS210 JJ. ° i----� \cn� 0 Ln t GIN COG -- CD tzj \ bd �\ \� • m d b d tv to '� - C IS x cc \ m nar Nm c m v cn&, S ° Pr ° 32 Z COor- ~ 1- ZD {rn D CLI FF ROAD 1 Vl n n p r N W — 1 Q0 l � a1 •` ti /O � cw tv y y, O Q 0 D CP W7 elf, W PE OD-1 tidyOD Lx CO _ N m epN D� e C m c m v wrn c ; n 32 m 0co r CLIFF ROAD Agenda InformationMemo July 31, 1981 Page Nine OLD DODD ROAD. --. STREET VACATION { j D. Vacation of a Portion of Old Dodd Road Alignment Adjacent to { Overhill Farm Addition (0.25 miles north of County Road' 32) - With the recent upgrading of Dodd Road from County Road 32 to County Road 30 a new alignment resulted in the requirement to vacate ' and abandon a portion of the Old Dodd Road alignment adjecent' _to the proposed Overhill Farm Addition and the Dineen property. The City Attorney has prepared a resolution for official ' vacation of this old alignment so that it may be incorporated' within the pro- posed Overhill Farm Additionlat. p All required notices have been published in the legal newspaper for this public right of way vacation. ' Although the resolution provides for the total description of the portion to be vacated, it will be broken down into two separate documents for recording purposes. The - portion - to be vacated adjacent to the Dineen property will not be recorded until we receive drainage and utility, easements that were requested in consideration of reducing the assessments to the Dineen parcel. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve the resolution vacating a segment of 'Old Dodd Road while retaining required utility easements and to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said resolution. A Agenda Information Memo July 31, 1981 Page Ten RENAMING-OF WILDWOOD-LANE• TO-DIFFLEY- ROAD A. Consideration for Renaming of Wildwood Lane to Diffley Road -- The City Administrator contacted Mr. Dick Elasky, Assistant District 9 Highway, Engineer, to discuss further . the possibility of- MnDOT financing the cost for new identification signs for County Road 30. Mr. Elasky stated that the cost is estimated at $2,400 to redo eight (8) road identification signs . that are ready for installation with the name Wildwood Lane on the signs. The eight (8) signs include ground mounted signs and overhead signs. MnDOT is willing to negotiate the change order with the contractor and any other administrative or maintenance related tasksinvolving the changing of the sign. However, the $2,400 cost for new signs will not be assumed by the State of Minnesota and, therefore, is a direct;, cost to the City of Eagan. The cost to redo signs that were prepared by the .City at $250 and the $2.,400 expense for the State highway identification signs would equal a total cost to the City of Eagan of approximately $2,650. Enclosed on page is a copy of a letter that was received from one resident regarding the renaming of Wildwood Lane to Diffley Road. If the name change is to occur, a special budget appropriation is required by the City Council. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the name change from Wildwood Lane to Diffley Road for County Road 30. : _ y lite /!wa7V. -171e7 8 9 � f0 co `I(14 j � 1 64 � z r Y $ 31 Agen$A' inf ;t tti on Memo ; July 4 � 4 F � Elegy I'NANCR C4NTZ B. Prop©s+ i rt?rdinano � i Amendment Regarding L RE irement ,ftir Condit '' 9us; 'et t a:bad Care Center At the Jul 'y^ 7., 19$' C `;ty r o�ci ,. there was a brief d3 seussion by the City; staff s � 1. regarding a potential 2 amendment to Ordinance #S2 that �tv ire a conditional use § permit; .fir© ecure for licens +�nters for the caring of six or, more children. Siz." t� t j , the City, staff 'has: prepared an . crdir►snce amendmer� cp cif` which ...J enolosed on Page •' .., end. sptaken with several residxta"- as' well employees of` the- a County Human S es Board« it ` seemed appropriate t© .address phi s agta item in separate :norandm, Therefore, ; a me orandu� entitle ''. ,'Propc� Ordinance♦ it i i t to Consider the I*suance of ` "Conditional ,Use ' "ermits far Hning nay, Gare Center: Licensing" is oriel©sed for yout ,,reference n ;pales - � through That e? o �iC empts to address backgrdu� inion and Y Eo provides a• certain ` amount of fact finding , seggrding . whether an ordinance , amendient to consider the issuance of conditional , use permits for handling day center licensing su1d be �rnsdered or: 'not Also end ed on pee through" - is° a �€tier from- Phoebe `Orton .4h resides at idgeon ,ay a letter fry the Minnesota LiG` ec *: Family' ire.°w c Ati:dn a, d�''a letter _ frim ; the ilaota County f` �„ .]Pay 77 , t� ACTIO TQ BE CONS ON` fes.,, `approve or deny ,the . proposed ordinance `, andmentR orithou.t mddifi.cation if approved regarding 'conditional 'Fermat . fob `hantIitday care , enter licensing'. s1 , r T�A n < ' t E" j .. 1 t r, VX r 1 I 5 - A °� '. MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JULY 29, 1981 SUBJECT: PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CONSIDER THE ISSUANCE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR HANDLING DAY CARE CENTER LICENSING HISTORY During early May, the City received a citizen complaint that called attention to the fact that several day care facilities may be opera- ting in Eagan without the required conditional use permits . The City has also periodically received complaints from residents regarding the impact a family day care facility has created on the residential integrity of a neighborhood. The City staff, in response to the complaint and questions that have been raised by residents of the community contacted Dakota County and learned that eighty-three (83) people were on record as licensed to operate day care centers or nursery schools within the City of Eagan. However, at this time, only five ( 5) people have been issued con- ditional use permits to operate day care centers or nursery schools within the City by the City Council . In researching the ordinance, nursery schools and day care centers are listed as a conditional use within any agricultural or residential district under an amend- ment to the zoning ordinance adopted April 20, 1976. Before this amendment was adopted, day care centers or nursery schools were not allowed except possibly as a "home occupation" which included as a permitted use "teaching limited to three (3) students . " The City and County have similar requirements for licensing. Both require a license or permit for the paid care of more children than those of one (1 ) family in addition to the family residing on the premises. This raised the immediate issue with the City staff as to whether conditional use permit applications should be processed for those people operating day care centers or nursery schools within the City who are licensed by the County and the State Department of Welfare but do not have a conditional use per- mit. The City Administrator reviewed this issue with the City Council at the May 19, 1981 City Council meeting, asking for some direction as to whether the City should consider enforcement of the conditional use permit procedure as a matter of record, amend the ordinance or allow the County to process the applications with no City involvement. The City Council asked that the City staff obtain more information to assist in the formulation of City day care center licensing guidelines, specifically requesting informa- tion on a breakdown of the number of children that are licensed in each of the family day care homes throughout the City. This information was gathered and provided at the City Council meeting on July 7, 1981 so direction could be provided as to how the City Council desires to proceed with day care center licensing. The City Administrator and City Attorney were asked to prepare an bb Day Care Center July 29, 1981 Page Two ordinance amendment that would consider a conditional use permit procedure licensing day care centers for the caring of six or more children. An ordinance amendment was to be placed on the August 4, 1981 City Council agenda for consideration. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The City Administrator was contacted by Phoebe Orton who resides at 3558 Widgeon Way who raised a number of concerns and issues regarding the licensing of family day care homes and group family day care homes within the City. A copy of her letter is attached for your information. Also, letters were received from the Minne- sota Licensed Family Child Care Association and Dakota County Family Day Care Association. Copies of those letters are also enclosed. The City Administrator asked that a meeting be scheduled with em- ployees of the Dakota County Human Services Department and the State Licensing Bureau, representing the Department of Welfare, so that staff could better .evaluate whether a City has reason or necessity to involve themselves further with control through licensing of family day care homes or group family day care homes. Due to the public employees ' strike, there was no representative from the Department of Welfare or licensing bureau. However, Joan Becker and Betty Keyes were present for a meeting with staff in- cluding the City Planner, Chief Building Inspector, Fire Marshal , Planning Assistant, City Attorney and City Administrator to further explore the issue. Both Joan Becker and Betty Keyes were very helpful in providing answers to questions and information asked by the City staff. A family day care home and group family day care home are licensed and governed through the Department of Public Welfare ' s "Rule II. Day Care Standards". A family day care home represents a program providing day care for no more than five chil- dren at one time, including the family day care provider' s own children under school age, and a group family day care home is a program providing day care for more than five but fewer than eleven children at any one time including the provider' s or helper' s own children under school age. Through the Department of Human Services, the Social Services Division has been authorized by law to license their homes, including both the family and group care. If a family wishes to provide a family or a group family day care home operation, they must first apply to the Dakota County Human Services Board for an application. They must provide information about their background, be interviewed by the Human Services person- nel , complete an application, a review of the applicant' s home is made by Human Services personnel , Human Service Board approval is required and, ultimately, approval by the Department of Welfare. An annual review and inspection is then conducted by the personnel of the Human Services, Social Services Division. Several questions 47 Day Care Center July 29, 1981 Page Three were raised by the City staff regarding code enforcement, such as potential fire hazards, and also the philosophy of allowing that magnitude of a business operation in a residential neighbor- hood. The City staff was assured by Joan Becker and Betty Keyes that the Social Services Division of the Human Services Board does require that the residential integrity be protected in a neighbor- hood, and, if there are complaints by neighbors of a day care center operation or parents who have placed children in a family day care center, that family day care center will be fully investigated and they have the right to revoke a license or to not renew a license on an annual basis. It appeared, after speaking with the two employees of the Human Services Board, that the City might well be duplicating a service that is performed by employees of the Human Services Board. Apparently, the Human Services Board does provide an inspection service, whereas, if a neighbor should have a complaint about the impact a family day care center is causing on his or her property, they can contact either Mrs. Becker or Mrs . Keyes and either one of those two people or someone from the Human Services Board Division of Social Services has the authority to review the problem. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT City Attorney Hauge has prepared an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. He has also enclosed a short synopsis of some of the regulations including statutory provisions for day care facilities within a City. s/Thomas L. Hedges ity A ministrator 6$ w PAUL H. HAUGE & ASSOCIATES. P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 9808 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY EAGAN (ST. PAUL). MINNESOTA 33122 PAUL H. HAUGE AREA CODE 612 BRADLEY SMITH TELEPHONE 434.4224 KEVIN W. EIDE DAVID G. KELLER July 31, 1981 RICHARD J. KRAMBEER Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Day Care Center Facilities Dear Tom: The following is a short synopsis: of some of the regulations including statu- tory provisions for day care facilities within a City. Some of the factors that appear to be important in a decision by the Council as to whether it wants to impose any type of conditional use or special use permit on day care facilities include (a) the cost to the City in regulating by conditional or special use permit and also the cost to the day care provider; and (b) the record keeping concerning the location and restrictions on day care centers together with possible duplication of state and county records. Several municipalities have apparently faced the issue of day care centers and to the best of our knowledge we are not aware of any City that is requiring a special use or conditional use permit with specific conditions. I understand that Maple Grove has adopted an amendment to its zoning ordinance which follows the state law closely and under certain circumstances requires a conditional use permit. South St. Paul's Council discussed the issue but simply delayed any action. It is my understanding that the Commissioner of Public Welfare actually licenses day care facilities under M.S.A. Chapter 245 and certain requirements must be followed in the licensing process. 1. The Commissioner must consider population, size, land use plan, availability of community services, the number and size of existing public and private com- munity residential facilities in the City. 2. The Commissioner may not issue a license under M.S.A. 245.812 if the residential facility is within 1,320 feet of any existing group residential facility unless the City grants the facility conditional use or special use permit. This would appear to give a City the authority to authorize con- ditional use and special use permits. 3. With the exception of foster family homes, the requirements of the subdivision mentioned above apply to all licensed residential facilities even if a facility is considered a permitted single family residential use. i 67 Mr. Hedges July 31, 1981 Page Two 4. Under Subdivision 3 of the same section above., the licensed residential facility operating out of a home in effect serving six or fewer persons or a licensed day care facility,which ordinarily isnot .in a residential home, serving ten or fewer persons shall be considered permitted single family residential use for purposes of zoning. 5. Under Subdivision 4, a licensed day care or residential facility serving from seven to sixteen persons shall be considered a permitted multi-family residential use for zoning purposes. 6. As to the City's power to be more restrictive under Subdivision 4, it is stated that a City may grant or require conditional use or special use permit ". . .to assure proper maintenance and operation ofa facility, provided that no conditions shall be imposed on the homes that are more restrictive than those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the same zones, unless such additional conditions are necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of the facility." This allows heavier restrictions provided such restrictions are not greater than those imposed on other conditional or special permit uses such as beauty shops, etc., in a residential area unless to protect for safety and health problems." ,.. Verymy you , (/}f I I ' Paul H. Hauge skk 76 CITY OF EAGAN Amendment To ORDINANCE NO. 52 - ZONING ORDINANCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA, DOES HEREBY AMEND ITS ORDINANCE NO. 52 AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 52.07 - Subd. 3-B - CONDITIONAL USES Within any Agricultural District no structure or land shall be used for the following use or uses deemed similar by the City Council except by conditional use permit: 4. Nursery schools and day care centers providing services to seven (7) or more children at one time. SECTION 52.07 - Subd. 4-B - CONDITIONAL USES !i Within any R-1, R-2, R-4 or R-5 District, no structure or land shall be used for the following use or_ uses deemed similar by the City Council ex- cept by conditional use permit: 2. Nursery schools and day care centers providing services to seven (7) or more children at one time. r I ATTEST: CITY COUNCIL - CITY OF EAGAN By. E. J. Van Overbeke, Clerk Beatta Blomquist, Mayor Original Ordinance dated: February 18, 1972 This Amendment Adopted: Amendment Published in Dakota County Tribune: 77l CITY OF EAGAN Amendment To ORDINANCE NO. 52 - ZONING ORDINANCE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA, DOES HEREBY AMEND ITS ORDINANCE NO. 52 AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 52.07 - Subd. 3-B - CONDITIONAL USES Within any Agricultural District no structure or land shall be used for the following use or uses deemed similar by the City Council except by conditional use permit: 4. Nursery schools and day care centers providing services to seven (7) or more children at one time. SECTION 52.07 - Subd. 4-B - CONDITIONAL USES Within any R-1, R-2, R-4 or R-5 District, no structure or land shall be used for the following use or uses deemed similar by the City Council ex- cept by conditional use permit: 2. Nursery schools and day care centers providing services to seven (7) or more children at one time. ATTEST: CITY COUNCIL - CITY OF EAGAN By. E. J. Van Overbeke, Clerk Beatta Blomquist, Mayor Original Ordinance dated: February 18, 1972 This Amendment Adopted: Amendment Published in Dakota County Tribune: Phoebe Orton 3558 Widgeon Way Eagan, Mn. 55123 Eagan City Council City Hall 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Mn. 55122 July 15, 1981 Dear City Council: Since no public notice was given for the 2 times family day care was dis- cussed at Eagan City Council meetings, this letter is to inform you of some of my concerns and opinions on the proposed ordinance of day care licensing in Eagan. I anticipate that public notification will be given the next time the day care issue is addressed at Council meetings. These 2 phrases will be used in this letter and are defined as follows by DPW Rule II Day Care Standards: family ay care home - a program providing day care for no more than five children at one time, including the family day care provider's own child- ren under school age group family day care home - a program providing daycare for more than five but fewer than eleven children at any one time, including the provi- der's or helper's own children under school age Through the Department of Human Services, Social Services has been author- ized by law to license day care homes, including both family and group care. Home providers of child care are regulated under Rule II guidelines. Center care is licensed by the State Department of Education and must meet the guidelines of Rule III. Rule II guidelines are available upon request from Social Services. The remainder of this letter applies to day care homes, not centers. There are presently 78 licensed family day care homes in Eagan and 10 lic- ensed group homes in Eagan with new homes applying each day. These figures com- pare with Burnsville's 60 family homes and 16 group homes and with Apple Val- ley's 73 family homes and 18 group homes. Remember that up until the last few months, Eagan for many years had only 1 group home listed with Dakota County Social Services. Countywide there are nearly 545 licensed homes. Not each family day care home has a full 5 children enrollment nor do most group homes operate a full 10 children enrollment. According to Frank Brennan of the Community Action Council, statistics last fall indicated that 70/ of the homes in Dakota County have both adults working. Add to that, the fact that our county has the second highest div- orce rate in Minnesota and one can see the basis of a, high demand for child care here. Eagan alone supports several large corporations and industries which in- creases the need for care locally. Even if all licensed homes and centers were operating at top enrollment, there would still be children under unregulated care. Federal law demands that Social Services place Title XX children (children in families receiving financial aid for child care) only in licensed centers and homes. In certain areas of Eagan, there are densities of AFDC cases which places a burden on day care homes nearby, thus increasing the need for group homes. 73 • page 2 Any type of child care should be regulated. I feel that Social Services has adequately pursued the licensing requirements in our county as well as policed the reported cases of homes operating without a day care license. Social Services is well equiped to regulate the homes in Eagan. For Eagan's City Council to be- come involved in home day care licensing would be a precedent set in this county. No other city is assessing special fees or requirements for its day care homes. We should consider if Eagan taxpayers can afford the expense as our council duplicates the work of Social Services. Additional expense to taxpayers will re- sult when staff time is needed to enforce this licensing policy. No one from the city is presently authorized to enter a day care home or to have access to enroll- ment numbers. Day care homes are already inspected annually by Social Services and possibly 4 more times annually by a USDA Food Program Representative. Does Eagan have the finances for the planning commission and Council to handle the in- coming applicants? Does it have the time for this on their monthly agendas? Not only will the taxpayers be paying for these costs, but parents seeking day care would be forced to pay higher rates to cover the cost of the provider's special Eagan license and legal work. The cost of daycare at present is high and increases of this nature will most likely not be well excepted by parents. It appears that some of this money could be spent toward more direct benefits for our children. Day care providers often times find themselves unintentionally falling into a group home category. As a provider cares for several families over a number of years, new brothers and sisters arrive. It is hard to turn away a child one has cared for since his birth because he now,has a new sibling. The provider's own family may increase and the limit of S children is easily attained. More child- ren may appear to be present when one or two friends of the provider's children come to play. Group homes are inevitable and provide a prominent service in Minnesota. Those of us who have been providing quality day care have worked hard to up- grade home day care at a reasonable cost to parents. We belong to Child Care Councils and Family Day Care Associations to promote good communication between children, parents, providers, and the community. Licensed providers have access to a toy and audio-visual equipment lending library, a USDA Food Subsidy Program, group day care insurance, grant money to upgrade our facilities, support groups, and numerous training sessions. It is only natural that we would like to see all licensed homes operating l smoothly and to see that all homes caring for children be licensed by the state so that the above avenues are open to them. Licensing is free and, in fact, is f required by law in most cases. If the Eagan City Council chooses to levy additional charges and regulations unfairly to group day care homes, much of our attempt to improve child care will be lost. The burden of the cost to the provider for implimenting the regulations being considered will undoubtedly force many providers to quit day care or to ig�•- nore the ruling. We will see the number of "legal" group homes decline sharply while "illegal" group homes will flourish. Is this the impression the Council wishes to show the rest of the county? With the porposed ordinance, the basis of quality child care will be challen- z ged. Parents will be forced to drive further to find licensed group day care and the children will lose the benefits of neighborhood care. The day care home close 7� • • page 3 to the parents' homes allows for school and summer school busing, including band and sports activities, Scout programs, religious instruction, etc. If there are less providers and group homes available, parents are losing their right to choose the best possible situation for their children. Allow me to interject some facts about my own, typical home day care. The Social Service Department has authorized me to operate a group day care home and I may bring in 9 children in restricted age groupings. I average 6 or 7 children in care week days between the hours of 7:OOam and 5:30pm. My meighbors support my business and to my knowledge have not complained about it. On the contrary, within a few weeks of .doing day care in my new home, I received 7 call from par- ents living within 4 blocks of me seeking day care for their children. I cared or care regularily for 3 of these families and for another family less than i mile away. I feel that my situation in not unique. Parents seek providers near their home. I quote from Dr. Wilson Riles, Superintendent of Public Instruction, the State of California Department of Education, "Those persons concerned with the needs of the young children and families must realize the gap between (day care needs and services is great. . . The needs of children and their needs for high standard child care is a 'right' not a 'privilege' . Children must not become a political football to be passed away for economic expediency.` Complaints concerning day care that are received by this Council should be reported to Social Services. If Council members are still concerned, let them speak to providers, their neighbors, or day care parents about this area of child care and welfare. I am confident that licensed day care will stand on its own good merit. I feel that the proposed licensing of group homes will be most det- rimental to good child care options in Eagan. Thank you for your consideration of this letter. Sincerely, Phoebe Orton Advisor to Dakota County Family Day Care Association Vice President of Minnesota Licensed Family Child Care Association i ccs Thomas Hedges Paul Hauge Dale Runkle Bea Blomquist i 7r 0 r Minnesota Licensed Family Child Care Association 750 ST.PAUL BUILDING, ST.PAUL,MINNESOTA 55102 612-291-7911 1-800-652-9704 (Outside Metro Areal Q July 15, 1981 Mr. Thomas Hedges City Administrator/City Council City Hall 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Dear Mr. Hedges: On behalf of its Dakota County Members and the over 7,000 Licensed Family Day Care Providers it serves throughout the State, the Minnesota Licensed Family Child Care Association wishes to express concerns on the possible licensing by Eagan 's City Council . There are nearly 8,000 Licensed Family Day Care Providers in the State of Minnesota. Licensed Family Day Care in our State is proud of the fact we have the most comprehensive regulation and support system of any state in the union. Minnesota serves as a leader and model of our country. Family Day Care has been in existence and demand since mid-century of this era, yet Child Care Services have never been in greater demand. The demand is brought about by today's economy and the increase of population. Family Day Care Providers have battled long and hard to insure better licensing regulations and to separate the identities of group and family day care. Any proposed legislation interfering with this progress should be carefully considered. Please send a copy of any final legislation. Thank you for your time and consideration. . 1 Sincerely, The Executive Board of the M.L.F.C.C.A. 9 CO `wL 17;581 -76 1s ~ E Z Dakota County Family Daycare Association 13151 FLAMINGO CT. • APPLE VALLEY, MN 55124 r PHONE: 432-5896 July 22,1981 PRESIDENT Nancy Burns 13151 Flamingo Ct. Dear Sirs It Apple Valley,MN 55124 432-5896 The Dakota county r'amily Daycare Association is writing VICE-PRESIDENT A%RM"Rah is a*Odnand-st. to you in concern of the possibility of requiring a special i woklog6,MN 53053 ".7-2+e4 permit to provide daycare for children in rngan. We under- SEC.-TREAS. nder- SEC:TREAS. Mary W.18 stand this concern is for licensed family ou da an 1339 W. 18th St, y � p care.y Hastings,MN 55033 437-5489 'i'he Dakota County eamily Daycare Association is an in.. ADVISOR Phoebe Orton 4034 Rahn Road dependent, non-profit organization which begun in 1978. Since Eagan,MN 55122 454-8520 the beginning of the association, the aim of the officers and REP.ON THE BOARD OF MINNESOTA LICENSED FAMILY CHILD CARE ASSOCIATION it's members is to promote quality child care• We try to Elaine Greer 1428 Skyline Rd. Eagan,MN 55121 aid communication among the county division of Social Services, 454-8989 REP.TO DAKOTA COUNTY parents, daycare providers, and the com:amity. Thus we are COUNCIL FOR COORDINATED CHILD CARE Nancy Leitch interested in all issues dealing with daycare. 1015 16th Ava.N. South St.Paul,MN 55075 451-0751 All licensed daycare providers abide by the rules and laws set forth to us by the Dept. of Public welfare. These rules are given to each of us by our licensing workers through our county Social Services dept. ooth the state and county dept. are constantly working for the betterment of family daycare. Providers are aware that parents are very concerned with quality daycare. Masses, training, and speakers on childcare and related areas are time and again of_ered by our s s association, the Child Care Council of Dakota County, and AULF29 Fcommunity programs. It seems that just when we have so maxW 1''�1 ;- a-n -77 , 2 people working on the betterment of child care we might now have a stumbling block in our wary. One would wonder if it would be beneficial for each munici- pality to vary from the norm with its own set of permits? One consideration might be the parents of the children; they might appreciate uniformity in the licensing of daycare providers when seeking a suitable home for their child, many of us have been striving to make the licensing law known; that if I you care for children from more than one family, in a home other than their own, you must be licensed. If an extra permit would be required, why wouldn't more daycare be provided outside the law? 4. Many parents living in the :tgan area are now having to look outside the i Eagan comity for daycare service. when this begins to happen monies are also spent in other communities. Since daycare is a much needed service we would hate to loose any providers. We urge you to take a good look at all issues of this concern, me appreciate any consideration you can give this important issue. Thank you for your time. z The L,xecutive Board of the f Dakota County Family Daycare Association I r t 776 Agenda Information Memo; July. 31, 1981 Page Twelve U,HAUL• SIGN PERMIT C. U. Haul for Sign Permit '-- A freeway siggn. application for busi- ness identification purposes was received fro the U Haul Corpora- tion located at 3890 Cedar Avenue. The 'proposed 'pylon sign would contain two separate sign areas totalii*g 110 feet of signage per side. The construction of the sign �will' .consist of steel pylons and plastic signage with interior, illumination. The total height of the sign is ' proposed to be ,27 feet; 'above the roadway level. , The application, submitted by Suburban Lighting for a conditional use permit for a , pylon sign for' the U Haul Corporation at Cedar Avenue' and. Highway 13 was originally considered by the City Council on September 16, 1980. At that ;time,' the application was continued until a study was completed concerning the types, sizes and usage of signs along the freeway. After the matterwas reviewed, an amendment to the sign ordinancewas recommended to the City Council and adopted o-n July 7, 1981. The amendment allows an on premise pylon 'sign for identification purposes for a business sign located directly adjacent to the freeway. An additional free standing ground sign is allowed if located on the side of the property oppo- site the freeway. All signs must; comply in all other respects with the provisions of the existing sign ordinance. The property on which the sign is to be lo'cated' , ,-is contiguous with, the Cedar Avenue Freeway property. No other pyl6n signs are existing .within 300 feet of the proposed U Haul sign. The current zoning of the property is GB' (General Business) whieh allows this type of sign as a conditional use permit., If the proposed sign is approved, it should be subject to the following conditions: 1 'The pylon sign may not' �be located within 300 feet of any other pylon sign, measured on the same side of the street. 2. The- pylon :`sign shall not project more than 27 feet above the roadway (Cedar Avenue Freeway) level. 3. This _type of pylon advertising sign shall not exceed 125 square feet in area per sde. 4. The sign shall. be located as shown on the attached site plan, at least ten feet from the lot' s boundaries. 5 All other applicable City ordininces shall be complied with. For a copy of the proposed sign location ,and proposed sign, please refer to page 2Q ACTION -TO; BE CONSIDERED ON THE'.' MATTZ-R: To approve or - deny the freeway sign application as presented by U Haul ` and. if approved, per consideration of the conditions as listed. f ' . — . ! • ' � �,.a9 _. _ •(ice ,� - 4100 or ' o zpw La tar 06fj I loo It yy Y s • rs+rt 7 +4- 2 t ,. ' -�4►genda'.In�or�aation .M� "'� ,,� duly 31 s .14$:1 of A' $e" Thirteen .. 77,{ _ , z,. A. Mcbon�ai.Id's Corporation for a Co le Permit for a Dri�e� Thru Fality tp be Added to, :tete �D€riald`s Restaurant -- A conditional -use permit 4' s ,originally received ` by thy: City and of.fciail.yaddrc� .,� ►ub c hearing by. the :Ad�tisorp Piax�ning €rmmission on`3Api4� 2g, ilii to consider a V44 thru faci :it tc� be added tt� ,.tom .` tnnald' Restaurant located at f995 "silver Be Il ' Road, , The ppl tat, :on Wa "taLbed tint l additional information anda 241Yout. of ' tae .- ,f tiity, could be examined , a.s requested by tha That infort-tonn was provided --'by, ,the agPlIcant an&- a 'new: p � eari a held .by "the Advisory Planning' Commis ij,6n,l-,On "July` 2$m :<..1 y481. The- conditional use permi�t is being recommended approval by the APC t© "the .Cit 16 r y Cou�tcii. For additional-.I i6on on thi6item, refer to `' City " Planning . Assistant's repo 11 tooi d on pages' through For action ,,that was taken by , tt�e: Advisory " -ann ng, Commirss on, refer to, a . copy of the miriut : Bund" on p g, _ ACTTt�Ni TO BE C£ �IP ED ON � :� �`� approve or deny the recommendation of the Adviso 1 it'J, bommios om to 'approve" the drive thru ";facility="f rr ,thhe a d' : x a;AurAnt. , r M V } ; vel / K, r k1 J { s y vxr a k146,4 k3 � 21 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT FACILITY APPLICANT: MCDONALD'S CORPORATICN - AL INDE, REPRESENTATIVE LOCATION: 1995 SILVER BELL ROAD EXISTING ZONING: GB (GENERAL BUSINESS) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 28, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: JULY 16, 1981 REPORTED BY: KURTIS G. ULRICH, PLANNING/ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The applicant has submitted an application for a conditional use permit for a drive-thru facility to be added to the existing McDonald's Restaurant located at 1995 Silver Bell Road. COMV1ENI'S This application was initially heard at the April 28, 1981 Advisory Planning Commission Meeting. It was the decision of the Board at that time to table the application so that the applicant could provide additional information and im- prove upon the layout of the facility. Subsequently, the applicant has resubmit- ted the proposal with the following changes: 1. The western (exit only) driveway is proposed to be narrowed from the existing 24 feet to 20 feet with additional curbing which would further discourage vehicles from entering this driveway from the public street I (see attached exhibit) . 2. A directional sign at the far northern end of the parking lot would guide q people to the drive-thru facility. Except for the above changes, the circulation pattern remains the same as originally submitted. That is, cars would enter the east driveway from Silver Bell Road, dri- ving in a counter-clockwise direction around the restaurant building to the food ordering station on the southern side of the building. Vehicles would then proceed to the eastern side of the building to the food pick-up area and proceed counter- clockwise around the building, exiting from the western driveway (see exhibit) . Please refer to the attached letter which contains a traffic circulation, traffic volume, and sales volume study of four other restaurants submitted by the applicant. The typical vehicle back-up from the ordering station was estimated by the appli- cant to be approximately 3 cars. CITY OF EAGAN MCDONALDS CORPORATICN JULY 28, 1981 PACE TWO I I The building addition which would contain the food pick-up area would extend out from the existing building approximately 41�' with a roof overhang which would extend an additional 41 . The roof would have a nine foot clearance. Construction of the proposed drive-thru facility would eliminate 9 parking stalls. An additional 2 stalls would be removed in the relocation of the refuse facility to the western side of the parking lot. A total of 58 parking stalls would re- main after construction of these facilities. The applicant has indicated that 36-42% of the restaurant's sales volume would be through the drive-thru window. Therefore, the existence of a drive-thru facility is expected to slightly decrease the need for parking spaces. City ordinance states that the number of parking stalls required at this type of restaurant shall be determined by the City Council. However, the requirement for a sit-clown restaurant is one parking space for each three seats based on capacity design. This particular restaurant seats 128 people, and therefore would require about 43 parking spaces if it was classified as a sit-down restaurant. The cur- rent proposal includes 58 parking stalls. Based on the above information, staff recarmends that if this application is approved, it should be subject to the following conditions: 1. An additional exit sign should be installed on the eastern side of the exit driveway (i.e. western driveway) to supplement the existing sign and to more clearly mark the exit-only driveway. o 2. The directional sign should be constructed at the northern end of the f parking lot as shown to direct traffic to the drive-thru. 3. The refuse collection area should be constructed as shown on the west- ern side of the parking lot. 4. A guardrail should be constructed along the outer edge of the sidewalk which is on the eastern side of the building. This guardrail should effectively limit access to the building frau the east and will dis- courage pedestrian traffic across the drive-thru exit alley. (See attached exhibit for location of guardrail) 5. The southernmost 4-5 parking stalls imrediately adjacent to the build- ing on the west side should be eliminated. (see exhibit) Note: approx- imately 53 parking spaces would remain if these five spaces were elimi- nated. The elimination of these parking stalls would help to alleviate the problem of conflict between vehicles backed-up at the drive-thru, vehicles parking, and pedestrians entering or exiting frau the western doorway. The area containing the eliminated parking stalls should be curbed and landscaped, subject to staff approval. 6. All other improvements shall be installed as shown. f s 7. All applicable ordinances shall be canplied with. KGUfiac S 3 McDonald's C-rmoration it 8030 N,collet Avenue Soutn McDvttald's Minneapolis, Minnesota 55420 A 612 X84-4,355; July 10, 1981 Mr. Dale Runkle City Planner City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 RE: Proposed Drive-thru Remodeling McDonald's Restaurant Eagan, Minnesota Dear Dale, Enclosed are four (4) reduced site plans of McDonald's restaurants that have undergone similar remodeling and have similar on-site traffic flows as that being proposed for the above referenced project. For comparison, the sites are as follows: % Volume higher Date drive- (lower) than $ Using drive- thru window Location Eagan restaurant thru window opened 1100 University Avenue Minneapolis, MN 66% 38% 8/79 1411 Madison Mankato, MN 90% 39% 6/80 2207 Main Avenue Bismark, N.D. , 29% 42% 6/80 2223 Main Street Rapid City, S.D. 57% 36% 8/80 As you can see, each of these restaurants does significantly more business than the Eagan store and all have a high percentage of drive-thru use. I've included this information as evidence that if these four examples can operate smoothly (and they do!) , then our Eagan store with it's lower volume can also. A traffic study was conducted between June 1, 1981 and June 15, 1981. Following are the traffic counts. Oft Mr. Dale Runkle Page 2 July 10, 1981 Breakfast (7:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.) - 140 cars Lunch (11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.) - 490 cars After 4.00 P.M. to 12 P :00 .m. close - 400 cars Total average daily traffic count - 1030 cars Also, the stop signs at the intersection in front of the restaurant will help slow and meter traffic. If I can furnish you or the Planning Commission with any more information which would be of help, please let me know. Sincerely, McDonald's Corporation ,� r 1r �L,Q,_ Al Inde Engineer Development Center Minneapolis Region AL/pk i t Is" pg F� `sa it 11 �=tz--1. iI` - f V-1 .� �: °. r c) •tis � r i rr; I a - -E-6Rs]ACAr - r .� [F t IIC i� '►j�; � k � M, ` t � t ve rje ri ��p :r �� fFf; 7t�� nv �:iF 6 E ` `� �f I� •i� if �% E Is i _�_ .9 •. vi 1 1, 7 �t7 O E: i f tic t ti , ff .fp � I j,► j.jv�� fF Is t rt �' t: t<< { i O-n "� :i All ,� Li 10 b � ares .. _ . •. � - -- � . op r r — '' - ` �.i "• �t(t� �� � : . . . . . . . . ILS :r i[ r [ CL �" o S ! - e = I�[,}e 6 i = t 'pr!? •[ �i !i; IF{F- p_Z •f ; i � ���=t E ( �( �r � ri� `f �[ � [# fir{ e `� o � �� _ 71��� � �t �: � �; �i +• =Ee fit 8 n f p pp F J O ITITL1-f_ 77 e > a _ r(tf �_ A MA\ o if If I :Y -GSL ie f ?i rpt f Kr 1 11 Fr It if �;: � � • - A !1 1! - f ---FZ- - w— I I I TI'l I 'l I I I' l 1 -1 --1 flur • t r6�O j�� .� ( l - � = �•�a s.C, 3 iC jj7FF - j �c rt � !C �f �< lif; F�i; Z Ell if Ll 9 - , d. i-� __ . . - LI A _ t _ - R s "a^ LUCEA •' R-4 _ � < R-4 L rp oJ a � CE A I ` Ll `moo -' INDUST IAL, ,PARK A 1 _I�G� IEW TAWE_ ' I 11 ACCACRES_ I� R - 4 4 JCN 1 A R 4 s sA R - 3 c T a- zcKPr u rC Pa __ A„RE S R,�� �- - G B R - 4 R- N R -1 - -� p _ 2 tiq. LB Ll CSCPK 1. •- ,R. CSC PF - A R PIC`.. /,`6'S C•� i ` ; . . .TL!` . ., MINUTES OF A REGULAR .-';FETING OF THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA JULY, 28, 1981 A regular meeting of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 28, 1981, at 7:00 p.m. at the Eagan City Hall. Present were Chairman Harrison and Planning Commission Members Hall, Bohne, Gits, and Krob. Those absent were Turnham, Wilkins, and alternate Haywood. Also present were City Planner Runkle, City Engineer Rosene, City Administrator Hedges, and City Attorney Hauge. AGENDA Chairman Harrison directed that the discussion concerning the report concerning industrial and commercial development dated July 20,1981, and the vacant lot survey dated June 1, 1981 be discussed by the Council. It was understood that the request of Annie McLaughlin for conditional use permit for day care center located at 3710 Blackhawk Road be continued. MINUTES Gits moved, Hall seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the June 23, 1981 Advisory Planning Commission meeting. All voted yes. MCDONALD'S CORPORATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The Chairman convened the public hearing regarding the application of McDonald's Corporation for conditional use permit for a drive-through facility to be added to the existing McDonald's restaurant located at 1995 Silver Bell Road. Mr. Al Inde was present on behalf of the applicant and indicated that the only difference between the present application and that submitted for the April 28, 1981 APC meeting was that there were two changes including the western exit only driveway be narrowed from the existing 24 feet to 20 feet with additional curbing and a directional sign at the far northern end of the parking lot would guide people to the drive-through facility. He also 1 9 � - Ck submitted data regarding comparable drive-through facilities in other McDonald's locations. He stated the trash would be stored in metal dumpsters without roof. There were concerns about violations of the exit and entrance locations by patrons and questions about pedestrians entering and exiting the 7 building in the lanes of traffic. Hall moved, Harrison seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application subject to the following conditions: 1. An additional exit sign shall be installed on the eastern side of the exit driveway (i.e. western driveway) to supplement the existing sign and to more clearly mark the exit only driveway and an additional entrance sign shall be installed to supplement existing entrance sign. 2. The directional sign shall be constructed at the northeron end of the parking lot as shown to direct traffic to the drive-through. 3. The refuse collection area shall be constructed as shown on the western side of the parking lot with design similar to existing building and which plans shall be agreeable with the City. 4. A guardrail shall be constructed along the outer edge of the sidewalk which is on the eastern side of the buiding. This guardrail should effectively limit access to the building from the east and will discourage pedestrian traffic across the drive-through exit alley. 5. All other improvements shall be installed as shown. 6. All applicable ordinances shall be complied with. All members voted in favor. GEORGE OHMAN REZONING The public hearing regarding the application of Mr. and Mrs. George Ohman to rezone part of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 34 r on Cliff Road covering approximately 3.3 acres from A, Agricultural to R-4, Residential Multiple was next convened. Mr. and Mrs. Ohman were present. 2 91- 6 • Agenda Information Memo July 31 , 1981 Page Fourteen GAGNOK VARIANCE FOR GARAGE B. Edward A. Gagnon for a Variance from Side Setback Requirements for a Garage to be Built ' Closer to the Side Lot Line -- A public hearing 'rias held at the Advisory Planning Commission meeting held on July 28, 1981 to consider a 'variance request from Cleo and Edward Gagnon who reside. at Lot 4, B3bck-:6, ,Ce'd6a'r Grove #5 (1858 Turqudse Trail. 'The' application ' is' specifidally. . requesating a ,. two; foot variance from the five foot setback requirement in' an R-1, Residen- tial Single District. The Advisory Planning Commission is recom- mending approval of the variance as requested which allows the -Gagnons to construct a garage addition to their existing single car garage. Mr. Gagnon stated at the Planning Commission meeting that he had contacted all of his neighbors who were noticed on the official abstractor' s list and there was no one in opposition to , his proposed improvement and variance request. There were no residents present at the public hearing. For a copy of the City Planner's report, -refer to pages ! through -4100 For .a copy of the action that was taken by the Advisory Planning Commission, refer to page , ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the' APC to approve the variance for side setback requirements to construct a garage for Edward A. Gagnon.' z CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: CLEO & EIMRD A. GAGNON LOCATION: LOT 4, BLOCK 6, CSAR GROVE #5 EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) ; DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 28, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: JULY 23, 1981 l REPORTED BY: DALE C. RMUE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATICN SUBMITTID An application has been suh ni.tted requesting approximately a 2' variance frau the 5' setback requirement in an R-1 (Residential Single District) . COW= Lot 4, Block 6, contains approximately 10,800 square feet. The existing house and garage contain approximately 1,308 square feet. The 12 x 22' ex- pansion would increase this house size to 1,572 square feet for a total lot coverage of 14.5%. Presently, Ordinance 52 allows a 20% lot overage. In reviewing the site plan, the west lot line is angled where the lot width is wider along Turquoise Trail than it is along the rear lot line. In re- viewing the site plan for the proposed addition, it appears that only half of the garage would require the variance. The lot line is angled so the front portion of the garage would meet the 5' side setback variance, but the rear of the garage would require between a 2' and 3' variance fran the west lot line. Presently, there is an existing single car garage on the west side of the house. The applicant is proposing to convert the single-car garage into a double-car garage, and this is the only possible way this addition could be caipleted. If approved, the variance should be subject to the following conditions: 1. There shall be no living quarters above or behind the proposed addi- tion. 2. All other applicable ordinances shall be enforced. DCR/j ac 13 i Mr. & firs. Ed,*ard A. Gagnon 1858 Turquoise Trail Eagan, Ni\ 55122 'i 1 i t3. -77 8 t j - � •-- - + sir j t � s — EX�itnSte►+� f 3 ; . I �o yrsAll �irF TninlS�.n)+"9A.c+�+�„ JAfia.'�ii6(Y•r �'�YYCF� � + � `� = t—vowsw k; i Adjustment Potentiometers Precision Potentiometers Relays and Relay Systems Transformers/Inductors a 0 0 � � � 3 V'% C�T a 'J t 4 n G t � � N 1 Q � O T O f� O d X N N b fR►` b b d 0 � 9S" LEW BONN �' ; "+ .�•'= 3 I 7275 Bush Lake Road "'. Ed na. Minnesota 55435 ." Te!c, none: (612) 941-4860 TAA 316 576-2726 • ( - •t/•Mw .. •� - 7. �. OY.... • 'tvM' f' •)rwyp♦ a da Cal 6 aid fi•p- ww/1= •o..f• ,! •d ti A ,, waw. t••• � .•LIcO» Ix �•. qJW 104 iM I90r4.\ is a. • f ..•K.•. • w ai . • �•• Aa W : ou• ' 4.414, • rd 1 Ij d 1• ON ,'• r1/ ku�.,.`•..�N w Y 1•\K r' « ltihY Y ,.�,f V I� ftft �i ,�• , ..N., 41 14 It ,.0 4, +•• 1+'�•, •i' »� "TA �`l•• � - y _ s LO 171 1 nY • �ter' � � �•• ,i + \ W r . � sl� + •1�• '.�i• w a+ w► •�� r •\� 1 ; M c ti M. 110 PA LLJ is to 1. ,"` , •� •» s o`er �� P� tJ• ,+ - . • \ • , as• 7 Y wd •. + . 'fir' � { .• at >r t>r' ;ea �,>•• 11 n � •+\ c .n, ;• w a • w war •t�••a •.'•• + ► . w ;r% r AP '0 {tri. •t•{. '.O••�.� am LAP r ,i• oK)•� .S .•.4 •X140, t no •., { 1 '1 •� • r•...w�•���.�•••/s•ter.•.... ; { AL 4 ' i d so Vol . �� v '=7 c _ /N-4 eN «..._ d I '..' • u_a44 to �_ I'-• I a 1J Ilia 18E1''SO —_ •.: --ti�' = E s::f III-a - _ Jli 2! a . EIN _ d 1-8 d la - N — 0 a 11_8 v 1-8 IF2i 1.VH ' d z 1- "'- III•a s °... N-a a it _ puf d 3 rt] -I-a •-� r ' m a 1'a Ti - - o:w 11_8 `L - U-8 ,.- ( d Ira .,.. ...., Pub-.. c ;, Jso 81 "c 1-a - 8l 8N !ra II b pu'' ,r -DUI d ..,. - n1-8 0 7d - _ Pul -- • . 89 PUI to - 1N3wdO13n30 43NNV-ld :pal / - ADD TION J , q R - 4 JON R_4 R -3 CROFT A r` ACRES f L I C IL _ � R -4 R- L GB -4 F - RI R I GAM MET O CENTE R -2 SILL H _ Ll ADD L B ,� %. -2 _ tt- R.1 I" ,/ \tom • r-t lJ V V Vti ,r .P Kms' w CSC PF 'j ,v` r .. Y A lid l�— DAR E7vE Z -�, �'', • l - - it HIL 4NGALE CEPA R R -4 -- \` PEEN /1) pD R - 4 �, A79- i PF �PF R loe 000, NB PF NB 4B R-4 , r \ ` q " Y N �xti R- 4 a PKOji ..,; �- ,;k„r. : i : • .• .•, -. r - PF R_4 ; • 0 parking spaces shall be provided as required by the City. 2. If the City determines that additional parking is required at any time in the future, the applicant shall add the additional parking spaces required by the City staff. 3. The proposed structure shall not exceed 38% of Lot 1, Block 6, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #3. 4. An adequate landscape bond shall be submitted and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. 5. A joint easement shall be provided to allow both businesses to use the westerly access. All members voted in favor. MR. AND MRS. EDWARD GAGNON -- CEDAR GROVE NO. 5 VARIANCE The public hearing regarding the application of Mr. and Mrs. Edward Gagnon for variance for Lot 4, Block 6, Cedar Grove No. 5 covering two feet from the five-foot setback requirements in R-1 district was next convened by Chairman Harrison. Mr. and Mrs. Gagnon were present and indicated they had polled 14 of the 19 neighbors and all approved of the variance to allow an expansion to their home. Harrison moved, Gits seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application subject to the following conditions: 1. That there shall be no living quarters above or behind the proposed addition. 2. That all other applicable ordinances shall be- met. All voted in favor. INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SURVEY The survey dated July 20, 1981, as performed by Todd Swanson, Administrative Intern, giving an update of the acreages in various commercial and industrial categories was discussed by the Planning Commission Members. 9 � Agenda Information Memo July 31 , 1981 Page Fifteen FINAL PLAT - TWIN VIEW' MANOR 2ND ADDITION C. Final Plat for Twin View Manor 2nd Addition All information regarding the final plat for Twin View 'Manor 2nd Addition was re- ceived by the City and is found to be in order for consideration. Enclosed on _page is a copy of the final plat as presented. There are no changes rom the preliminary plat as approved by the City Council ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the final plat approval for Twin View Manor 2nd Addition. c TWIN VIEW MANOR SECOND AD L:6E rw NE :IC 13 r 72e. I.As T . u .I --- :r: F1•t n s 6 Nr to,nw ac is l7,ts 1, t, 1, 4, 5, ILLI rn MnNUMEN• 1 ^ ^,1�.,. ,. •t 1.3.60 EAST - ^1 _ I TVet.lu•r wttn th ettcnv lun of t!ie no. 1 Iw I ,' - Tr.yrthor with that p.,rt nr .0s l'ouevn, L Int G vlo,k.4, antd rd IN VI": v1•lr11'; the: C.S.A.H. NO. 32 ( CLIFF ROAD) 2,n0 feet to thin roti of be,tr:ni n,; ,7f tll • radl u• or N6.no Leet A.,, a crnt.r�1 nn"le • -- - - wr.et of the giant line of the as! Cu -- •J71.•. IW 47 •. 147 c! 15f 71 a !.._,r_..•� , W with the north line of saIA ast Qua, cant line a dl etan.:e of J:9.t!'3 feet, then- s[id TW IN v!F',7 !"0.!1Ji1; then<e X.:--it 1 do r-, extension of the north line cf lot 1, -1o,. Erik's 13oulevardl thence south ilong said L!J i I Have caused the same to be surveyed And pt -� I _ �'� o m o forever the cul-de-sac, and also oe0leate — the right of access as shown on this plat. •• -j I I I 2 I I J Z 1 I/1 In witness whereof(said Richard A. Strom O W `7 -1 1 O W f ry i:dto I - ° \li I z u f- 1 J at In witness whereof said Pleat State Rank its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed I i /p.4• I - ri v> 1 State of Vinnesota 97f7 s6 a� t9 �P• I 3 County of K. Strom, forcroing 1 _ ro 1. 200 _l / A , ( Strom, husbar is gn ,6State of/ n _�_sezez,•oo.E \\•soo" ,u ;S 1 County of Mir.- �`� --' _� so 5 1 N a 3 �'-�' —1 _ es_so 'WEST z'I„ N I o f I _-.03 _ -31 e2 ` _ -�, W NORTH a, e I �OiAti I hereby cert to Ee_ I I I 1 ' )eo 6o A,'t a \ 30 .!. I I a that this pla 9 ! 3Z. _ "' and hundredth a W 1 � I '�� It I Aqo�� 1 � boundary line 0_ so other ttwn as gTyE qN, : _ I 7 ry \\\ I scats a FEET State of Minn ` z • \ \ I Ir I County of Dak '•i4 j \ I I, I \ ' SCAL:: 1 inch 50 feet z 6 ( N The north line of ttie N•E••1/4 Sec. .i \ \ ! „/QT\ 1 /I;r�e m 33 Is assumed to have a bearing of j \ I (,q :, 1 + � I i ; o Fact. 4t H \ / ./ UTILITY / ; o .enotes 1/2 in_h by 14 Inch iron n EASEMENT / z ?ipe monun.ent set with plastic cap CI'"Y CO(NCIL �I. , \\ 1 �\ -�� m / i I Tarred "RLS 8625", unless itherwlae Ke do hereby ; L I C4 \ 5a pL t b shcwn. plat. r I I \'•,,� S •ts 1i.e I _ I -v—t7-Denotes "right of access" dedicates to Daeota County Denotes found iron pope } Pursuant to as oz _j 113 s oz - -ey scl -1 —23200 1� I z.z oo approved th - --236.57--- ---EAST- - r 23.45-\0(` \ I < f I or EAST EAST Q I f.' _ Q! .... * Drainage and utility easements are 0r ++v•e a shown thus: ,f This plat of t I I I Minna Count) • e �'� Minnesota, a 1n •iCth; unless Chairma Being 5 feet b ot:-er4tse I.ndicateJ, and adjoining No delinquen (; '•\` b / lot lines, and 1 feet Sn wl4th and 10 �., ad'olning street lines+ as shown on I '' 1�- I w rl the plat. I � � e.zt, Docu-cnt Hir;oL ---1902t---_M99^51'45.1-__ I fICTCUy C!r 4TIET7 +.sLOCATION, =MAP EASEMC NT-_. Toe n • -• : =_______, .-= -= ori pa6e SEC 33, TwP 27,raE.25 .y�. loth 162.13 WAS. N6`.t°31.45'•1 n• A +- ^•".... - 1 I1 I82.00 PIAT I I �. ? SITE Lj i No I,/ NE,t/4 �', • OI N,5 SCALE'i ' 1 =0 S,E V4 S E.IN °1 D LMAR H. SCHWANZ t! " 67 M.1[ „•I AI LAND SURVEYOR ---- -- Agenda Information Memo July 31, 19$1 Page Sixteen FINAL PKAT FOR CINNAMON RIDGE ADDITION D. Final Plat for Cinnamon Ridge Addition' -- A final plat appli- cation was received and is found to be in order for Cinnamon Ridge Addition. There is a question whether the required bonding docu- ments will be received prior' to the meeting on Tuesday. If the bonding documents are ,received and found to be in proper order, stuff is recommending consideration of the final plat. If the. documents are notreceived, this item would then be continued. A copy of - the final plat is enclosed on page . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE NATTER: To approve or deny the final plat for Cinnamon Ridge Addition or continue the item, depending on, receiving certain information. r .wta►ri.vr..wrr a irwr urrr�i s..i�r+-•/••�•. nM i/ *a$ "� r ;� -r e+___J v1 + 2 y \ Y ` a ♦� aca ]7 Z �.. _ • t Na it - 4 go ! a v ; n M_M y `+_' y i �if t ��'R`p-3L H.r ♦ {7+. / i W \Z O Yi Z ly q % J W Z W<� >> >r m / ./. ' c. .. �' J Zin Z O Wfas 0 00- Ail z H _ l•, _\ S Nh J J✓ O '0 W i ` ; ,ee ix:a 11 Z F Z 3 2 ` p .c I S so Z y h l/J✓ Q Z VNO W—t9 _Z ZW MO Z Nzw J g f� S Z 2. OZ WHH Y VWd� ZIL4 1 t I _�.. :y`_. •. � JCH b.(I WtiiV r.y I.I�1.y/+ rr- _.. - _ r 103 fib} } Prk 777. t Agendareformation July 31:'3 1981 Page Seventeen ,`• g F ' SPECK. Il Spe44" Arse Permit { _ 3 �. cr a a � c+ aarter `the. - trailer p �t renewal ' ft�r :. � ra ' not iven annual renewa1py h City Counci° ..: �< ,vficia notice,; to the MejO rs: than their o"i a �. a required, _ to be rem. in, 't location as 'r :a Cca�cil action. . Joyce Ilei+esi has" fade ap ratio� "for t to allow a mobile home at 3240, Dodd load, Lot 5 � , ce. dd tion, Section 12. The ,zoning of the. parcel is- .n � ` � .ness: The trailer home ks to be used rm primarily aee fir writy purposes or a family business which was` o� it :� � td fox this pur-- p >se in :July 1472. ;, It was the Txeotlbrz 'apartment' s u�tder- standing that th+ ,ribi home was t ids .afamily . resi'-» deme , as ori�inail ra�r�tetdd : to",31y of 1972tCld; therefore., the iperi-it was revoked..` los�d o� a E�'�'; iso` a .spy. of a letter as 'receilved tsar; the �i � f�rc� �flyee ssner �0 yoUir reference. s ACTION 'TO BE CONST � �.' � V 1 7 pproye or deny the spacial permit to, ell�w a b at dd Road, Lot 51 Block 1; ` Joyce Addititi 0' „ ctit a � r o AT r n s. z nc ` a � 7 a ' M r 44 g fir, ` .1 �nYi� b' F 5 1 .5✓ a �. k. 3240 DODD ROAD ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55121 (612) 454-2996 1pzb July 20, 1981 2Isar Mr. Dale C. Runkle, City Planner City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road fang MN 55122 Dear Mr, Runkle: This is in regard to your letter of June 25, 1981 advising me that the permit for the mobile home located at 3240 Dodd Road had not been re- newed by the City Council. I would like to have this matter reconsidered, so I am reapplying at this time. The reason we need this mobile home mainly is for security reasons. The family business, Television Service Labs, Inc., is located to the North of the mobile home. The shop is located in an area that is rather iso- lated. With another residence nearby we usually arrange for someone to be around most of the time to watch. Usually one of our employees lives in the mobile home. Previous to having this trailer, we were broken into on three occasions, with money-taken and a great deal of vandalism done. Since we have had it, we have had no further problem with this. I would appreciate it very much if you would reconsider and grant a per- mit for this mobile home. Thank you. Very truly yours, / Lt k 1 ` I \ ` 1 i y M. Meissne Jos Agenda Information Memo July 31 , 1981 Page Eighteen t SPECIAL TRAILER PERMIT� - ELMER SCOTT F. Special Use Permit for a Trailer. for Elmer Scott -- Recently, the City Council did not renew 'a trailer permit that was .originally granted to ,Elmer and Dorothy Scott to allow a `'14 foot by 72 foot trailer home at 4175 So. Robert Trail. This permit was originally granted in November of 1980 for security reasons for the adjacent business. When the business was sold; there appeared to be no reason for the trailer permit to be -reissued. As a result of action by the City Council at the June 2, 1951 City Council meeting, this trailer permit was revoked. An application has been submitted for a ,special permit to allow the mobile home at 4175 So. Robert Trail. The zoning of the _ parcel is GB, General Business. The trailer has on-site sewer and water. As stated, the trailer was originally permitted for security reasons for the adjacent business`- and has since been used as `a residence by Mr. Jerry .Scott. A Letter was sent to the City by Mr. and 'Mrs. Elmer Scott requesting the special permit for- a mobile trailer, a copy of which is enclosed on page '. „F ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER; To approve or deny the special permit to allow a mobile home' at 4175 So. Robert' Trail. lb6 �r 7a ate AIL, aZao 4y/yv � �2�� Agenda Information MemcS July 31, 1981 Page Nineteen CONSTRUCTIONRMER--�-COUNTRYSIDE-FIRST ADDITION, GSpecial Use Permit for Construetion Trailer for Countryside First ' Addition - Recently, Countryside Builders received preli- urinary plat, approval for Countryside First Addition which consists of approximately 3 acres and contains 1`9; dwelling units. These dwelling units consisted of two ei ht-fplex buildings : and the rehabilitation of two existing single : family homes. The applicants are in the process of preparing the details for final plat and hope to have everything completed by '-October of this year. Nor- mally, in the construction stages of 'a' development, the developers are allowed a construction trailer on. "site for use as ' an' office .complex, sales unit and for storage of materials. The developers in this instance are requesting a construction trailer; however, it is not on the site they are proposing. to build on. The construc- tion trailer location for this particular project is proposed in the NE'k of Section19 which is due north of the new alignment of Silver Bell Road and west of T. H. 13, or more commonly referred to as west of the McDonald' s Restautant The applicants have sub- mitted an application requesting a special permit and have paid the permit fees for consideration of the construction trailer !lova- ted- off the . premises, for which the , applicants have received pre- liminary plat approval. The size of the trailer is a 12 foot by 60 foot unit. The present owner of the property is Norman Vogepohl and his song Greg Vogepohl, has authored the application form. Enclosed onage3� is a map that .illustrates the .location of Countryside irst t on as proposed and also the location of the trailer home tobeused as a 'temporary office, sales and storage unit ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE NATT'FR 'To approve or deny the special permit to allow 'a contruc.tion trailer for Countryside First Addition as described. 0 } . s , n . , t .. j } S • v ip m `� sY� T ? ^ t ` O yy � ♦ \ G in ol CO J �` - y� .�f-C J a• bra t Agenda Information Memel July 31, 1981 Page Twenty _ fw � t Contract 818 A. Receive Bids/Award Contract, Imp. 81--8; Gedar Cliff 2nd Addition et al Streets -- At 10:30 a.m. on Thursday, July 30, the City"offi- cially received bids for ,the above referenced contract, of the bid tabulation as received is enclosed on page Alfor # your information. It shows the comparison, to the engineer s . esti- mate and the feasibility report, The bids as received will be checked by the Director of Public Works for accuracy and any 'cor- rections, or changes will be discussed . at the meeting on August 4, 1981. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER; To receive the bids for Contract 81-8 (Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition et al Streets) _and to approve or- --deny the award of the contract to the apparent : low or successful bidder. ' i E KJ OUR FILE NO. 49214 ST. FRANCIS WOOD 2ND ADD. ETC. PROJECTS 307B, 327B, 328E & 329B STREET IMPPOVEMENTS EAGAN, MINNESOTA BID TIME: 10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T BID DATE: Thursday, July 30, 1981 CONTRACTORS _ TOTAL BASE BID 1. McNamara Vivant Contracting Co. $135,897.00 2. Valley Paving, Inc. 141,507.00 3. Alexander Construction Co. 145,687.20 4. Bituminous Roadways 147,432.92 5. Hardrives, Inc. 151,186.10 6. Northwest Asphalt 153,677.60 7. , Arcon Construction Co. NO BID 8. Fischer Construction Co. NO BID 9. B-Tu-Mix Construction Co. NO BID 10. Burress Construction NO BID ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE----------------- . -- $155,900 307 327 328 329 Feasibility Report $39,900.00 $27,170.00 $36,490.0o $47,570.00 Engineer's Estimate 38,120.00 26,350.00 31,150.00 60,350.00 Low Bid 32,166.50 22,372,00 26,131.00 55,227.50 % Over (+) or Under (-) F. R. 19.4 (-) 17.7 (-) 28.4 (-) 16.1 (+) til T 777 3 s I a , .Agenda 'Ii` joatiom Julgg.t{ .{ , y a Page TwentY,:4ne x " i All, NR srec x .. ='.y.'n reg :,5;„ a x ; ..3 irr "• ,sa..d:, .rku' diS rZZO ♦ Y B' yhkYa 9 y R h i '. r.. ..; ! _ � ; a .. .,. J r ...,i.rte s • B. Retes/Award �ontra�t, �� "Addition U#i hies -- At =IV:9 �`�.� -,� on Thursday, ��i�� of ieia7.ly- renei�red f .lids fQ the abovereferenced c i Vit, ° of ,the bid tabula tions 4howir the comparison t er's ='e timate and the feaibi ity r Qrx .ie endo yid h kc f i , . ,. fed Baur .reformat on A11 bids received are being 'che ,1 .. ro car of Publics Works e aneccptnfor acturaey a used at y the meati on "August 4, 'iosh 1 _ ACTI©i� 1 BE. CtTI ''� °� � To reive the bids ' for t Contact $2-9' 4 c mar = i i n ` �: i �e ' and iso:ap crave o deny the award ©f the contr t+� tie a�paent ,low or successful kidder. si, dr 4 j 3 1-7 iTr �g d y - k 3t o d ..'+ S c ' c kf,. �r�`c s P y. •i x" f OUR FILE NO. 49227 TOMARK 1ST ADDITION ` CITY CONTRACT 81-9 UTILITY, GRADING & GRAVEL BASE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 336A EAGAN, MINNESOTA BID TIME: 11:00 A.M. C.D.S.T. BID DATE: Thursday, July 30, 1981 CONTRACTORS TOTAL BASE BID ALT. BID 1. . Richard Knutson, Inc. $ 88,526.35 $ 86,346.35 2. Lametti & Sons 98,000.00 96,092.50 3. Fredrickson Excavating Co. 99,675.45 97,495.45 4. Encon Utilities, Inc. 101,215.50 98,490.50 5. Sandmark Construction Co. 108,832.40 106,107.00 6. Walhunt Construction 110,854.00 - 99,409.00 7. Erickson Construction Inc. 114,360.00 113,815.00 8. Thomas Montgomery Construction 125,678.00 NO BID 9. Bonine Excavating 143,013.20 NO BID 10. H.B.H. Construction Co. NO BID NO BID 11. Lion Construction Co. NO BID NO BID 12. Fraser Construction Co. NO BID NO BID 13. Ideal Enterprises, Inc. NO BID NO BID 14. M. G. Astleford Co. NO BID NO BID j I • i f ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE-------------- $92,600 Feasibility Report 90,575.00 Not Avail. Engineer's Estimate 92,600.00 Not Avail. Low Bid 88,526.35 86,346.35 % Over (+) or Under (-) F. R. 2.3% (-) 4.7% (-) mw i.. j � _ Agenda 'information' ti Yid -jply 1, Page Twerity 'awo ; h _e 41 , �1- ,. �y�� ��F f �?�n4�� r� �Z�� Ci■`ate C. "Ove . Plans & SpeC � e` 1st Addi.ti.o ► epi al # ntracC provites N nano a l tswing projects in ` for Cie instal2atidil of unlit y u theirtrespectiue loo tions: ` ,{ Project .346 -- Cinnamon t Pro jEct 133Y — Univac SOA! 0 1110 lY : Project 335, .. TxLn View40—or zzon Project34-A oWi , s ' tt . t.. r The, statue ardi the required a emwnka will bei discussed; during the review Ch :: !Inns atrit sf i:ctt ,ss +off .August 4 at the City . Ccuncil .' eetln o _ _ w ACTZ4N ' . BN '1 : .0 - '� - � ` To. aprgve or deny the .plans and specifiots fcz 0�rac -S {Clrnson Ridge • ist Addition et al . Ute Iii "es 3 `" and r a *er.t .aeet for bias with a bid ogenfn ,. heduI f'or , 3 4:� "Ang st . 27, 198I; f'approved. At .ds Contract D. Approve:; , Plans. Speci c p err Coachman Land .Compnt A! di�Cd d ,`r. teets' __ Deta .ed plays and specif �ttions ��►en .' dor the installation of streets' under the ��ae tefea t 'tact . 'to 3ncQrpoate the following �pra jests in ir'rs� � i�tic�n f i Project 323 {+ hn za st ;Addition Prey jest 32 � tri at Pro jest 36 4:mark mw All easements 'n ��` far, th fit' ti-on of then � ir�prbventa have been :d1at � ! Y cif �i �,_fir� plats fox th+ respective suhdivs�ior�s. a.; f .f a rove: or d the C` L ' 'l't) ; ~ anipe�iica� JI # C r Land, Company at diti al eets the" bid c3penin$, to be hed + d apt is hurset 27; 3.9$x., ' f approved. e OR r Agenda Information Memo July 31, 19$1 Page Twenty-Three l UTILITY EASEMENT COOPUAT VE POWER ASSN n E. Approve Utility Easement for Cooperative Power. Association - As was discussed informally with the Council previously, the Cooperative Power Association is requesting a twenty (20) foot utility easement along the west boundary of the City ':of Eagan' s 40 acres located; in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Wescott RoadwithPilot Knob Road. This: easement is to ;facili- tatethe installation of a 69KV transmission line from Deerwood Drive to Wescott Road. From this point,, it will continue east within the recently acquired Wescott Road right-o€-way to Lexington Avenue with a connection to the existing, recently installed 69KV transmission line The City staff', and Council had concerns per- taining to the proposed route of this major 'transmission line com- bined with type of, material, . possible interf erence ' with the Police Department radio frequency, and overhead vs. underground feas.ibili- ties The City has received a detailed report from CPA pertaining to their analysis of this proposed route as compared to three (3) alternate routes. A copy of this report is enclosed on pages Jlk through _' for your information. If the Council has no 0 Sections to t�i�e�cat�ion of this easement, staff would recommend that a condition be placed requiring CPA to. assume all costs asso- ciated with any adjustment or relocation of this power line resul- ting from future improvements to Pilot Knob Road, ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny a twenty (20)_ foot utility easement adjacent to Pilot Knob Road to Coopera- tive Power Association for a 69KV .transmission line. � AA COOPERATIVE POWER ASSOCIATION'S FINDINGS AND FACTS PILOT KNOB - LEMAY LAKE 69 kV PILOT KNOB - DEERWOOD 69 kV TRANSMISSION PROJECTS EAGAN, MINNESOTA JULY 1, 1981 116 Project Need The construction of the 69 kV lines from Pilot Knob Substation to the LeMay Lake Tap and to the Deerwood Substation will provide two additional electrical power sources to the transmission grid in the Eagan area. This additional capacity eliminates the present problem of overloading facilities during a loss of either of the existing sources from the Glendale or Rogers Lake Substations. In addition, they provide backup sources to the Deerwood and LeMay Lake Substations which are presently on single lines (see system map). Overhead 69 kV Transmission Cooperative Power Association as well as the electrical transmission industry construct overhead 69 kV transmission lines, unless there is no possible overhead alternative. Underground 69 kV transmission line is used exclusively for term- inations to substations and for transmission in inner-core cities where there is no location to site an overhead line. This is because the cost of underground 69 kV is approximately 10 times as great as overhead line. Also, the system reliability is reduced because a fault in underground transmission will take the line out of service for extended periods of time, due to the difficulty of repair. The cost of undergrounding the Pilot Knob to LeMay Lake line from Pilot Knob Road to Lexington Avenue along Wescott Road is approximately $610,000. The cost of an overhead line along the same route, including the additional costs of self- supporting steel and concrete poles, is approximately $73,200. Since underground transmission is not the only possible way to construct this line, and the proposed route is feasible to construct overhead transmission, underground construction is not warranted in this situation. 69 kV COST BREAKDOWN - PILOT KNOB ROAD TO LEXINGTON AVENUE Overhead Underground Conductor $ 6,650 Conductor $237,600 Labor 23,000 Labor _ 300,000 Material 13,350 Concrete Cap 20,000 Steel Poles 20,000 Riser Poles 30,000 Design 3,500 Material 12,200. Misc. 6,700 Design 3,500 Misc. 6,700 TOTAL $73,200 $610,000 117 -1- Routing Factors Listed on the summary are factors that were considered when evaluating the route alternatives for this project. These factors reflect features of the routes that would be impacted by the transmission line or would make the route desirable. The total length of the project was considered for two reasons. The longer the route, the more area that would be impacted by the transmission line; also the cost of the project, which is dependent on line length, had to be weighed against the other factors. There were many features of the routes that would be impacted adversely by the existance of a transmission line. These factors were parks, lakes, trees, home- steads and churchs. Parks and lakes were avoided because of negative aesthetic impact and restrictions of land use imposed by jurisdictional regulatory agencies. Tree removal would be minimized for conservation, aesthetic and economic consid- erations. Although the avoidance of residences and churchs along the alternative routes would not be completely possible, it was considered, especially the avoid- ance of residences facing the line route close to roads being paralleled. Existing land use of the area on which the transmission line would be sited was a major consideration in assessing the alternative routes. Established land use principles of multiple use of existing right-of-way or right-of-way corridors were followed. Use of existing of future road or utility line corridors were pre- ferable over creating new corridors, if the impact of the additional line would not be overburdening to adjacent land use. Additional private easement and across country routes were considered undesirable for these and economic reasons. Proposed Route Alternative#1 Alternative #2 Alternative #3 Total Project 3.75 miles 3.75 4.25 4.75 Across Country 0 miles .5 0 .5 Lake Crossings 0 1 0 0 Park Crossings 0 1 0 0 Tree Removal .2 units 3 3 .2 (30'X.5 miles = 1 unit) Multiple Use of 100% 80% 100% 70% Future Road R/W Existing Road R/W 1.85 miles .85 .45 0 Private Easement .65 miles 1.25 2 2.5 Homesteads 3 2 8 15 Churchs 3 3 1 0 Tly49i �- ,,b ,• bra a r ., h,s lw $r' a �M j�A t ,. £ -,' S. r e r � 10 At tv so pro! : # t . h 3 �K k` N 40 Ar hip, ,11440- Ag!A& MAI ,yam„#. +�5 - t r % a ,'. ,iyy,, a•, ,at "Y OM1 fi . Alternative #1 Travels north from the Pilot Knob Substation on the east side of Pilot Knob Road to Deerwood Drive. It then travels east along the south side of Deerwood Drive 1/2 mile, then continues east across a wooded area, crossing Patrick Eagan Park and McCarthy Lake to Lexington Avenue. It then turns north along the west side of Lexington Avenue to Wescott Road where it ties into an existing 69 kV line. The portion of the line from the Pilot Knob Substation to Deerwood Drive will be double circuit construction to accommodate the construction of the Deerwood 69 kV tie in 1985. This line would run along the south side of Deerwood Drive from Pilot Knob Road to Dakota Electric Association's Deerwood Substation. This route along with the preferred route is the shortest at 3.75 miles. Also it has the fewest number of residences along the route. However, the route encounters several negative factors along the segment from Pilot Knob Road to Lexington Avenue. This portion of the route is completely wooded with .5 miles of the route being across country. To construct this route, extensive tree removal would be required along with the establishment of a new utility corridor. Because of this, this alternative would require large acquisitions of private easement with the multiple use of future road right-of-way being 80%. Two features unique to this route are the crossing of Patrick Eagan Park and McCarthy Lake. Researching the feasibility of such crossings, contacts were made with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), which has jurisdictional control over the lake crossings, and the Office of Local and Urban Affairs, State Planning Agency, which administers the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LAWCON), from which Eagan has received monies for development of the park. The DNR expressed concern about the lake crossing. Wetland areas are considered a priority land use to be avoided by utility lines. This is because of the dis- turbance of the wetland area, and the conductor's impact on waterfowl flyways. The Office of Local and Urban Affairs stated that the crossing of Patrick Eagan Park by the line would create a "6F" conflict, regarding the conversion of park land to non-park use. If such a conflict existed, the City could be required to replace such land with land of comparable dollar value and recreational usefulness. In consideration of the above facts, the difficulties of such construction, the high costs, the negative aesthetics and the disruption of a City park, this route was rejected. Alternative #2 Begins at the Pilot Knob Substation, then travels north along the east side of Pilot Knob Road to County Road 30. It then travels east along the north side of County Road 30 to Lexington Avenue. It then turns north along the west side of Lexington Avenue to Wescott Road where it ties into the existing line. zz -4- Alternative #2 continued The portion of the line from Pilot Knob Substation to County Road 30 would be double circuited to accomodate the construction of the Deerwood tie in 1985. The Deerwood line would run north on the east side of Pilot Knob Road from County Road 30 to Deerwood Drive. It then would travel west along the south side of Deerwood Drive to Deerwood Substation. This alternative avoids parks, lakes, cross-country routing and has the desirable advantage of 100% multiple use of future right-of-way. It is, however, a longer route than some of the alternatives, requiring a large amount of private easement to be acquired. It also runs close to a significant number of houses which are very close to the road the line parallels. The impact on these residences would be great. Tree removal along this route would be as extensive as alternative #1, the greatest of the alternatives considered. Because of these reasons, alternative #2 was considered feasible, but given a low desirability among the choices. Alternative #3 Travels east along the north side of an existing 115 kV H-frame transmission line from the south side of the Pilot Knob Substation to the east line of Section 27, 1727N, R23W. It would there turn north across country on the ease line of Section 27 to Lexington Avenue, then continue north on the west side of Lexington Avenue to Wescott Road where it would tie into the existing 69 kV line. In 1985, the Deerwood tie would be constructed from the Pilot Knob Substation to Deerwood Drive on the east side of Pilot Knob Road. There it would travel west along the south side of Deerwood Drive to the Deerwood Substation. Alternative #3 travels along established road and utility corridors. But upon closer examination this advantage was outweighed by several negative factors, and rejected. i a This alternative is the longest of the routes and would require the largest acqui- sition of private right-of-way. One-half mile of the route would be across country with only 70% of the route being located on future road right-of-way. Fifteen residences would be encroached upon by the line with the major impact along the east-west portion which parallels an existing NSP 115 kV transmission line. The only possible route along this existing corridor would be north of and parallel to the existing 115 kV line. This alignment would require an easement ent ac uisition with extensive impact to several residences adjacent to the existing line. Proposed Route Begins at the Pilot Knob Substation traveling north along the east side of Pilot Knob Road to Wescott Road. It then turns east along the north side of Wescott Road to Lexington Avenue where it ties into an existing 69 kV line. This line will be double circuited from Pilot Knob Substation to Deerwood Road to accommodate construction of the Deerwood 69 kV tie line in 1985. 121 -5- Proposed Route continued This route is the shortest of the routes with no across country segments. It is also sited on the largest and the greatest amount of (1.85 miles) existing road right-of-way. One-hundred percent of the route will be located on future road right-of-way, with tree removal and easement acquisition being the least of the proposed alternatives. Although this route will front three residences and churchs, their defects were outweighed by the superiority over the other alternative routes in the other factor categories. For these reasons this route was substantially superior to the alternatives and chosen as the primary route. Concern has been expressed about possible interference with the 2-way radio system operated by the Police Department from the transmission line. A 69 kV transmission line will not interfere with a 2-way, Police frequency radio. Construction Construction of this project will occur late fall 1981. The tap from the inter- section of Pilot Knob Road to Dakota Electric Association's Deerwood Substation will be constructed 1985, after I-35E is completed. Three types of structures will be used for the project. Horizontal Post insulators on single wood poles, with a crossarm for Dakota Electric Association's 3-phase distribution line, will be used from Deerwood Drive to Wescott Road along County Road 31. Horizontal Post insulators on single concrete self-supporting poles will be used along Wescott Road to eliminate guying. Non-angle poles along Wescott Road will be wood, stained to match the concrete poles. Double circuit davit arms on single wood poles will be used for the portion of the line from the Pilot Knob Substation to Deerwood Drive. In addition to these structures, single shaft self-supporting steel poles, on concrete foundations, will be used at the intersections of Deerwood Drive and County Road 31, Wescott Road and County Road 31 and Wescott Road and Lexington Avenue (see picture). The average pole height will be 60 feet along Wescott Road and 65 feet along Pilot Knob Road. These spans will vary from an average of 300 feet along Wescott Road to 275 along Pilot Knob Road. The minimum ground clearance for the 69 kV conductors, without underbuild, will be 24 feet. The minimum clearance for the distribution underbuild will be 22 feet. These dimensions will vary with the underlying profile of the ground, distribution service taps of the line and to maintain safety code clearances over existing structures. Consult the plan & profile for specific details. Six conductors with one shield wire will be carried along the double circuit portio of the line. The single circuit portion of the line will have three conductors with one shield wire, except the segment from Deerwood Drive to Wescott Road will carry an additional three conductors and one neutral , distribution underbuild. 122 -6- Construction continued The existing 3-phase distribution line with telephone underbuild from the Pilot Knob Substation to County Road No. 30, along the east side of Pilot Knob Road, will be buried. This area is sufficiently developed so that the correct size conductor can be buried without future size changes. The 3-phase distribution line along the east side of Pilot Knob Road from County Road No. 30 to Deerwood Drive will be relocated to the west side of Pilot Knob Road. It will be overhead since the area along this portion of the route is undeveloped, and the final cut and fill sections for the future Pilot Knob Road are not known. From Deerwood Drive to Wescott Road the 3-phase distribution line on the east side of Pilot Knob Road will be underbuilt on the transmission poles . It is possible to underbuild on single circuit transmission lines, but not on the double circuit portion from the Pilot Knob Substation to Deerwood Drive. t23 -7- aL Y fl S "TER akp' Aj�PORT -- _ 11 N A lwrgy� - — jr V r i \ YANKE C AR , r s � MIA � LE � 1 ---- VA ( D OODL ETwA - P �. HYLAND LAKE �1 j DOG �' •! - EAGAN ow �RIV MLLzw5 j� 1 6ANON — to •o RNSVILLE I� TwP KEGAN LAKE et4sVILL.E o BROCK Y' C k046AL' " \ GLASS � til PRIG L KEi w y / WI LA Ac 00 .> # I FISCHER WOR CR DIT WER ' " Ok¢t iA D I •� 'CPA NSP ;' � ��r Y;� � ` r' • +- i � - .,{ CREDIT R ER 1 ��• 1 TwP o O ( LAKEViLLE I EMPIRE rMINryREC TwP TwP I o a 1.•I _ ' 11 LdEVILLE 1 r ` AIRLAKE FARM I N ,T, N 'FARMINGTON i MARKET CASTLE TwP1 . I Tt 4 X `r•�li „ .. j I . ' i _ - � _,EUREKA ,! �- - .1 cr C TwP �� p MARKE I ¢ -H- Z Z ` Y >R" b t ya_�a 4 [ �3 r f mfr ; it Horizontal Post on wood pole with 3-phase distribution underbuild YANKEE DOODLE ROAD- EAGAN Double circuit davit arm on wood pole PILOT KNOB ROAD - EAGAN 77 ry #� 9 Steel 900 self-supporting pole on Horizontal Post on direct buried self-supporting concrete foundation concrete pole YANKEE DOODLE ROAD - EAGAN '�s. COUNTY ROAD NO. 42 - BURNSVILLE Agenda Information Memo July 31, 1981 Page Twenty-Four APPOINT•MEMBER-Te-ADVISORY-PARK=COMMITTEE F. A oint Member to Advisor Parks & Recreaton Committee to Fill Unexpired Term - The City Administrator was directed to place an article in the Dakota County Tribune and Eagan Chronicle regarding thei vacancy that exists on the . Advisory Park & Recreation Committee as a result of Jean Loken moving to New York. This ap- pointment would be for the remaining unexpired term for Jean Loken which . runs through December, 1983. Sandra Masin who wasan appli- cant for consideration on the Advisory Parks & Recreation Committee in January was contacted and she has expressed a willingness to accept an appointment if she is selected for the position vacancy. The only other candidate to not be appointed to some other position as a result of the January applications was Mr. Louis Frillman who applied for the Advisory Planning Commission. Mr. Frillman was contacted to see ifhe would be 'interested in an appointment to the Advisory Parks & Recreation Committee;: however, to date, he has not responded to the City Administrator. There were no applications received as a result of placing the article in the newspapers to date. A resident did inquire about the vacancy and expressed interest; however, there has not been a letter or resume received from that individual as of the time of this 'memo. If any additional applications are received, they will be forwarded on Monday as a partof the Administrative Packet' Enclosed on pages �, - { 7through t*3 ,0 is a copy 'af a letter and resume of Sandra Masin as`submitted in anuary of 1981. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED .ON THE MATTER: To approve an appointment to the Advisory Parks & Recreation Committee to fill the vacancy created by Jean Loken. Special Note: Following is a copy of the article as it appeared in the newspapers: r 4' � ., . • a i79r cl�ar .� 7 Jf ur� aG✓�c/ �/O.u�? Sandra A. Masin 1795 Carnelian Lane Eagant Minnesota 55122 (612)452-3411 PERSONAL BIOGRAPHY Birth: November 811942 Cleveland, Ohio Height: 5' 2 3/4" Weight: 134 pounds Hair: Brown Eyes: Brown Social Security Number: 273-38-7379 Martial Status: Married Husband's Name: R. Douglas Kane Children: Bob — 12 years old, Laura — 10 years old, Randy — 1 1/2 years old. EDUCATIONAL HISTORY Valparaiso University Valparaiso, Indiana 46383 B.A. — 1964 Major: Government Minors Economics Activities: Lyceum Committee — Secretary Phi Beta Chi Social Sorority Young Republicans Elections Committee A.W.S. WVUR Radio tZ� WORK REC ORD: September 1980 to November 1980 Comsery Corporation 1385 Mendota Heights Road Mendota Heights, MN 55120 i I worked as a documentation aide. My activities included using the copy machine, the varitype machine, laying out the pages for the manuals, and assembling the manuals. This was a part—time position. My job was terminated when two full-time amployees were hired. February 1980 to June 1980 Blue Cross HMO 3535 Blue Cross Road meant. MN 55164 I worked as a part—time claims examiner. This was a temporary position to be terminated when .HUO had successfully switched from a manual to a computer operation. September 1977 to February 1979 Blue Cross 3535 Blue Cross Road moans, MN 55164 I worked as a part—time claims examiner. I left two months before the -ead_of mq_pregnancy. November 1976 to September 1977 Employers Overload 105 South 7th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 I had general office assignments. I left because the job offered at Blue Cross seemed to offer more advantages. IZ9 ACTIVITIES Coached CAA Girls' T—Ball 1977 Coached Mend—Eagan Girls, Soccer 1977 Y Brownie Co—Leader 1978-79 Girl Scout Co-Leader 1979-80 Now Neighbors Joined 1978 League of Women Voters 'Joined 1978 Energy Portfolio 1978-82 Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church 3930 Rahn Road Eagan, 1W 55122 Sunday School Teacher 1978-79 Altar Guild 1979&80 ALCW Representative to Church Women United since 1978 Picture Percon at Rahn Elementary School 1980-81 130 Agenda Information Memo July 31, 1981 Page Twenty-Five PRELIMINARY- PLAT EXTENSION - OVERHILL-FARM.-ADDITION G. Preliminary Plat Extension for Overhlll Farm Addition -, A letter was received from Mr. David Dehler representing Overhill Properties, Inc. Mr. Dehler is requesting a six- month extension for his pre- liminary plat which will expire August 3, - 1981. He states in his letter that he expects to submit the > final plat application early in August but cannot- meet the August 3, 1981 deadline. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the request for an. extension to the 'sixmonth requirement for a pre- liminary plat extension. SET- PUBLIC-HEARING.---'C,A. - ROBERTS-CO. H. Set a Public Hearing to Consider IndustrialRevenue Financing for a $1,310,000 for the C. A. Roberts Company -- An application was received from the Fluor Corporation representing their subsi- diary C. A. Roberts Company for industrial revenue financing in the amount of $1,310,000. Briefly- the C. A. Roberts Company is presently leasing a facility located directly west of Corporate Square and at the southwest intersection of Neil Armstrong Boulevard and Gemini Road. The proposal forindustrial revenue financing is to purchase the existing building occupied by the C. A. Roberts Company and proceed with plant expansion directly to the , south of the existing facility which, after expansion, the entire plant will consist of approximately 53,107 sq ft. of office space and inside storage area. The C. A.' Roberts Company distributes special- ty tubing and piston rods and represents over fifty" leading ' steel ! and aluminum users. They serve customers including manufacturers and agricultural equipment, construction machinery, machine tools, auto/truck suppliers and other. manufacturers. There will be more detailed information regarding the C. ,A. 'Roberts Company, the Fluor Corporation and specifics relating to the proposed use of industrial financing at the time ' of the public hearing if action is taken to establish a public hearing date to consider the industrial revenue financing request. The City Administrator is reviewing the site plans with the City Planner to make certain that there are no variances or conditional use permits required. The property is platted and properly zoned for the use. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny setting a public hearing for the September 1, 1981, City Council meeting to consider industrial revenue financing for C:, A. Roberts Co. City AdmEnistfAto 3 • C. SERVICES Total Cost Cost/Unit Single Family (10 units) $ 7,274 $ 727 Twin Homes (32 units) 13,966 436 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 7,128 509 Condominiums (68 units) 17,312 255 $ 45,680 D. STORM SEWER Single Family (10 units) $ 7,973 $ 797 Twin Homes (32 units) 15,308 478 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 7,813 558 Condominiums (68 units) 18,976 279 TOTAL $ 50,070 E. STREET (Grading/Gravel Base) Single Family (10 units) $ 4,235 $ 424 Twin Homes (32 units) 8,129 254 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 4,149 296 Condominiums (68 units) 10,077 148 TOTAL $ 26,590 F. STREET (Surfacing) Single Family (10 units) $ 17,906 $ 1,791 Twin Homes (32 units) 34,380 1,074 Single Family Cluster (14 units) 17,548 1,253 Condominiums (68 units) 42,616 627 TOTAL $112,450 Page 11. 5023a S-6 LATERAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY Single Fam. Single Fam. Twin Home Cluster Condominium Sanitary Sewer 1,673 1,004 - 1,171 585 Water Main 1,285 771 900 450 Services 727 436 509 255 Storm Sewer 797 478 558 279 Street (Grading/Gravel Base) 424 254 296 148 Street (Surfacing) 1,791 1,074 1,253 627 TOTAL LATERAL ASSESSMENT 6,697 4,017 4,687 2,344 Page 12. 5023a -.57