Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
12/15/1981 - City Council Regular
AGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL DECEMBER 15 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 �., A. Fire Department �.7 C. Park Department B. Police Department �q D. Public Works Department IV. 6:55 - CONSENT AGENDA p. IG A. Contract 210 A, Final Payment/Acceptance 1 Ifo B. 1982 Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) Street Designations e 0C. Tax Forfeit Land Classification 4pp�,0 D. Project 353, TH 55 Utility Revisions/Extensions t V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS e•21 A. 1982 Budget & Federal Revenue Sharing Fund Use QQt\ B. Vacation of a Portion of Storm Sewer Easement on Development. Property Near Hwy. 13 C. Final Reassessment Hearing for Project 247 (Alexander Road) VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Midwestern Association, Orrin Aune, for Preliminary Plat. Approval, `` Lone Oak Heights, & for a Variance to Exceed the Lot Coverage in Part of the NE4 of the NE-14 of Section 9 B. Billboard/Naegele Outdoor Advertising Sign Co. , Located Between New Cedar Freeway & Nicols Road South of Chicago, St. Paul RR Tracks Crj 4 C. Amcon Corporation (Patrick M. Cannon) for Rezoning from A• (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development District) to allow 2 Office Buildings & Hotel Complex; for the Preliminary PLat of Ravine Plaza; and for a Variance to Exceed the Height Limitation in a Commercial District ; Located in Part of the NE4 of the NE4 of Section 4 (South of Proposed I-494 Right-of-Way & West of Pilot Knob Road) ?.9 S D. 1982 Gravel Pit. License Renewals Eagan City Council Agenda December 15, 1981 Page Two VII. NEW BUSINESS A. David Furlong for a Conditional Use Permit for More than 3 Amusement Devices in One Building, Located in Park of the E2 of the NW4 of Section 30, 4215 Nicols Road ©, 4A' B. Eileen Fournier for a Conditional Use Permit for the Housing of 2 Rubbish Trucks, Located in Part of the NE-4 of Section 32, 1810 Cliff I \� C. Final Resolution-$750,000 I. R'. Financing for Fitzgerald/Gresser QOffice Project. D. Duckwood Trail Apartments for Two Temporary Advertising Signs VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS P. 04A. Metropolitan Council' s Draft Storm Water. Management Plan IX. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) X. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO; HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE DECEMBER 10, 1981 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of the November 19 1981 special City Council minutes and the December 1, 1981 regular City Council minutes and adoption of the December 15, 1981 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration: nam FIRE DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department - Item #1: Minnesota Fire/Rescue Service Training Seminar - Fire Cher Childers would like to send five firemen to the Mankato Area Vocational Technical Institute on Jan- uary 16 and 17 to attend the Federal Emergency Management Agency seminar. This is sponsored by the Minnesota Fire Rescue Service Training and Mankato Area Vocational Technical Institute. The registration fee is $10 per person; however, there would be lodging and additional expenses. Normally, this item is approved in the budget and would be routine. However, due to -the hiring and equip- ment acquisition freeze, any seminars outside , the metropolitan area must be authorized by the City Council . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the request for firefighters attending the seminar. (Those firefighters, are Chief Childers , District' Chiefs Adam and Schindeldecker, and Training Officers Schultz and' 'Bahke. ) Item #2 The Fire Department has reviewed applications for adding ten TTM additional fire 'fighters to the Fire Department . Currently the Fire Department operates with 14 firefighters available days and 16 at night at Station #1, while 7 are available on a rotating basis. At Station #2, there are 2 available days , 17 at night , and 4 on a rotating basis . And at Station #3, 3 are available days , while 13 are available at night, and 2 o a rotating basis . This totals 78 firefighters . There are ten new firefighters being; proposed, of which 4 are available days at Station #1 , three days at Station #2 and one days at Station #3', The additional two are night , Station #1, and night, Station #2. Again, this involves additional manpower and would require action by the City Council , both to satisfy a ,condition of the bylaws as well as the action of the 11-17-81 meeting :instituting a freeze on any new manpower.< Chief Childers has expressed a concern about the lack of fire- fighters available during days and is concerned specifically for Stations #2 and #3. Enclosed for review by the City Council are the monthly reports for June through September. These were just received from the Relief Association and are found on pages Agenda Information Memo December 10, 1981 Page Two through .6 If any member of the City Council desires to wok at thelist of applicants for becoming firefighters, please request that information at the City Administrator' s office. ACTION. TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the request for the hiring of ten additional firefighters . Z EAGAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEYARTME;NT MUNTHLY RLrUKi 0R MONTH OF September, 1981 • WORK PERFORMED TYPE MAN HOURS Fire Calls 740 Rescue Calls 200 Training 379 Truck & Equipment Maintenance ' 238 Station Maintenance 133 Fire Prevention 66 Administrative 178 TOTAL 1934 MANPOWER STATION #1 STATION 412 STATION 413 Available Days 14 2 3 Available Nights 16 17 13 Available Rotating 7 4 2 TOTAL 37 23 18 FIRE CALLS TYPE , NUMBER $ LOSS Structure 7 $ 9,500.00 Grass 0 0.00 Vehicle 3 1,500.00 False 4 0.00 Other 8 0.00 TOTAL 22 $11,000.00 RESCUE CALLS TYPE NUMBER Vehicle Accident 0 Medical 17 Industrial 0 Miscellaneous 0 TOTAL 17 LARGE DOLLAR LOSSES DATE NAME LOCATION OCCUPANCY LOSS 9-8-81 Lull Engineering Hwy. 13 Car $1500.00 9-16-81 Drenckhahn 2811 Pilot Knob House $9000.00 3 EAGAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT *R MONTH OF August, 1981 • WORK PERFORMED TYPE MAN HOURS Fire Calls • 470 Rescue Calls a Training 334 Truck & Equipment Maintenance ' 174 Station Maintenance 160 Fire Prevention 79 Administrative 228 TOTAL 1575 MANPOWER STATION #1 STATION #2 STATION X63 Available Days 14 2 3 Available Nights 16 17 13 Available Rotating 7 4 2 TOTAL 37 23 18 FIRE CALLS TYPE NUMBER $ LOSS Structure 5 $4,500.00 Grass 1 0.00 Vehicle 4 1,000.00 False 0 0.00 Other 9 0.00 TOTAL 19 $5,500.00 RESCUE CALLS TYPE NUMBER Vehicle Accident 0 Medical 10 Industrial 1 Miscellaneous 0 TOTAL 11 LARGE DOLLAR LOSSES DATE NAME LOCATION OCCUPANCY LOSS 8-11-81 3924 Mica (near) Home $1,500.00 8-21-81 Cedarvale Car $1,000.00 8-30-81 2080 Opal Drive Home $3,000.00 4 EAGAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT ,. OR MONTH OF July, 1981 10 WORK PERFORMED TYPE MAN HOURS Fire Calls 620 Rescue Calls 138 Training 397 Truck & Equipment Maintenance 147 Station Maintenance 140 Fire Prevention 5 Administrative 122 TOTAL 1569 MANPOWER STATION X61 STATION #2 STATION X13 Available Days 14 2 3 Available Nights 16 17 13 Available Rotating 7 4 2 TOTAL 37 23 18 FIRE CALLS TYPE NUMBER $ LOSS Structure 6 $20,125.00 Grass 3 0.00 Vehicle 4 3,500.00 False 5 0.00 Other 7 0.00 TOTAL 25 $23,625.00 RESCUE CALLS TYPE NUMBER Vehicle Accident 0 Medical 19 Industrial 0 _ Miscellaneous 0 TOTAL 19 LARGE DOLLAR LOSSES DATE NAME LOCATION OCCUPANCY LOSS 7-16-81 Red Owl 990 Apollo Road Warehouse $10,000.00 7-27-81 4389 Malmo Garage $10,000.00 7-31-81 2104 Cliff Hill Truck $ 3,500.00 S EAGAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT OR MONTH OF June, 1981 WORK PERFORMED TYPE MAN HOURS Fire Calls 760 Rescue Calls 272 Training 480 Truck & Equipment Maintenance 147 Station Maintenance 143 Fire Prevention Administrative 221 TOTAL 2026 MANPOWER STATION 411 STATION 412 STATION 413 Available Days 14 2 3 Available Nights 16 17 13 Available Rotating 7 4 2 TOTAL 37 23 18 FIRE CALLS TYPE NUMBER $ LOSS Structure 4 0.00 Grass 5 0.00 Vehicle 7 $1900.00 False 3 0.00 Other 9 0.00 TOTAL 28 $1900.00 RESCUE CALLS TYPE NUMBER Vehicle Accident 0 Medical 16 Industrial 6 Miscellaneous 0 TOTAL 22 LARGE DOLLAR LOSSES DATE NAME LOCATION OCCUPANCY LOSS 6-3-81 1436-Lone Oak Car $500.00 6-14-81 13 & Cedar Ave Car $999.00 6-14-81 Silverbell Road Car $200.00 6-15-81 County Road 30 Car $200.00 Agenda Information Memo December 10, 1981 " Page Three POLICE DEPARTMENT B. Police Department There are no items to be considered for the Police Department at this time. PARK DEPARTMENT Park Department -- Item #1: Use of Snowmobiles Along Johnny Cake Ridge Road, South of-`C= -- The Director of Parks & Recrea- tion has been contacted by the local snowmobile association to see if the City Council would approve and designate the boulevard trail along Johnny Cake Ridge Road south of Cliff to Dakota County Park as a snowmobile trail. For additionalinformation on this item, please refer to the attached memorandum prepared by the Director of Parks & Recreation on page ,. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the designation of the snowmobile trail as described. . November 30, 1981 • MEMO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR #ROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: REQUEST, SNOINMOBILE ORGANIZATION I've been contacted by the local snowmobile group to see if the City Council would approve and designate the boulevard/trails along Johnny Cake Ridge Road south of Cliff to Dakota County Park as a snowmobile trail. Background: The Dakota County Park system maintains snowmobile trails within Lebanon Hills Park. (between Johnny Cake Ridge Road on the west, and Dodd Road on the east) Entrance to the trail system can be gained off of Johnny Cake Ridge, Pilot Knob or along designated areas along Cliff Road. Prior to last year, snowmobile groups were able to obtain access to the trail system off of old Galaxie Road, however, this segment of the Dakota County Parks system has been changed and does not now provide for snowmobiles. Con- sequently, snowmobilers who live in the westerly quadrant of the City can only gain access to the trail system off of Johnny Cake. To get to this access point by riding, snowmobilers come down the highline trail to Johnny Cake Ridge Road or use Cliff to Johnny Cake. Issue: South of the intersection of Johnny Cake and Cliff, high volume traffic has made the riding of snowmobiles in the street a dangerous situation. Because of this danger, snowmobilers are requesting that they be allowed to drive their machines on the existing boulevards/trails from this intersection to the Dakota County Park property. Existing City ordinance prohibits the operation of snowmobiles on boulevards. Consequently, a snowmobile group is asking that the City designate this as a trail for snowmobiles in order that they may safely ride on the boulevard area without breaking existing City ordinances. Concerns: If the City Council decides to permit the boulevards to be utilized for snowmobile traffic, it is my recommendation that they consider utilizing only the east side of-Johnny Cake. The reason behind this is that it would prohibit the crossing of snowmobilers from west to east further down on Johnny Cake at the park entrance, which may be dangerous to snowmobilers and motorists alike. This provision would require that crossings to the east side would be made at the signalized intersection at Cliff and Johnny Cake. Second, that the existing speed limit of 5 miles per hour be kept in affect. Three, that all snowmobiles travel in a single file. Four, that this is a one year designation. This designation is to be reviewed on an annual basis. Five, that there be al least 2 inches of snow cover at all times for the trail to be used. This will prevent any sod, turf damage or trail damage that may occur if there is not sufficient snow cover. (The Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee re- viewed this issue on an informal basis during 1981. No recommendation was forthcoming from the Advisory Committee concerning this item but concern was expressed for the liability that the City might incur by designating this trail segment. Because of the limited amount of space for such a trail, frequency of sign posts and telephone poles, the crossing of busy streets, it was felt the City would incur serious liability for designating trails that are not maintained, nor meet the proper width and clearance for snowmobile traffic. Further, there was a concern that there would be conflict of use between snowmobilers and pedestrians who might be utilizing this trail and path at the same times) I'm asking that you place this on the December 15th Council meeting. Agenda Information Memo December 10, 1981 Page Four PUBLIC WORKS -DEPARTMENT D. Public Works Department --- Item #1: Petition - Stop Sign Re- moval _ (Wilderness Run Road) _ -- The City has received a petition from 44 individuals representing 28 properties within the Wilderness Park 2nd Addition, requesting the removal of a three way stop sign presently located on Wilderness Run Road and Oak Chase Road.' Approximately 12 of the 28 representive , properties are requesting that the stop sign controlling Oak � Chase Road be left in place and that only the stop signs affecting the traffic on Wilderness Run Road be removed. A copy of the petition and a location map referencing the petitioners is enclosed on pages /0 through 12. The staff recommends that, if any stop signs are to be considered for removal , the existing stop sign on Oak Chase Road be left in place to control the traffic on Oak Chase Road. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or denythe petitioned request for the .removal. of the three way sign n at the intersection of Wilderness Run Road and Oak Chase Road. Item #2:; Petition - Stop Sign Removal (Wilderness Run Road-Wilder- mess Ru Drive) -- The City has received a petition from 49 indi- viduals representing 29 properties in the Wilderness Park 2nd Addi- tion requesting the removal of the stop signs at the intersection of Wilderness Run Road and Wilderness Run Drive. 11 of the 29 representative properties have requested that the stop signs on Wilderness Run . Road only be removed. They indicate that they wish to have the stop sign controlling the traffic on Wilderness Run Drive at its intersection with Wilder- ness Run Road remain in place. Upon review of the intersection' in question,` the staff recommends that, if any stop signs are to be removed, that only those stop, signs controlling traffic on Wil- derness Run Road be removed and that the existing stop sign control- ling traffic on Wilderness Run Drive remain in place. A location map referencing the affected properties on the petition and a copy of the petition are enclosed on pages f 3 through /,S- for the Council 's information. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To receive the petition and approve or deny the removal of any/all stop signs at the inter- section of Wilderness Run"Road' and Wilderness Run Drive . PETITION *MOVAL OF THREE-WAY STOP SIGN • As a resident of the Wilderness Run area, I am requesting the removal of -the _ three-way stop sign at the intersection of Oak Chase Road and Wilderness Run Road. It is my understanding that the stop sign was not installed as a result__ of a petition by the residents which is the correct procedure. The stop sign is a waste of time and gas, inconvenient and unnecessary. ,k d��-day - - _ - YX, _ 4,a rr 000 - ---- Lk.Z - �, .17 Uk3 — . qis 6 - C� p ---- c.F. 16.4Uc 2 �uacrJ Q SO �3Co�! ��crnZ.ec�. _ 4�.►6-GIIc 2 � .� 1347 ��-- O -- a'/ c!.1 y -6Lk z- Cf L�.\8UK41 _ (h4.9- WVlar 6Lk L1-_. ,�c� 3�� � o . L'r,77 Btk3 LVZJ c t I Z bLk L 5 GLk Z-)"P� P 26 115 i KEY TOTAL # OF PETITIONERS (441 INTERSECTION OF ::... :. PROPERTIES - (28 ) W RUN RD.+OAK CHASE jD- REMOVE ALL STP• SIGN ••91 �d•?: v •e T.� r _ • STP. SIGN ON i JPo� !, r •' OAK CHASER 10 as, 2e.3S' i�N\' ._.--. ),•oa N"• 3' __ __ __,^ .�.•'.`Yv C�1f♦� �� o m .24 . „ .4jy�;.'y T,yti::•• •_i %FfowSa. 1, _ 9_ _ 'a'o•, _.i ::t:::. ___»___ wo ii p.60 •10 ii :Y. '�• 1 \ :::• •�•\J, _`: c2 o.• •K�".,•• .___—__ ____ •i'E Io :.��f•{ �• ` ..::::'• j•°o o 9J.°z`: 'tF•'•• .Y'. t� 0`p \ -b HTB° •tAia0 �O[, J: OJ OOV,f�':i'::::.:EE •�....• ...75° °p.E I.• f~i•..SZd. 23 5 1 ' 'Ir:A9oSSd3•F'• 3o I3D •o .i 0C E .oa J 2 0 3. \• o° a N.73e>:� 131�9 S\ $ N.6B° o O D ( _ l0 J °J `'I! c , b > i` ,•+•i O ya2 i .o >0 22 of Je\ ,o° ••• 12 •. 11 e aTti f I nsx .^,: `o.. oP n •, poq I} '� J 6vu 04 - I _ H.°9°5738-E. ..::; ....... i 10 • e o o J cI 'sJ q v`! a ry'� •r 'off. 413 po g, 21 J c g 10 oD°� •,gyp ' - J 0 3 '\Ii- ._^ •J}.; •g -i o•$ ,�qT'-.t •s..;.'.t•:tiC�:::'''�,•6..�F8 IS - e.». p,�/•`•. � ,♦ `J c � N 6>° .•'•':.':.'. w, ^0 11 .• A7_�[•'::::' .::::I r i .4. _ ?r. " 00 ` Q. - IN z 1�Y •,t• •.....•.•h • 9.eE•. �g °e :7 9 0 19y3 20 •,�:::.�.: Z - g ,'J�` �2�••:•..:�' Ce 9 J _ _ J i ••'1 Q, °a,:s > '.i �•:•..':4'^ .`row°• `� Ope• 1' 'f 1.]g 2, J •, ...:: ti _OJ.. Cp.• �•6Rpss..i'c' 9 9[ ti ° B9S7 2B E b� L 20 q > o '.•+may".::': Imo. :•V::•:•: !o F 12 a 3o 3D Frp>,_�/.. ]''o•��•;: "21 is 13716 !. i 7 .,L::::::::::::::w•..::::ti•1i OJ 9 19 2/ N.Bl°1533-E g Jv ' ::: ...•r.l:::••�.t dl. 9 we ow E :n 0y J O •' ... ::::. ...:.`u p0 s 22 J°� m 17 «A °� IB �_ 1. ' �. .•.'••••i 1 Q •°�•::: ECJ •,_:......:5�•'� _ - •° - s �m � ��' 20 Iso73 .....�... Ise 66.. •X•:�:�r '' , Q •109'°5003E. p �I-� o ue9°so oz'E '.'i':•:.:•:•:•:•::• I :it.•> :1i1.S:'::)•' •:':•:�.: �� �� �.... 1 1369 O 163olo- X '.S': •P ii �fM: :'[1�''.V.:�Lt'•.•.•. Pw 212)'• p TO 706 6e ry. •r'° .sl zo F: {::::• i{;.. :•'¢:•:� M 01°0)'1 •• i{' "••�•�•::'':l� ?.'•'•' .'\L•,.,,:,�. 10 c 3o 15 i • e° to N Z ;�.•}: J:'::b•... .S e?°5'.B•• -� ��a°3 � 0 2iDza _ e9 j' _ .•�•.•: :•'•'�:S -L. :�•3�!v:v�:o•.•.•.•.• ::� 1 22 t�:30• 11 :�.^� O �c^ �R 1 75O 2e 3 _Q � •,°i OS �•�Y4`�•s'i'��� ...•[S?^.•..:..: 1 _ 4• t 14 QI, ro 9� .. O '.•.•.. �o d U :•'�� ^ •'F�,s, 1 od0 �; a IS e 8 �.g..g $ 3 •.(.�••..•.'.•. ! 3 I g '•,: cr •N V '^.. r 13 �'o f Jae 2"3 7°J'r - 'Ia'ii{::•:• I 3. c -1 Z Y,d i ry o t� o. °• 1 1 •10 - ; ` o .W 12 R_,, eti`°� y A\ �pa�➢` °'i. `'e�M1•i R 2 17 LU 0 2 t..:..• � � �8 r 24 y t`t` !� 13 nv:..J.[.•.• I• .0 11 O : •C�''•'••• ••••:i � 3 • ,a°pJC�GtiFss i r°rs•ze E ° .e9•s,;°E Q Ir. }iirv: ti -I _•�Sa•9 t� \ �+• 797• t•'•..'.•� 70 -_ z ..•... '•tr '. b -w"�•. r�.• :. > a: � �:':':'yL .::. '�,., ,. - 301 5: .. .::: d�N zi `° c .9 .! m,°o•.'.r�^ ::y�S:;:Yi, .t:.'.� •9. .n1 }�: ::;:; :•. V � i..�. 1• i12 •••.:�••". :5500 --1 _� a3 � 1 •RJ JJf. 9 AQUARIUS °�5'3eE LANE ' ,706• ,,1. \ ..•1J1 �) _ 1 \ .e.> ' 770• ^ ::s t 13 JN +esr512e'[ -. 1 f N «.3 IS 16 ) Ig pp o ROAD F:'. al_ 365D.DD In[il �•• _L•� 3 • 4// / -t-- '` It f` rt` 3 iCil 3�a .4 0 41 1 _ •�� -_ ��-- - / ��' -CJClI i moi•'' \ '�^_� v>�' � /' ci - U X11 yyl�o %}�/. 31N 33 r --- NHG ad �`� \� _---Jz --- O 'kVnn �5 INV 7 cl 1J D 'd oHON ce ��e ;,� Q u 2„ - CY QI� I Yl � 1 GSIHV� 'I � VHD p ----------��^, _ , \ y c N830 S VH:) d ui a JJ(H�� d lzr 3 r nG co d LAJ 1 : J ow ,dw a Q ,D vw� LL- J O Q V 1MVal5 , N O ao No Oa9� � ce HVW a S3HO N ASN3A bW NJ Q R (fUJ J T3Hd ROGER1E`N Cl E Q - I ON .o U_ Q� ►- < VI 03S - `��� Q'pn19 Q c,Nl'i3 l Iu —� orlu Gd 900 W w 4(- -� �J I �y __ 3SSVHIS Z a / u�ll� i;r�., N3G�t7M DR K E PETITION FOOVAL OF THREE-WAY STOP SIGN As a resident of the Wilderness Run area, I am requesting the removal of the three-way stop sign at the intersection of Wilderness Run Drive and Wilderness Run Road. It is my understanding that the stop sign was not installed as a result of a petition by the residents which is the correct procedure. The stop sign is a waste of time and gas, inconvenient and unnecessary. 0 el C�. l 13Lk I/ CA L12?b �.�� C�`� • --- LIUi43 6 O L�.2 6Lk3 ._ v 4,) qT?7 _ �rtdrarn �u' ----- --; Cl .�o dLk l _..Ww kk,4rB•i f<<3?7 amu .._ - - t�..Vg 6Lk`1 1. � , Lis-Y J_ 13 iCEE�S LU ec", �I - Q_U 4.33 li_""� ��•8 Lam/=3 rk QC:�.cE,iJr 4��iLcor! (��l :,> L�.6 ►�.Ct 1 L�.a rxkt__ 3Ll � n . i KEY .•99- TOTAL # OF PETITIONERS (49 ) EI INTERSECTION OF W. 3e3`..;t :f•,;:::::.::,•:,,,,. # OF PROPERTIES (29) RUN RD. + W. RUN DR. REMOVE ALL STP, SIGN :' sP.;r: :: ::: �: :.:;:;: — _ . . _ STP. SIGN ON �'. •• .• J Ja •3 3O• _ W. RUN D R. °� :K.`• ' P � �.e _ .. - N °• O �p - 2IT• .eee: ze3s• ::,-oe,.-. 3�z5: •::: n, - —�"tt�•'^^_ '�:.W; - ' 24 � `.:'::a• :::2+�• ..�'. ..f54.'F.'z\.\�.._..______ •O•v-.-•.ani':',;::. -_�_—___-_-- -'-._._ 151 5:..:.....V•:.�•. IOW N TB :•+1,'�•••J. ,0C J .... OJ ��.° ..:::::: .T:•:', - �pI ew 6' 1 � .. •::' I .. ..:.:•t::: [bv ,` Cbl :::::: :'::5:.:: «.T3° �2••. 2Q� 23 E IN 03° 55 a3•' 3J 30 i c��•Ci':• 'y0 P.. -�,.• •:::::. °-E 9 \. OB E ° °0 2 0° 4:':•a,•,•x.E.:\•,•'•.-,p• °e GO �� A ,152y�� .J N.�IB•'I .31.5 �\ . N.b O .._O I .•I,.•:•:•{{}}QQ�� 1 14 Cj '4• _ `••O 6z mm c 22 - - ;.'.T•�'•;.:::.:• J a op \(4'a' \ 12 e: •.• 11 � 30 � I �: ••r:•. o�. / 6;2` t, i .'.,Y A.'.'.'.., ,,• P Jp ? J• Js�J °°•q 1.•v Q pv q '/ : beo hJ 02 p •••N.89°5T 28 E. J6•' •60j Is o 10 10\°� ooi T 21 _ _� •.X::::•:1. �- —T •g ♦ q° C�lPoo o sLd ,♦ �J O O C ba°•i0 ! ,/��/ .l1mv �A ia.h,' �;. Ig o� y' 20 4 Q. B �•'•':.ti•'::PS_ �� �7/�sJ •"�'":;3�•`6'' a, ,� :7 1 : O ObM1' l's 5S C •: ���•.' ' I '-.O_••.'3:::::•::!tl 1 Pa>,. n 20 Je, H o •'d1eess3"y•• E L •:'. .'.•.' a: �t 2B _ 6 •.9. y. ��...::•SC;)C:..., °i4 4c• e°°="a°a ISS. 'jm •^ 19 _ •.'�•':....•. �o `I0 12 30 30 °` �,', •' ..c •'y21 ae q . IB �' °.eJ .{� •° 'o.>•:: �; . �h`• •e n 153 19 I 6 + \J / .�`.•.•,•.;:.;. ` .r, O' qah 19)2• aS SSE 6 ` •�-... •. '3J, q N 09°50 02 n N.B3° •'•::.:. .; : '�yam') a �ap i 22 •o e I7 _ - - IB oo !. o :• ;.,.••...f �. •q........h✓ 209 95..-... : `m r 15023 ..... I 13066. i. '.13500 :. C.. ..;..t '•F - 20 1 8is 3 K -0 02'E. o cl$ $ N e9.5002'E :.}: :a•b>:•26•Y: V;a:;:;:::'•. •P q' +.. 1 6v i 14 ```` ^::':•:•: ;.�}1'Cij•:; •. .3 c e.`e 2•. W 10.00 6 r yr y'.^ ]0 30 D!p'�.,•' fff ,,vv J.':::. d .:.:5;'•. ::C'• •_� 206 6 ':`.1L•l::::'. ••:::�. .' ..:. N 13•• 3i 20 •I 139 96 •.:; .'l•:.":::....:. s••0z' 'W _R NB6°5l03�W .O ••h a.'.•..•.... �1 Ia...•:';•gF:p,:,: a; ••a•39 Szae:t•. 10 y, �9Jp IS �o a 3 1 :;.;.:..,: { � •'t•�'•'r .>.:�30 ':;�,;�.},.•. qb i•�r'e ya �._ tr _ 16 1_ ••••••••.'O •; .' Lr.':.' .'.'...�' ...:•c i 5'R•5T:0 •ti +., ?° 9,15 sm ., .•�. Z IS �;:::;:;: .:.•.. i 69 j :m �•• O. :1f.'.':'. i K 22 •:5 II - ~♦ . ��' �.� 25°20'35..W eI (Y ; •.ei" Q J g r°tie���}. N �/ se 15 b g O •Yi•:ati' o O.V Va.•3„ e.'\ y ' 3 .ti•. .: :•: :'-+/i':•::ti•:� g },: 1 ;�o W •''ate♦o o•a c,°� :}: •.Md!a. * 23 13 v e° �•0a 0j'r - ....:.....• •:ti,i:zd••:•:•: ;:' :I W d o> Z"Z J ::•:t•::•::•:::•::• I•• Q 1^ .I N °ice ' 14 a,z 1 �: :•::• xgp ':•i::•:r.":.:•: i w 12 0'° e'��v � �L/ �' `.'•� � iti } :::� I 2 zIp A\y`�iD°">'' q•' •:i:v: :. :. :7•.•.'[} ••;t+6:�:;.;'•: �� 24 ; nl , ♦: ` a'9 ,0...9�,• U •'.y.b• .:.{e\!.•r - �a3•• .;.{:;4:.:};: o I3 6•� SG'�' LG...tC.C\ w'tL I vary+za E ie N 09as12d E Q • %.• ''� .... _ 2e•�9' :•{ 1, CO�Vs z9 a 30 3o Eli Z •:�, 15-0624 t •��.: I 8:0 ',y}..;v' ..�� �,'. �b _ •: :}•:'•1s:8_ �v,9; .....T.'.... ze s..P'• .9 ,3. Iov,`�,ix '� f S` ' :` ,•a•• �.� ;�� t'. t 1 X •.••. _ 12 r p /�_ :4,00 I +2 131/ 0 �• \�° 12 ~�, �!•°• AQUAf?IU$ 'SJ•1 6e.•512 R '6J0J 1 a •[ LANE y il. s. '�°� • u .uo 2oa• �.•e \ Se Be z+0• ?� � � 5' 13 E iT � ::::. JN -' N 89.5?20 -- nt ! 14 20 ROAD st _x = 2630.0018111 1 • vC.v[ N[ ...i 3 o/ wo N- - --- �Q �g4M'�C�M ii CY � 31N , SVM •�c��C., 3. J I 2 \� ANt, LL- Jill Jb 6 03WOHON V-1 NOIHOkv NN OSTHC1� G�. -----.---- I � VH3 0HID •:�• �( S— N830 D d OJJ(N�� d SVH 3 I :j— P� � • �s�� lr I �_ V-1 I n(i p o Q QLy LA, L4j J OW,VW ' Q Ct Jv cz c� Q v -- O89A � d"1 NO I 3 zil HVW Q S3HO N ASN3A V NJ Q Li DR v\EW v 3(]HV R\DG IR cr E i a �Q , 0 P 8 'o LL av J ►- VI b3S M '� •�:(�\�� �'I]n38 J Q S,HIH3 aI O Cr) _ I �� OOOI m ('�\ ��1\�HI uLULJ ,====�. OHbNDiH 3SSV8IS a W 7A�lI,M N3a-IdM Z d �11�\��I� �d OV) ��' � �\� CO ' �� a R o �. O.- o Agenda Information Memo December 10 1981 "' 11 Page Five t There are four :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 wishes 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 the three (3) public hearings as legally noticed for 7 :00 p.m. CONTRACT 210 A A. Contract 210 A, Final Payment/Acceptance --' The, City has re- ceived a request for final payment throughthe consulting engineering firm pertaining to Contract 210A. Contract 210A provided for the installation of streets as a combination of four project numbers designated as follows : ' Project 198, Cedar Ridge Addition Project 204`, Blackhawk Hills 2nd Addition Project 210`, Wilderness Run Road (Oak' Chase ;Road to Wilderness Park Addition) Project 211, Marell Addition- Although these projects were constructed during 1977, the City is just now receiving the final payment process from the consulting engineering firm. All construction' costs associated with these projects were included in the assessments which have already been levied. The consulting' engineering firm has certified that the projects have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications and are ;now recommending acceptance by the City of Eagan for perpetual maintenance. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve final payment number 11 to Hardrives, Inc. , in the amount of $5,490. 30 for Con- tract 210A and accept the improvement for perpetual' maintenance. 1982 MSAS STREET-DESIGNATIONS B. 1982 Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) Street Designations` -- The municipal state aid street system allows individual munici- palities to designate local streets as a municipal state aid street' with the number of miles for this designation being determined by the total number of miles of streets presently located within the community. As of 1981 , the City' has a maximum allowable MSAS designation of 26 .68 miles . Presently, the City has 24.52 of MSAS streets designated within the City. This results in 2. 16 additional miles of MSAS streets that could yet be designated ,by the City. Agenda Information Memo December 10 1981 Page Six-A It is in the City' s best interest to maintain the designated number of miles at its maximum limit which results in the City's ability to maximize all the City' s financial need requirements from the municipal state aid street system. The total construction needs as determined by the number of miles of streets to be constructed to state aid standard is a basic factor used in the criteria in determining the amount of state aid funds made available to the municipality each year for both construction and maintenance allo- cations . Therefore, the staff is recommending that a 1.68 mile MSAS designation be approved for a proposed alignment of the southerly extension of Wescott Hills Drive between Wescott Road and Wilderness Run Road in accordance with the City' s major street plan. The basic criteria for acceptance of 'a proposed designation by MnDOT requires that its termini must connect with .an existing MSAS route or trunk highway and that it serve as a community col- lector on a major _street plan. This alignment would meet both criteria. In order for this designation to affect our 1982 alloca- tions, it is necessary for the City Council to pass a- formal resolu- tion designating this segment as a municipal state aid street align- ment. The alignments and designations can be changed, added and or deleted in the future without any retroactive penalties per- taining to past needs allocations . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve the designation of 1 .68 miles of Wescott Hills Drive as municipal state aid street , approve the proposed resolution requesting acceptance of the MSAS designation by MnDOT and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said resolution. TAX FORFEIT LAND CLASSIFICATION C. Tax -Forfeit Land Classification -- The county has informed the -City that certain lands within the City of Eagan have been forfeited for nonpayment of taxes and were subsequently classified as nonconservation lands at the County Board meeting held on Novem- ber 10, 1981 . The county is informing the City of Eagan of these tax forfeit lands so that the City may review these parcels and determine if there is a public need for the City of Eagan to acquire these parcels The location of the two parcels within the City are referenced on the maps attached on pages through After staff review of the location of these parcels , it appeared that there would be no benefit to the City to acquire these parcels . It appears that there would be a greater benefit parcels to be combined with existing adjacent by allowing these p g �acent properties -for development purposes. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To designate Outlot B of 'Wilderness Run 5th Addition and the east 10 feet of the Harvey Addition as being nonconservation lands and authorize the sale of these properties by the county at public auction. EC BERNARD R LARSO • I COUNTY Y N,W. 1 /4 29 27, 23 DCOUNTY.CQUNTY.MIN• - ......... .. AUGUST, 1978 TY STATE ;--AID HIGHWAY N0. .., 26 _ SSS e ,o•i, _ � dp+'1• . g WO if I �I i t / --•caw.•-.. - ` - -Ba.S.;:•- STA• • - :. T - � E HIGHW + N0. 55 .. LOT 0 e.• LOT 0' LOT B \\ =COURT i V 2 'SALLY :po1MASK 7 . • z s :x. 9p .,g CIRCLE �•..... � A N.Wo 1 /4 SECe 227v �;3 -COUNTY ,o.zm ,ae >.of E T— „ STATE ,.� AID---N� i- Y HIGHWAY onao , . n°,• I w 1 sm e. 72 ] • ° Z ',, • 8'x s f l0 11 12g"E - 1 8fx ] . e �' s h I I s t .R n g at may— a.ao°— - I ,e• o e, R '• °)a'•'r >�",%' e.DD i]ew pip iin � mw I moo a>u0 ,00 1 f _ ii ___!f0___- - Kaa'Hoi[ \�"\.). ,+�•9�( a'`\",.+,16x•1] w-x n 8on:,-•>n:°ao,rm i._i _'teg x"�s;'♦ 8zIa ao p�>S 'J>'b♦. `�`•?M18•�, �.�sY. e6+'8 17 • •y f •:.-^g •_N r,eureEs),nea.oaiiE 8[_ I`Q.�J�:=� kg€_�{I ! �xox,Asv, a•'(oi[ y 1. °•! �]1• a hZ 12: _ .tEuo vpII. '•' y '"v •P ib ,.�t°•" + If .vt\,,; \ ' ^h M$�1O 11 i 4o s..\�. - '/ 10 og. ` s��8,.%/�.>y .t" \"ti zo'g°� �a s� • J•` ;� I nn °plp .�.6. )va cx+2 NED. ti�rrf °4 a\a d53. '� 7 •': s� :.STREET 'w' Y o�4b/ •e m,, E R �8 1 .� �e� :$ 21 t•- -- ____.4S k�-• a -�'6..__ '.'� P _.ti 6°$«s y. dY o ,e�Try r,Y a!°iE - _As•O . _22 . .xx R nIn e,xx.i♦ k *� o$a. r-� v�.sf>: S=�• [ - ff frs^�as.'JIKky •s i"e. S W 22 I FRIAR rR '.`NJ ♦ s Q _ °- �b ae zez xx 1.�; y� �� - _ so so I x FFFFS3 =o •� e?�w ;t,�' _ >oi>' a°o�.c x,s•a°'c S is•_N�sra.`� R gym. zo°o T g 3Ik 2g 23 ra\ �,b.{ /•7 2 )o, a.,"'>a.° If k,\\ E Baa z, 13 OIf '° 8 6 am m'c. R e,er)s'me[o° v M•.s,•zd°i aea Gz4 55 G,ii pn , °° 'x •$ . zbn A s w.c e^ _ ,l /6 �Z .s.x f Y m ' R—a'saa- EAST oo Y 1 ; �••,,. �� a er a.o..•w i8 E a• - ♦Z 2 R'W �oox .o°.x ,o o, soap f g 'g'U1 f 2• k� S f i O.' . x ',Z a • r�rzl>o '.r' e b !•x3 fiM S•7 8 g�W y 'S " �i ,foo oo Y 2 12 6'I� - g • $-�J% 1 8 S 2 R8 ''! • s- a N •'�' "•'zw'aaf-\�-^n' '/� ] - q •426 ) �• y k;._.:.8~� o � f 8• ,0= Y,10 ....- _ 8 sn u,z• ,�.,. g '� ,S 1s 8 "a& ,,,ss � u _ �.zx z Q$ m ee oxo noo g �,JI - c s arxo.r 26 ,.s•'s°' •. aastio,•r - 12 Xc•R •A`\.•n^ia• ZM r>'uat . )•'t"o", a e E MII ic � •!�:Ma..�p..o- ?vim// f . ., ,ry6 - 'I 3 15 14 13 A, fL. : ` I' „a�a +3• p p aax S S •4'�... p yt B 27 2 .._ F- k: 8 `_•— _ _=,s _ R )y E 1 'y'". t^- �- - �� e:r��' b•' O 2 3 0 �; EAST R BALSAM STREET Y. h� �' t� ox °^tw asxw a Zj s aep a 6•m • f as.ao e. >ze,,,en..•r 16 �..: , v�I ao L .°..- ey„sr:o•Ir6 . x , •' ::. SIS nn,,� y Agenda Information Memo December 10 1991 Page Six-B PROJECT 353 D. Project 353, T.H. 55 Utility Revisions/Extensions -- During 1982 , MnDOT will be upgrading T. H. 55 from Lawrence Avenue (Skyline Motel ) to the south intersection of T H. 149 (Skelly Station) . This upgrading is required in anticipation of traffic flows generated from the opening of -I-494 anticipated- during the fall of 1982. The present intersections of T. H. 149 with T. H. 55 will be redesigned with signal" installations' during this upcoming improvement period. In conjunction with this improvement to T. H. 55/149 by MnDOT, the City of Eagan has approximately 1,700 feet of water main within existing trunk highway right-of-way .that will have to be relocated/adjusted due to this proposed improvement. The cost of all utility adjustments will be the responsibility of the City of Eagan due to the fact that the City' s utilities are in the MnDOT trunk highway right-of-way by permit agreement During review of this proposed improvement to T. H. 55, the Public _Works Director has determined that certain sanitary sewer and storm sewer crossings should be installed at this time to avoid costly and extensive jacking construction procedures in the future. These crossings of T.H. 55 and 149 are required to provide ultimate sani- tary sewer and storm sewer service to Section 1 (old 'Dayton Hudson property) . Therefore, staff is requesting authorization to proceed with the preparation of a feasibility report detailing the costs associated with this project and its proposed source of revenue. BecauseMnDOTproposes to let the construction project on February 26 , 1982, it will be necessary to enter into a cost participation agreement so that this work can be accomplished as a part of their contract . Because of the short time frame , it ;is necessary that the City pass a<resolution requesting MnDOT to prepare a cost parti- cipation agreement to include this work. Once this agreement has been prepared; it will be brought back to the City for formal review and approval at that time period. It is thle "City' s intentionthat this feasibility report will be completed and reviewed by the Coun- cil prior to this cosh participation agreement being presented at a future date. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To authorize the prepara- tion of feasibility report #353 (T.H. 5'5 Utility Revisions/: Extensions ) , approve a resolution requesting MnDOT to prepare a cost participation agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said resolution. Agenda Information Memo ' December 10 1981 Page Seven< 1982 BUDGET & FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND USE A. 1982 Budget & Federal RevenueSharing Fund Use -- The 1982 Budget as .certified to Dakota County in October is in order for final adoption. The City Council has held several special budgetary meetings during the months of August and September and again in November to consider the general fund, public enterprise and federal revenue sharing expenditures proposed for. 1982. There were a number of budgetary adjustments made during those special meetings , and as a result of all budgetary considerations, the general fund budget is proposed at $3,287 ,130, the public enterprise budget at $1,746,480 and monies available for use through Federal Revenue Sharing is $129,882 for 1982. This represents a total City opera- ting budget in the amount of $5,163,492 . The summary data sheets outlining the proposed 1982 budget are enclosed on pages 21, through 40. . Upon approval of the 1982 budget , the detailed —nFormation including debt retirement obligations will be printed for distribution in early January 1982 . Presently, there is an uncertainy with the. State of Minnesota as to the amount of local government aid and homestead tax credit municipalities will receive in 1982 . The total for local government aid' and homestead tax credit anticipated in 1982 is $816 ,774. Please note a portion of the homestead tax credit is allocated to the debt retirement accounts The motion adopted at the November 17, 1981 Council meeting which reads as follows , "No further hiring of any personnel or acquisition of equipment or any expenditure of any City funds , budgeted or unbudgeted, except for those expenses necessary for the operation of the City will be allowed without express authority of the City Council until such time as the state aid funds and homestead tax credit funds for 1981 and 1982 cash flow ' have been determined," is and will be in effect with the adoption of the 1982 budget. This type of narrative will be inclu- in the comments traditionally written by the City Administrator as part of the budget document. The City Administrator will provide a handout for the audience and explain any parts of the 1982 budget where there might be questions . Also a copy of the 1982 budget is enclosed in the City wide newsletter to be distributed in the next several days . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing and consider approval of the 1982 general fund, public enterprise and federal revenue sharing use funds for 1982 . y 21 GENERAL FUND COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF REVENUES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 General Property Taxes $1 ,258,042 $1 ,497,095 $1 , 782 ,470 Licenses 41 ,900 49 ,100 44, 710 Permits 1043950 150, 960 1835950 Intergovernmental Revenue 567 ,394 628,533 8293460 Charges for Services 393900 32,150 85,100 Recreation Charges 18,000 22,040 Fines & Forfeits 22 ,000 25,000 40,000 Miscellaneous Revenues 28 ,100 27,500 31 ,000 Refunds & Reimbursements 142 ,992 224,000 268,400 Other 27,402 TOTAL GENERAL FUND $2,205 ,278 $2,679, 740 $3,2873130 ill 22 GENERAL FUND DETAIL OF REVENUES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES 3011 _Ad Valorem Taxes-Current $1 ,247 ,042 $1 ,461 ,095 $1 , 716,350 3015 Fiscal Disparities 11 ,000 36 ,000 66 ,120 $1 ,258,042 $1 ,497 ,095 $1;782,470 LICENSES 3110 Liquor $ 27 , 700 $ 323700 $ 29,600 3111 Beer _ 1 ,150 1 ,225 1 ,480 3112 Cigarette 850 900 900 3113 Mechanical 1 ,200 1 ,300 1 ,000 3114 Vending 2 ,000 3 ,000 3 ,000 3115 Garbage & Rubish Hauling 350 350 400 3116 Kennel 150 125 130 3117 Dog 6 ,500 6 ,500 6 ,500 3118 Amusement 1 ,200 3119 Gambling/Bingo/Raffle 300 3120 Other 2 ,000 3 ,000 200 $ 41 ,900 $ 49,100 $ 44,710 PERMITS 3210 Building $60,000 $90,000 $120,000 3211 Electrical 223000 30,000 32 ,500 3212 Plumbing 5 ,000 11 , 500 10,000 3213 Mechanical 10,000 11 , 500 10,000 3214 Sign 6 ,000 6 ,000 6 ,000 3215 Trailer 300 210 200 3216 Well 100 100 100 3217 Cesspool 100 100 100 3218 Gravel Pit 200 250 300 3219 Excavating 250 500 1 ,000 3220 Conditional Use/Special Use 2, 500 3221 Water Softener 650 3222 Utility 300 3223 Tree Cutting 100 3230 Other 1 ,000 800 200 $ 104,950 $ 150,960 $ 183 ,950 Z 3 GENERAL FUND DETAIL OF REVENUES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE 3310 _Federal Grants $ 21 ,046 3340 State Grants 11 ,800 3345 Local Government Aid 338,548 $ 328, 978 $ . 356 ,380 3346 Attached Machinery Aid 5,370 53960 3347 Homestead Credit 120,000 200,000 380,520 3348 MSA Maintenance 273000 24,945 25 ,000 3350 Shade Tree Disease Program 5,000 16,000 5 ,000 3551 Police Town Aid 44,000 53 ,240 56 ,600 $ 567 ,394 $ 628,533 $ 829,460 CHARGES FOR SERVICES 3411 Variance Fees $ 500 $ 550 $ 600 3412 Platting Fees 5,000 5 ,500 53000 3413 Rezoning Fees 2 ,600 2,300 2,500 3414 Property Splitting Fees 600 1,000 13000 3415 Returned Check Fees 100 3416 IDR Bond Fees 2 ,000 2,000 3417 Dog Impound & Kennel Fees 3,000 3,000 2,500 3419 Burglar Alarm Fees 3 ,000 3,000 3,000 3420 I .G.H. Fire Dept . Dispatching 9 ,000 93000 3421 Public Safety Fees 200 3422 Plan Checks 400 60,000 3425 Assessment Searches3 ,000 3 , 500 3,500 3430 Sale of Printed Material u 13200 1 ,200 1 ,500 3440 Other Fees & Charges 2 ,000 100 200 3445 Permit Surcharge 10,000 600 1 ,000 3446 Administrative Fee-SAC / Collections 2 ,000 $ 39 ,900 $ 32 ,150 $ 85,000 RECREATION CHARGES Recreation Fees $ 18 ,000 $ 223040 $ 18,000 $ 22,040 FINES & FORFEITS 3610 Court Fines & Forfeits $ 22 ,000 $ 253000 $ 40,000 $ 223000 $ 25 ,000 $ 40,000 a-4 GENERAL FUND DETAIL OF REVENUES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES 3810 Interest on Investments $ 20,000 $ 15,000 $ 15 ,000 3821 -Building Rent 73200 10,300 10,000 3840 Sale of City Property 200 1 ,600 3 ,500 3850 Contributions & Donations 200 500 500 3880 Other Revenue 500 100 2 ,000 $ 28,100 $ 27,500 $ 31,000 REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 3910 Project Administration $ 105,000 $ 80,000 $ 100,000 3912 Water Administration 80,000 89 ,600 3913 Sewer Administration 403000 44,800 3914 Insurance 5 ,000 5 ,000 5,000 3915 Planning 4,000 4,000 4,000 3916 Engineering 10,500 103000 10,000 3917 Legal 10,000 3920 Other 183492 5,000 5 ,000 $ 142 ,992 $ 224,000 $ 268,400 OTHER 3980 Transfer from Reserves $ 27 ,402 $ 27,402 TOTAL GENERAL FUND $2,205,278 $2,679 , 740 $3,287 ,130 as GENERAL FUND COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 GENERAL GOVERNMENT O1. Mayor & Council $ 23,943 $ 24,980 $ 28 ,150 02 Administration 85,010 107,290 Clerk/Elections 17,036 33 ,910 Financial Administration 2373464 Auditin 10,000 05 FinanceClerk/Elections 149, 710 241 , 760 06 Legal 50,000 60,000 08 Planning & Zoning 453288 53 ,420 70,690 09 General Government Buildings 46 ,301 39 ,850 33,680 $ 380,032 $ 436,880 $ 541,570 PUBLIC SAFETY 11 Police $ 8803843 $1 ,0163940 $1 ,198 ,240 12 Fire 139 ,816 197 ,060 212 ,960 13 Protective Inspections 975202 111 ,970 155,090 14 Animal Control 153471 17 ,460 21 ,880 15 Civil Defense 1 ,675 1 800 423170 16 Ambulance Service 13 ,000 21 ,060 22 ,800 $1,148,007 $1 ,365,290 $1,653 ,140 PUBLIC WORKS 21 Public Works/Engineering $ 563789 $ 167,310 $ 203,830 22 Streets & Highways 321 , 287 373, 550 423,610 $ 378,076 $ 5403860 $ 6273440 PARKS & RECREATION 31 Parks & Recreation $ 2793163 $ 304,470 $ 385, 300 32 Tree Conservation 203000 325240 44,680 $ 299,163 $ 336, 710 $ 429,980 OTHER 41 Contingency $ 33 ,500 $ 33 ,500 TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES $2,205 ,278 $2 ,679, 740 $3 ,287,130 2� • • GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE BREAKDOWN BY MAJOR OBJECT CLASSIFICATION BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 01 Mayor & Council Personal Services $ 20,570 $ 20,500 $ 23,210 Other Charges & Services 3,373 4,480 4,940 $ 23,943 $ 24,980 $ 28,150 02 Administration Personal Services $ 67 ,450 $ 83 ,530 Supplies, Repair & Maintenance 500 1 ,000 Other Charges & Services 16 ,860 22 ,510 Capital Outlay 200 250 $ 85,010 $ 107 ,290 Clerk/Elections Personal Service's $ 6 ,500 $ 28,620 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 1 ,080 700 Other Charges & Services 1 ,631 2 ,190 Capital Outlay 7 ,825 2 ,400 $ 17,036 $ 33,910 Financial Administration Personal Services $ 154, 365 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 9 ,850 Other Charges & Services 59, 749 Capital Outlay 33000 Other 10,500 $ 23.7 ,464 Auditing Other Charges & Services $ 10,000 $ 10,000 05 Finance/Clerk/Elections Personal Services $ 80,480 $ 140, 700 Supplies, Repair & Maintenance 7 ,000 8 ,250 Other Charges & Services 625230 923310 Capital Outlay 500 $ 149,710 $241 ,760 a- 0 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE BREAKDOWN BY MAJOR OBJECT CLASSIFICATION BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 GENERAL GOVERNMENT (cont. ) 06 Legal Other Charges & Services $ 50,000 $ 603000 $ 50,000 $ 60,000 08 Planning & Zoning Personal Services $ 27,276 $ 38 ,140 $ 51,000 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 1 975 600 950 Other Charges & Services 11 ,937 13,930 17 , 740 Capital Outlay 1 ,100 750 1 ,000 Other 4,000 $ 45,288 $ 53,420 $ 70,690 09 General Government Buildings j Personal Services $ 34,142 $ 19,520 $ 18, 790 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 3,000 1 ,250 1 , 750 Other Charges & Services 7 ,959 18,580 12 ,690 Capital Outlay 700 500 450 Other 500 $ 463301 $ 39,850 $ 33,680 TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT $ 380,032 $ 436,880 $ 541 ,570 PUBLIC SAFETY 11 Police Personal Services $ 692 ,462 $ 829 ,870 $ 983 ,040 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 53,198 58,600 723230 Other Charges & Services 107,683 85,580 89 ,630 Capital Outlay 27,400 42,890 53 ,340 Other 100 $ 880,843 $1 ,016,940 $1,198,240 12 Fire Personal Services $ 78 ,104 $ 132220 $ 139 ,650 Supplies, Repair & Maintenance 11 ,800 10,400 14,560 Other Charges & Services 383287 38, 540 40,500 Capital Outlay 11 ,625 153900 18,250 2g $ 139 ,816 $ 197,060 $ 212,960 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE BREAKDOWN BY MAJOR OBJECT CLASSIFICATION BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 PUBLIC SAFETY (cont. ) 13 Protective Inspections Personal Services $ 54,698 $ 73 , 540 $ 103 ,640 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 3 ,925 4, 300 5 ,300 Other Charges& Services 11 ,179 323280 435050 Capital Outlay 1 ,400 1 ,850 3,100 Other 26 ,000 $ 97,202 $ 111 ,970 $ 155,090 14 Animal Control Personal Services $ 7,401 $ 8,500 $ 135800 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 23450 2 ,530 2 ,370 Other Charges & Services 5 ,620 5 ,430 5 ,410 Capital Outlay 1 ,000 1 ,800 r $ 15,471 $ 17,460 $ 23 ,380 15 Civil Defense Supplies , Repair & Maintenance $ 75 $ 150 $ 250 Other Charges & Services 1 ,600 650 200 Capital Outlay 413720 $ 1 ,675 $ 800 $ 42,170 16 Ambulance Service Other Charges & Services $ 13 ,000 $ 21 ,060 $ 22 ,800 $ 133000 $ 21 ,060 $ 22,800 TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY $1 ,148,007 $1 ,365,290 $1,654,640 PUBLIC WORKS 21 Public Works/Engineering Personal Services $ 37 ,683 $ 148 ,100 $ 176 ,380 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 340 2 ,100 2 ,980 Other Charges & Services 5 ,536 17 ,110 193010 Capital Outlay 2 , 730 5 ,460 Other 10, 500 $ 56 ,789 $ 167 ,310 $ 203 ,830 2 C GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE BREAKDOWN BY MAJOR OBJECT CLASSIFICATION BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 PUBLIC WORKS (cont. ) 22 Streets & Highways Personal Services $ 146,558 $ 177,680 $ . 204,160 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 25,550 76 ,540 873420 Other Charges & Services 146 ,629 107,330 125,030 Capital Outlay 23550 12,000 7 ,000 $ 3215287 $ 373,550 $ 423 ,610 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS $ 378,076 $ 540,860 $ 627,440 PARKS & RECREATION 31 Parks & Recreation Personal Services $ 191,956 $ 221 ,160 $ 272 ,350 Supplies , Repair` & Maintenance 34,185 35, 980 46 ,940 Other Charges & Services 373930 33,930 46 ,310 Capital Outlay 9,600 13,400 193230 Other 5 ,492 470 $ 279,163 $ 304,470 $ 385,300 32 Tree Conservation Personal Services $ 12,544 $ 20,810 $ 29,520 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 2 ,650 2 ,380 2, 710 Other Charges & Services 4,806 9 ,050 1 ,800 Capital Outlay 10,650 $ 20,000 $ 32 ,240 $ 44,680 TOTAL PARKS & RECREATION $ 299 ,163 $ 336 , 710 $ 429 ,980 OTHER 41 Contingency Other $ 33 ,500 $ 33 ,500 TOTAL OTHER $ 33 ,500 TOTAL GENERAL FUND $2 ,205,278 $2,679, 740 $3,287 ,130 30 PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF REVENUES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 61 Water Metered Sales $ ; 375 ,000 $ 500 ,000 $ 675 ,000 Connection Charges 60 ,000 150,000 91 ,500 Other Income 54,150 55 ,000 . . 83 , 390 $ 489 ,150 $ 705,000 $ 849,890 62 Sewer Metered Charges $ 508 ,000 $ 665 ,000 $ 800 ,000 - Connection Charges 50,000 50 ,000 30 ,000 Other Income 158 ,020 23 ,600 59 ,590 $ 716,020 $ 738,600 $ 889,590 63 Street Lighting Customer Billed Charges $ 4,000 $ 4,400 $ 7 ,000 ' $ 4,000 $ 4,400 $ 7 ,000 TOTAL PUBLIC UTILITIES $1 ,209 ,170 $1,448,000 $1 ,746,480 3l PUBLIC UTILITIES COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF EXPENSES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 61 Water Personal Services $ 153,724 $ 108 ,630 $ 132 ,390 Supplies , Repair & Maintenance 47 ,355 33 ,320 42 ,150 Other Charges & Services 1313174 142,900 . 171 ,330 Capital Outlay 44,860 3,660 7 ,600 Other 112 ,037 416 ,490 496 ,420 $ 4893150 $ 7053000 $ 8491,890 62 Sewer Personal Services $ . 753713 $ 56 ,160 $ 65 ,490 Supplies, Repair & Maintenance 13 ,255 83890 11 ,500 Other Charges & Services 339,944 604,890 7193850 Capital Outlay 25,710 18 ,470 7 ,000 Other 261 ,398 50,190 85, 750 $ 716 ,020 $ 7381600 $ 889 ,590 " 63 Street Lighting Other Charges & Services $ 4,000 $ 4,400 $ 7 ,000 $ 4,000 $ 4,400 $ 7 ,000 TOTAL PUBLIC UTILITIES $132093170 $1 ,448,000 $1 ,7463480 32- PUBLIC UTILITIES DETAIL OF REVENUES BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 61 Water 3711 _ Water Sales $ 375 ,000 $ 500,000 $ 675 ,000 3712 Water Penalties 3 ,000 3 ,200 6 ,750 3713 Water Connection Permits 23600 3 ,500 13890 3714 Water Customer Service Taps 300 300 600 3716 Sale of Property-Meters 19 ,,500 30 ,000 183000 3717 Sale of Property-Copperhorns 13700 3,000 4,800 3718 Sale of Property-Other 400 400 400 3719 Water Turn Off & On Fees 200 200 200 3720 Water Bill Collection Fees 200 250 - 400 3721 Hydrant Permits 150 150 150 3810 Interest on Investments 13,000 13 ,000 50,000 3865 Connection Charges-Water 60,000 150,000 91 ,500 3920 Refunds & Reimbursements-Other 13000 13000 200 Non-Revenue 12 ,100 $ 4893150 $ 705,000 $ 849,890 62 Sewer 1 3741 Sewer Service $ 508,000 $ 6653000 $ 800,000 3742 Sewer Penalties 33000 3 ,200 6 ,900 3743 Sewer Connection Permits 23600 2 ,600 1,890 3744 Sewer Customer Service Taps 400 200 300 3745 Sewer Inspection Fees 20 500 200 3810 Interest on Investments 163000 16,000 50,000 3822 Equipment Rental 100 100 3866 Connection Charges-Sewer 50,000 50 ,000 30,000 3920 Refunds & Reimbursements-Other 1 ,000 200 Non-Revenue 136 ,000 $ 716 ,020 $ 7383600 $ 889 ,590 63 Street Lighting 3771 Street Lighting Service Charges 4,000 $ 4,400 $ 7 ,000 $ 43000 $ 4,400 $ 7 ,000 TOTAL TUBLIC UTILTIES $1 ,209,170 $1 ,448 ,000 $1 ,746 ,480 33 61 WATER BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 PERSONAL SERVICES $ 153, 724 $ 108 ,630 $ 132 ,390 SUPPLIES , REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 47 ,355 33 ,320 42 ,150 OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 131 ,174 142 ,900 171 ,330 CAPITAL OUTLAY 44,860 3,660 7 ,600 OTHER 112 ,037 416 ,490 4965420 $ 489 ,150 $ 705,000 $ 849,890 Account PERSONAL SERVICES 4110 Salaries & Wages-Regular $ 95,510 4112 Overtime-Regular 9 ,560 4130 Salaries & Wages-Temporary 2 ,600 4140 Accrud Retirement Benefits 13 ,140 4150 Accrued Insurance Benefits 115580 $ 132 ,390 SUPPLIES, REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 4210 Office Supplies $ 1 ,000 4211 Printed Material 1 ,000 4220 Operating Supplies-General 2 ,000 4221 Motor Fuels 85500 4222 Lubricants & Additives 1,500 4223 Cleaning Supplies 200 4224 Clothing & Personal Equipment 350 4225 Shop Materials 200 4226 Chemicals & Chemical Projects 12 ,000 4230 Repair & Maintenance Supplies 6 ,000 4231 Equipment Parks 8,000 4233 Building Repairs 1,000 4240 Small Tools 400 42 ,150 OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 4310 Professional Services-General $ 500 4314 Professional Services-Auditing 5,000 4321 Postage 2 ,500 4322 Telephone 500 4323 Radio Units Communication 400 4332 Use of Personal Auto 500 4350 -General Printing & Binding 200 4360 Insurance 7 ,780 4371 Electricity 11 ,200 4375 Electricity-Wells/Booster Stations 89 ,600 4376 Gas Service 20,000 4379 Waste Removal 200 4381 Automotive Equipment Repair 700 34 0 61 WATER (Cont. ) 4382 Other Equipment Repair $ 22 ,000 4383 Buildings Repair 5 ,500 4386 Communication System Maintenance 400 4393 Machinery & Equipment Rental 200 4395 Protection Services Rental 400 4410 Miscellaneous 1 ,500 4411 Conferences and Schools 2 ,000 4412 _ Dues and Subscriptions 150 4413 Licenses and Taxes S0 4415 Reference Materials 50 $ . 171 ,330 CAPITAL OUTLAY 4580 Mobile Equipment $ 7 ,600 7 ,600 OTHER - 4710 Permanent Transfer $ 89 ;600 4720 Transfer to Reserves 384,020 4840 Merc' andise for Resale 22 ,800 496 ,420 $ 849,890 3S 62 SEWER BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 PERSONAL SERVICES $ 75 , 713 $ 56 ,160 $ 65 ,490 SUPPLIES , REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 13,255 8,890 11,500 OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 339,944 604,890 719 ,850 CAPITAL OUTLAY 25 ,710 18,470 7 ,000 OTHER 261 ,398 50,190 85 ,750 $ 716,020 $ 738,600 $ 889,590 Account PERSONAL SERVICES 4110 Salaries & Wages-Regular $ 47 ,050 4112 Overtime-Regular 4,710 4140 Accrued Retirement Benefits 63320 4150 Accrued Insurance Benefits 7 ,410 $653490 SUPPLIES, REPAIR & MAINTENANCE 4210 Office Supplies $ 500 4211 Printed Material 600 4220 Operating 'Supplies-General 500 4221 Motor Fuels 3,000 4222 Lubricants & Additives 1 ,000 4224 Clothing & Personal Equipment 350 4226 Chemicals & Chemical Products 350 4230 Repair & Maintenance Supplies 1 ,000 4231 Equipment Parks 3,200 4233 Building Repairs 1 ,000 11 ,500 OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES 4314 Professional Services-Auditing $ 5 ,000 4321 Postage 2,500 4322 Telephone 1,200 4323 Radio Units Communication X200 4332 Use of Personal Auto 500 4350 General Printing & Publishing 200 4360 Insurance 2 , 790 4371 Electricity 2 ,000 4374 Electricity-Lift Stations 500 4376 Gas Service 4,000 4379 Waste Removal 680,960 4381 Automotive Equipment Repair 1000 4382 Other Equipment Repair 9 ,500 4386 Communication System Maintenance X200 4393 Machinery & Equipment Rental 100 Aa 62 SEWER (Cont. ) 4395 Protection Service Rental $ 2 ,000 4410 Miscellaneous 1 ,500 4411 Conferences & Schools 1 ,500 4412 Dues & Subscriptions 50 4413 Licenses & Taxes 120 4415 Reference Materials 30 $ 719 ,850 CAPITAL OUTLAY 4580 Mobile Equipment $ 7 ,000 7 ,000 OTHER 4710 Permanent Transfer $ 44,800 4720 Transfer to Reserves 40 ,950 85 ,750 $ 889,590 i 37 63 STREET LIGHTING BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 1980 1981 1982 OTHER SERVICES & CHARGES $ 4,000 $ 4,400 $ 7 ,000 $ 4,000 $ 4,400 $ 7 ,000 Account OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES 4372 Electricity-Street Lights $ 7 ,000 $ 7 ,000 $ -- 7,000 3$ 12 FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND The original "State and Local . Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972" was signed into law in October, 1972 . The act provided for distribution of federal tax dollars to local units of government for a limited five-year period. Each year the total funding available was adjusted upward to offset inflation. This original Fiscal Assistance Bill expired on December 31 , 1976 . A new Revenue Sharing Bill was _approved that extended the program to local municipalities through September 30, 1980. In December of 1980 , the . .bill was again amended and the program was extended for three years until the end of the fiscal year 1983 (September 30, 1983 ) . It should be noted that President Reagan has been proposing reductions in revenue sharing, and even though it is an entitlement program, both current and future levels of funding are in doubt . Revenue Sharing Funds received by the City through December 1980 and $90 ,702 of the 1981 allocation have been used to purchase land and for the construction of the police facility as well as for the construction of the public works garage . The balance available for 1982 is budgeted as follows : Payment for Civil Defense Sirens (4) $38,826 Transfer for Capital Outlay and/or Operations 129 ,882 39 FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING Receipts Cummulative • Disburse- Cash Year Allotment Interest Total ments Balance 1973 72 , 733 2,571 75 ,304 98 $75 ,206 1974 43 ,531 5,523 49,054 121 ,368 2 ,892 1975 96 ,581 2,362 98,943 6,265 95 ,570 1976 89 , 320 6,416 95, 736 4,520 186 , 786 1977 87 ,878 12 ,478 100,356 63,450 223,692 1978 Cash 99,270 8,195 107 ,465 472 ,863 [141 , 706] Revenues Cummulative Expendi- Fund Allotment Interest Total tures Balance 1978 Accrual 26 ,020 -0- 26 ,020 49,629 [ 165,315] 1979 106 ,365 -0- 106,365 [5,086] [ 53,864] 1980 116 ,858 [ 1 ,278] 115,580 291863 31 ,853 1981 128 , 583 -0- 128 ,583 90,702 69, 734 1982 98 ,974- -0- 98 ,974 168 ,708 -0- Includes only the entitlement through September 30 , 1982 . Funding for the 1983 fiscal year at the same level would increase this number by approximately $33,000 . Agenda Information Memo December 10 1981 Page Eight STORM SEWER EASEMENT VACATION B. Vacation of a Portion of Storm Sewer Easement on Development Property Near T.H. 13 & Robin Lane -- During the construction of the Blackhawk Lake outlet under Project 297, a storm ':sewer utility easement had to be -obtained for the storm sewer pipe. The original plans provided for the location of A junction manhole to be located .within trunk highway right-of-way on the north side of T.H. 13 near the extension of Robin Lane. Because MnDOT requiredthis manhole to be located outside of trunk highway right-of-way, a new easement had to be obtained. to provide for -a slight shift in alignment. Subsequently, a small, triangular portion of the recently obtained storm sewer utility easement has beenrequested to be vacated. All notices have been placed, in the legal papers and the City staff has received no objections of this vacation from any other public utility. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing and authorize the vacation of a partial storm sewer utility easement adjacent to T. H. 13 near the extension of Robin Lane. PROJECT 247 C. Final Reassessment Hearing for Project 247 (Alexander Road) City Administrator Hedges and City Attorney Hauge are recommending that action ;be taken to continue this item until' 9 : 30 p.m. on the agenda. Apparently, the applicant plans to have his appraiser and attorney present to discuss. the assessment appeal with the City Council . Because this item might be lengthy,' it would be unfair to residents present on the other items of business to wait through this type of proceedin All parties have been notified gg and are `in 'agreement with the 9: 30 p.m. time. Alexander Road was constructed to provide access for the R. L. Johnson 'plat' located on the north end of the Sibley Terminal Industrial Park by T. H. 13. When the final assessment hearing was held on September 15, 1981 , the developer submitted 'a formal objection and subsequent appeal of assessments associated with this project. Therefore, in order to insure that the City follows the proper procedure prescribed,. by law pertaining to the levy of special assessments , that original assessment hearing was cancelled and rescheduled for 'December 15 1981 to allow the City adequate time to prepare proper appraisals of the property to prove benefit- as related to the referenced improvement. The developer has also requested that assessments associated with this roadway be spread against the Eagan-13 Industrial Park in addition to the R. L. John- son plat. All properties involved are under the same ownership 41 Agenda Information Memo December 10 1981 Page Nine of Mr. R. L. Johnson. Per his request , the assessments were spread on a proportionate ratio based on the number of square footage contained within each respective lot . A copy of the information pertaining to the final reassessment hearing is enclosed on page for your information. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To continue the , reassess- ment hearing for Project 247 until 9: 30 p.m. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the reassessment hearing and either approve or deny the proposed assessments for the reassessment hearing considering Project 247 (Alexander Road) . } • FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 247 SUBDIVISION/AREA: R. L. Johnson 1st Addition FINAL R kSSESSMENT HEARING: December 15, 1981 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: WATER RATES SANITARY RATES Area Area Laterals Laterals QService Ej Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM STREETS Area Grading/Gravel Base (� Laterals g $11 08 to$1.1 Surfacing � 9.29 3,952.73/lot Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 4 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 RATE OF INTEREST: 801/ TOTAL AbtOUNT ASSESSED: $184 988 19 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 79-16 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 21 1978 � 3 Agenda Information Memo December 10, 1981 Page Ten PRELIMINARY PLAT & VARIANCE - LONE OAK HEIGHTS ADDITION A. Midwestern Association, Orrin. Aune, for Preliminary Plat Approval of Lone Oak Heights & for a Variance to Exceed the Lot Coverage as Described -- A public hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at their regular meeting held on Sep- tember 22 , 1981 to consider a preliminary plat entitled ' Lone Oak Heights consisting of approximately 145 dwelling units and a variance to exceed the lot coverage requirements in a residential district. The Advisory Planning Commissionrecommended approval of the preliminary plat subject to fifteen ( 15) different conditions . A copy of those minutes are enclosed for your reference on pages through ._.. . Also enclosed is a 'copy of the City Planner' s report which was prepared and distributed as a part of a previous City Council packet. However, due to the length of time since original consideration was given at the October 20, 1981 Council meeting, another copy is enclosed on pages - 47- -, through $"7 for your reference. ` Also enclosed is a- letter requesting certain"" F information from ,the Timberline Association and a response to that letter as prepared by Mayor Blomquist, found on pages SJ through At the October 20., 1981 City Council meeting, a motion wade, seconded and all members voted in favor except Councilmem- ber Wachter who =voted no that read as follows , "The motion to cone- time the consideration of the application until November' 17, 1981 and that the Council authorize the hiring of an appraiser to prepare a brief report as to the probable cost incurred' by the City, in the event that the Council should determine that the portion of the property should be down zoned to a lower density from an R- 4 to an R-3, and further, to determine the additional cost of re- zoning to R-1 or some R-2 buffer areas;, further, to allow the staff to continue to study the project including the density' determination; further to determine whether to include the private street in determining, the density of the project." The appraisal work was not performed prior to the November 17 Council meeting, and there- fore a ' second continuance was given until the December 15, 1981' meeting. Enclosed is a copy of the appraisal found on pages b4 through -7 2_ for your review. Also enclosed is a copy of a memorandum prepare by the City Planner that addresses the density determination and private street, found on pages _ __� through "7he City Administrator has received a copy o —� T ' a blank petition from the president of they` Timberline 'Association, Fran Winkel , a copy of which is enclosed on page , and apparently, she is circulating, at the ' request of a num er of residents in that addition, this petition to various affected areas around the proposed Lone Oak Heights Addition. A signed petition will be available for distribution as a part of the administrative packet on Monday. Also enclosed on ,pages 7z,- ,- through is a copy Agenda Information Memo December 10 1981 Page Eleven of a letter from Tom Nikolai regarding the proposed zoning change in Martin Shield' s property. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON , THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission and/or any addi- tional action on the appraisal and other studies as prepared by the City staff. Special Note It is the option of the City Council if there are changes proposed by the developer and/or residents that the 'plan be referred back to the Advisory Planning Commission for additional review.. Also, if the petition is receivedsimilar to the blank copy, the 'City Council" may wish to defer this to legal counsel for determination regarding the question raised in the petition. These are options to be considered depending on discussion at the City Council meeting. 4�� LONE OAK HEIGHTS ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCE C The public hearing regarding the application of Midwestern Association- Orrin Aune for preliminary plat approval of Lone Oak Heights, consisting of 14.09 acres and containing 145 dwelling units, together with an application for variance to exceed lot coverage in residential district was next convened. Mr. Aune was present as were other representatives for the applicant. Mr. Aune stated a private road is planned between Lone Oak Road and Towerview Road within the development, although the staff recommended that it be a public street according to city public street standards. Mr. Aune agreed with the street being built to city standards but requested that set back requirements be waived. It was noted further that the density permitted would be less if the street were upgraded to public street standards and with required ordi- nance set backs. Mr. Aune stated that NSP would relocate the gas main through the property and that the applicant had agreed with the relocation at the developers' cost. It was further noted that Dakota County will not allow access from the development to Pilot Knob Road and that only Towerview and Lone Oak Road could be used for access. Mr. Aune showed a revised plan which changed the location of parking and there were concerns by staff as to the location of the garages in relation to parking. A large number of affected residents from the general area were present and objected to certain aspects of the development, including the impact on Pilot Knob School and the addi- tional traffic on Lone Oak Road. Mr. Aune stated there would be two home- owner's associations and staff was concerned about the private street owned and maintained by two different associations with potential problems. Mr. Aune further stated that the land is not feasible for underground parking because the condominium buildings are not large enough to be economically feasible for underground parking. There were also objections to the density proposed and the fact that the adjoining playground is already heavily used. Member Hall recommended that the Planning Commission consider recommending approval, subject to compliance with the ordinance requirements on density, and that the interior street be upgraded to city standards with allowing set- back deviations because of the existing planned development. Two tot lots are being proposed in the project. A representative from Banco Mortgage was present and stated that FHA may require the street to be dedicated to the City and further stated that under FHA requirements, that sales could not initially be made to non-resident owners. There was also a suggestion that a looped street be installed in the townhouse area. After considerable discussion, ' Hall moved, Krob seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application, subjecct to the following: 1. That the parking area on the revised plan be reviewed, including the parking near the condominium buildings and that the parking throughout the complex comply with ordinance requirements and staff recommendations. 2. That the total number of units comply with density requirements for the specific zoning on the entire parcel. 3• That in the event that the planned development is not completed within three years from the time of final approval by the council, with the potential for extension of time at the discretion of the City, that the property then revert to Agricultural zoning. ( 4. If the site plan is approved, the gas main shall be relocated so as \_. not to interfere with any of the proposed buildings. 4�9 APC Minutes C September 22, 1981 5. The townhouses shall be relocated to meet the setback requirements in accordance with Ordinance 52. 6. The plat shall be subject to all easements as required by City staff. 7. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be approved by the City Staff. 8. A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by City staff and an adequate landscape bond shall be submitted with the final plat and not re- leased until one year after the landscaping has been completed. 9. The developer shall provide two tot lots for the pre-schoolers within the development. 10. The developer shall construct a trail to city standards from Pilot Knob Road to Pilot Knob School between the condominium and townhouse develop- ment as determined by the City staff. 11. The developer shall provide the City with a copy of the homeowner's association Articles and By-laws for City review. 12. A development agreement and planned development agreement shall be approved prior to approval of the final plat of Lone Oak Heights. 13. The plat shall be reviewed by the Dakota County Plat Commission because the plat abuts two county roads. 14. The developer shall provide the necessary drainage and utility easements throughout the addition for water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer lines as determined by staff. 15. The developer shall install a street, to city standards, from Lone Oak Road to Towerview, through the development that would allow for future dedication to the City as a standard public street in the event the mortgage lender requires dedication or the event the city determines it should be dedicated for proper maintenance; further that the street setback provisions not be required. It was also noted that a number of other variances would be required under the proposal including reducing the number of units in both the condomi- nium and townhouse areas, the set-backs along Pilot Knob Road and the total square footage for the mix that is proposed. All members voted in favor except Wilkins who voted no. It was suggested that the developers meet with the area residents informally, prior to consideration at the next council meeting, and Mr. Aune agreed with the proposal. RAVINE PLAZA - REZONING, PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCE The public hearing regarding the application of Amcon Corporation and Patrick Gannon to rezone approximately 19 acres from agricultural to. PD 40 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIM MRY PLAT AND VARIANCE - LONE OAK HEI(ZpS APPLICANT: I-TIE ESTERN ASSOCIATION - Orrin Aune LOCATION: NE a OF 7HE NE 4 OF SECTION 9 EXISTING ZONING: PD (PLANNED DEVELOP PENT) TATl'T'H R-3 (RESIDETdTIAL DATE OF T IINHOLTSE AND R-4 (RESIDENTIAL P'NLTIPLE) UNDERLYING; ZONING PUBLIC HEARING: SEPTEMBER 22, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: SEPTEMBER 16, 1981 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLA,,eM APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The first application submitted is a request for a preliminary plat, Lone Oak Heights, which consists of approximately 14.09 acres and contains 145 dwelling units. The second application is submitted is a request to exceed the lot cov- erage requirement for a residential district. ZONING AND LAND USE Presently, the parcel is zoned R-3 (Residential Townhouse District) and R-4 (Residential Multiple District) with a PD (Planned Development) zoning over- laying the entire parcel. The land use guide designates the 14 acre parcel as an R-3 land use (Mixed Residential) with a density of 6-12 dwelling units per acre. The proposed development will consist of a net density of 10 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the land use guide plan. BACKGROUND As you may recall, in September of 1979 there was an application submitted for this parcel. The development consisted of an 80 acre apartment con Alex and 62 units of townhouse for a total of 142 dwelling units. This preliminary plat was approved by the City of Eagan in 1979. It is the staff's understanding that this development did not proceed, and new people have purchased the sit)- ject parol. Therefore, the applicant is requesting to re-design the plat than what was originally approved in 1979. CCM EWS The applicant is proposing to develop the parcel with condominium and town- houses. The proposed plan will consist of 2 condominium buildings with 42 dwelling units each and 61 townhouse and quadrarninium units. As stated earlier, the parcel is divided into two areas according to the zon- ing. The R-3 parcel contains 8.2 net acres and would allow 60-61 dwelling units. The applicant is proposing to develop 61 dwelling units. The R-4 47 CITY OF EAGAN =WESTERN ASSOCIATIM PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCE - DONE OAK HEICIM SEPTEIMER 22, 1981 PAGE TV parcel contains 5.4 net acres, and the density is determined on a sliding scale. The condminiLun buildings will be 3-story buildings which will contain 18, 1- bedroom dwelling units, 18, 2-bedrocin dwelling units and 6, 3-bedroom dwelling units. The total square footage for this mix is 134,160 square feet. The ap- plicant is short 32,555 square feet of land for this mix as proposed. If the developer would construct underground parking, he could gain 300 square feet per dwelling unit for underground parking which would reduce the amount of land he is over to 6,055 square feet, or which is approximately 2 dwelling units over the maxi_= allowed under Ordinance 52. Belga is a density chart describing each of the parcels. PPI USE ACRES LOT COVERAGE 'UNITS PROPOSED REQUIRED UNITS ALLOWED PARKING PARKING Condominiums 5.4 22.9% 84 81 216 210 Townhouse 8.2 18.40 61 60 174 128 Parcel No. 1 - Condominium Apartre1ts - The applicant is proposing 2, 42-unit condominium buildings. The applicant is proposing detached garages for the covered parking space requirements. In review of this parking plan, the appli- cant is proposing outside parking spaces in front of the garage spaces. This will be a conflict with the overall parking circulation if parking is allowed in front of the 84 garage spaces. Staff is suggesting that the applicant revise the parking plan to provide the required outside parking spaces so they will not be in conflict with the garage parking. One suggestion is that if underground parking would be provided vs. the outside detached garages, the applicant would gain density credits for the underground parking. This density credit calcula- tion would reduce the excess amount of land needed dawn to the 6,055 square feet, which would then be approximately 2 dwelling units. As stated above, the appli- cant is proposing 84 dwelling units on this parcel. If the applicant would re- duce the dwelling units to 82, or 80, and provide underground parking, the appli- cant could come into ccntpliance with Ordinance 52 for this proposed site plan. Parcel No. 2 - Townhouse Development - Parcel 2 is proposed to be constructed with 16 auadraminium dwelling units and 45 townhouse dwelling units. In review- ing the site plan, it appears that the variance would be required for the set- back along Pilot Knob Road. The setbacks for Pilot Knob Road are 501 . The ap- plicant is proposing 40' in some locations. Also, in reviewing the setback be- tween units it appears the setback drops down to 20' vs. the required tween e ppe g 30' in Ordinance 52. In calculating the densities, staff calculates a net acreage of 8.2 acres in C which 60 townhouse, or quadrami.nium units, could be constructed. The applicant is proposing to construct 61 dwelling units. Therefore, it appears that the applicant is one dwelling unit over the ordinance requirement. CITY OF EAGAN MIDWESTERN ASSOCIATION PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VAi2TANCE - LCJNE OAK HEIGHTS SEPTEMBER 22, 1981 PACM THREE The access to the property will be fram Lone Oak Road on the north and Towerview Drive on the south. The applicant is proposing to dedicate the northerly 30' of right-of-way which will be dedicated for Towerview Drive. There will be one access off of Lone Oak and Towerview Drive which will be connected by a private street providing access to the development. The applicant is proposing no in- gress or egress onto Pilot Knob Road. There is a gas main which crosses the northerly portion of the property. If the development proposal is approved as presented, the applicant will be re- quired to either relocate the northerly 42-unit condominium building or relo- cate the pipeline. The applicant has indicated that he is in the process of trying to relocate the pipeline. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE The southwest portion of the plat abuts Pilot Knob Park. The northerly por- tion of the plat abuts Pilot Knob School. Therefore, there is open space im- mediately to the west to provide the park needs. It is staff's understanding that the applicant dedicated the land for Pilot Knob Park. Therefore, there will be no park dedication for this proposed development. However, staff is / requesting that there be a trail connection from Pilot Knob Road to Pilot Knob \_ School somewhere between the condominium project and the townhouse development. The applicant shall also provide 1 tot lot to provide the needs for the pre- schoolers within this development proposal. If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following conditions: 1. The parking area in the condcgninium development shall be re-designed and possibly consideration of the underground parking for the condominium development. 2. If the site plan is approved, the gas main shall be relocated as to not interfere with any of the proposed buildings. 3. The townhouses shall be relocated to meet the setback requirements in accordance with Ordinance 52. 4. Either one townhouse, or a variance, shall be granted to exceed the num- ber of townhouse units allowed. 5. The plat should be subject to all easements as required by City staff. 6. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be approved by the City staff. 7. A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by City staff and an adequate landscape bond shall be submitted with the final plat and not released un- til one year after the landscaping has been eapleted. 8. The developer shall provide a tot lot for the proposed pre-schoolers with- in the development. 41 CITY OF EAGAN MIDWESTERN ASSOCLATION PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VUUANCE - LUTE OAK HEIGHTS SEPTEMBER 22, 1981 PACE FOUR 9. The developer shall construct a trail from Pilot Kncb Road to Pilot Knob School somewhere between the condominium and townhouse development. 10. The developer shall provide the City with a copy of the homeowner's association bylaws for City review. 11. A development agreement and planned development agreement shall be ap- proved prior to the final plat of Lone Oak Heights. 12. The plat shall be reviewed by Dakota County Plat Commission because the plat abuts two county roads. DCR/jac ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS 13. Provide the necessary drainage and utility easements throughout the addi- tion for water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer lines. 14. Provide a 34' wide 5-ton public street extending through the addition from Lone Oak Road to Towerview Road. 15. Provide 26' wide private internal access streets to the public street to serve the adjacent units and built to 5-ton street design standards with a 3" thick bituminous surface and concrete curb and gutter. RWR:li SO • TO: ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FROM: ROBERT W. ROSENE, CONSULTING CITY ENGINEER DATE: SEPTEMBER 15, 1981 RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT - LONE OAK HEIGHTS ADDITION (ORRIN AUNE) The Public Works Department has the following comments to offer for considera- tion of the above referenced plat: UTILITIES Sanitary sewer can be provided from the sanitary sewer extension currently be- ing installed across Pilot Knob Road to serve this area. This line has suf- ficient capacity and is at the proper elevation to serve the entire proposed addition. Water service will be provided from the existing 12" trunk water main on Lone Oak Road and the existing 12" trunk water main on Towerview Road. The water main should be required to be looped within the addition. GRADING AND DRAINAGE An existing 24" diameter trunk storm sewer line passes through the middle of this property. It has sufficient capacity to receive the drainage from this development. It will be necessary to install catch basins and lateral lines within the addition but no additional trunk facilities are required. STREETS The layout indicates that all streets within this addition are intended to be private streets. The main street through the area is shown to be 24' wide and the minor streets serving individual driveways are shown to be 20' wide. A discussion with the Dakota County Highway Department indicates that the two access points originally shown to Pilot Knob Road will be denied because of traffic problems which would be created on Pilot Knob Road. The revised lay- out omits these two access points. Traffic signals will be installed at the intersection of Lone Oak Road and Pilot Knob Road with the current County Road 31 construction project and conduit is being placed in Towerview Road so that traffic signal lights can be added at that intersection with County Road 31 in the future when traffic warrants are met. With no access to Pilot Knob Road, it is our opinion that the main collector street extending from Towerview Road to Lone Oak Road through this addition should be a public street not less than 34' wide with concrete curb and gut- ter. The streets and driveways leading from the adjacent units to this street can be private drives due to the limited number of units each serves but should not be narrower than 26' . Both the 34' wide and the 26' wide streets should be constructed to City residential street construction specifications which require a 5-ton gravel base and a 3" bituminous surface with concrete curb and gutter. I will be available to discuss in further detail any portion of this report with the Planning Commission at their meeting on September 22, 1981. C Respectfully submitted, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Robert W. Rosene �--� Consulting City Engineer RWR:li 6270a m � it• ' r m i m -._ i V,/� - ->_•—._<"-`_-acts--- `—\ - —..--�_—.,r:' - w—_ uz�A I OpOLf M3Ntl3M01 �o 00,0 Axis ' 1 1 k , �, c-mar i, •' is IE IV SL e ■ — Z m r m A rrw$ NO� CD CD f. O < ' • -oma- -,- T ox 21 - (SE ON ovoa "m) ' ovoa Hvo 3NOI .s o ;� ;T c P — r T—GVOM M31Atl3M01. ��`-^�. / / 0.4 -a7-_ r' • f - � : � `,� � � -.L":i ice.{-� � \ .. ASW 15 dam 40 on is Gh O t 2. pm � :22X01 } .Y cl •• • It -o kgs `� I � �• � ,�.. � � ., 3 . �_ L�• _ 11 r pill _ (9L W OVOW '071 _. OVOU XVO 3#401 ".go I:P. t - C2 r • v 7 i = J � \ N _ � t �.�'� .•'� •" .{. � .-s 1 1 ,\• _ ii,iii , r, - i fA 44 '"` 4 4 � f � +I� � ►' ��'�`}'.fir _- � `Q' :i�.,+ M '• d�;:_�---. � •�.�-•_- Z + Gr � , `__ -�- - +rz�—lam.=�_��.ls_ � r•.•.., r.�. ' o ,• - r' rn ZW f7C �< T _ i - !9t N OVOti '09) '_ _: ,.. � �-'��'��t-• yy � ;-c.{ j' - -a - r• p, -� i r•^;-.-,r—�-•••-i t4-.. �.- "_ !!__ i Vic/ M1u70d {r.a vtb:M01 �_ �.� •�� � 4. ,J�;t tom-. !` T�.� •�• � _ / ' - is � ! �! �i >. r a• t� �� 1-�"u' !e �. 10 rTl 3 .i' f k al .,'` a..y y tl±• t -�r t`$ • .1� j y f �/� r Til i._ _ S 1J 3-., a. '-'�✓ > f`' r Q- - r` i rri r rt •f_. r.3�a`7i :�P .T`• -►- ; �� •tY._ �yYi -f�� >✓ ii1`��t! .s:s t' `• 'r rt�,:E_ j tyT - '1 ,y Ito, z+�a�; _.- ' .{{ _ �~T _�;g3• }�+<.rr `s Eye .- �► '"- ./If � .- l•t _ Zt 21 3 F i •, U V nU ^n ••b'a r ti' 4 a;��<� ,`.c+ '� ..L.yr. +�,f t 't �.; ," ' � ial M > e t•" - ar to -^ ` r )`.,�'� "� : '' • i �"'f ��� `\> �- ..r �:, ,. a". s x�. Ir ` : t `' i 1 Z �'r tr ct i � '. ��—.J•�+'y` ��_ I:, Y. .. t r t. 4' t ' r G L •r rY . f: ?-.•y,A. 1. !!"^U�._-u'► ♦ :- .ti �'F.i _ v r J•-. 4 t r M �- � i t 4n� f • r z ,�I ) .'/' S �• t 'c-- � rye .r Tv�1 r -•�A4 � � s mac•� .:a � � F - - .. a.r-. -� '" �.itt �_•'nvj�♦ -..fl.s'-t;i•+..;•.er,.a, «r,`-2 3 ; '�' -,rf �' i 1 ^� ' v :} 14Cv04 xv0 31401 [t T+ • i" _ r t _ GE RB Ind GE _ GOLF Ind._ _ • - Xt - , -_. _Ind`, fel Ind .. E LB .. - o� p i Ind. 8 R- Ind R& R-11 R-III _ Ind R-O / NB R-II P R-II D; LB - R it - '.,. L8 CSC P 41 P . . LB _ F R-III R-IRj � E P R-11 R-II - - ® R-IV ,R-III :::P - = HALL rry R-II - F t R-i Ind. P F'rt HS R II - RI 4-IV -- - R-11 R I GB U fz_E - _ '4-P l pp R-1 R-II R-II LB ., M R-III E tv LB �^ t a �} _ R-Il M ^^ R-111 RB CSC/GB/L t Eft R-I Rill R-11t R Ilf R_I'_ `• R-1- p R1 _ p E ..._. p X P E R�i CR-II R-11 t' R-11R-11 _ P ER i NB Y RI ft-i R L3 R-' LB R-1 CSC R I LB R3 LB R-I P R i R-I '- -- P R-I R-II p R-ii " R-II Jas P IF r LADOST SP',JR r-. : I, 1 �OUNTRY ' EAG44DALE , z CLUB RB T' PF LB CE.NTE"R NU 3 A RDS VALI,El HIGH VIEW R PARK �! hA�S COU TRY � I J. � �' NO 1 PLAT>EA ;` L i it'sjl R -1 � .; PK HO R— 1 R - i t - TREFFLE ACRES i I '# ZEHNGE5i —1 A� R- 1 T l R• R Z4 A NPF, llcPPL B • �� �F, 1 A \ OMEa ?4- R-3 3. P F - A R- 4 N t 1� •1 __ R _4 RD Eq ADDITION R-j R- 4 ,UNB R - 4 l 1 Q 2 .1 "_PK A , y RIDGE A - . _, N B A G B R-4 N B K< < -4 . , A i RIP I SP-7i LB P F - p . CSCR . 4 75-3 !i • • 9 L10, (- TIMBER 0�LINE CIVIC ASSOCIATION .. e9 ' October 16, 1981 Mayor Bea Blomquist City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re : Lone Oaks Heights Dear Mayor Blomquist : Within the next few days, the Eagan City Council will vote on an issue which will greatly affect this city and this neighborhood for many years to come . Another land developer is again proposing to build new homes -- townhomes and apartments for people who need places to live . Midwestern Associates plans to start building a complex oaf 84 condo units, 20 quadraminium units and 35 townhouse units on what was formerly the Martin Shield' s property - 139 units on 14. 07 net acres . As you make your decision with respect to the proposals of Midwestern Associates, this Association asks that you be sure of the answers to the following basic questions : 1. Water: a. What is the capacity of the present 9 city wells? b. What plan is there for augmenting these wells when they run out? c. How much has the Eagan area water table dropped since the city wells were dug? d. Bearing in mind that the Rosewood Corp. is now building 80 dwelling units , and that a high rise is in the planning stages in that same general area, how will Midwestern Associates ' complex of more than 100 families affect the Eagan water supply over the next 10 years? 15 years? 2. Sewage : a. Does Eagan ' s present sewage treatment facility have the capacity to handle the additional population? S$ 0 • MAYOR BEA BLOMQUIST -2- OCTOBER 16, 1981 b. Where will funding come from to build a new plant when this city needs one? What type of schedule will there be to pay for it? A dev- eloper in Prescott, Arizona, recently was re- quired to put money into an escrow account to ensure that Prescott would have enough to build such a plant in the future . c. Where does Eagan' s treated effluent discharge? What effect will this complex of more than 100 families have upon this situation? In 10 year? 15 years? d. Has Midwestern Associates provided the prospectus required by HUD with respect to such services as water, sewage? 3. Wetlands : a. The swamp in the SW corner of this property, about 10 acres, is designated a city park. This swamp has served as a nesting and breeding area for ducks and other wildlife . This developer plans to build his quadraminium units to within 30 feet of this area. Although that distance may be within the letter of the law, does that meet the intent of the law with respect to preservation of valuable wetlands and other conservation areas? 4. Safety: a. Midwestern Associates plans a 60 foot wide city - street as access to the project from Lone Oak Rd. This street is to run parallel to the playground of Pilot Knob Elementary School, divided from this playground by only a thin strip of boulevard. No thought has been given to the children who play on this playground during school hours . The developer, Orin Aune, stated on October 8 that he had no plan with resepct to either a high fence - or a birme with hedge to protect the children from the anticipated heavy auto traffic on that street . b. There has been no provision made for street lights in this project . c. There has been no provision made for recreation facilities within this project ( other than 2 "tot lots" ) to prevent children from running across the street to the schoolyard through the traffic to play. C S MAYOR BEA BLOMQUIST -3- OCTOBER 16, 1981 C 5 . General : a. When Mr. Aune was asked on October 8 how may units would sell for $80, 000, he replied that there are none; that the highest priced unit he plans to build will be sold for $67, 000; that the "Engineers" told him to put the $80, 000 figure in to his pro- posal. b . Mr. Aune stated that his intent is to sell his units but would not discuss whether some would be rented if they should not be sold. Before you cast your vote with respect to the approval of this proposed development, it is respectfully suggested that you assure yourself of the answers to questions such as those posed above . Sincerely, Frances C. Winkel President Timberline Civic Association cc : Mr. Thomas A. Egan, Council Member Mr. Mark Parranto, Council Member Mr. James A. Smith, Council Member Mr. Theodore Wachter, Council Member Mr. Thomas Hedges , City Administrator Mr. Dale C. Runkle, City Planner Mr. Thomas Colbert, Public Works Director 60 BEA BLOMQUIST MAYOR THOMAS HEDGES CITY ADMINISTRATOR THOMAS EGAN ���� �! -ALAN EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE MARK PARRANTO !— G CITY CLERK JAMES A.SMITH ;. THEODORE WACHTER ;3795 PILOT KNOB ROAD - COUNCIL MEMBERS P.O.BOX 21199 ^a _EAGAN, MINNESOTA ...55122 PHONE 454-8100 November 9, 1981 MRS FRANCES C WINKEL PRESIDENTS TIMBERLINE CIVIC ASSOCIATION 1575 MCCARTHY ROAD ' -- EAOAN I-IN 55121 Re: Proposed Lone Oak Heights Development Dear Mss. Winkel: At the October 17th Council meeting, the Council was presented with a proposed pre- liminary plat providing for multiple density in the southwest quadrant of Lone Oak Road and Pilot Knob Road. The Timberline Civic Association submitted several ques- tions pertaining to several issues that were outlined in a letter from the Associa- tion dated October 16, 1981. I have had the City staff review this letter and re- search the information that was requested in that letter. The following are the responses to your questions: 1. WATER Q. What is the capacity of the present 9 City wells? A. 12.24 million gallons per day Q. What plan is there for augmenting these wells when they run out? A. The City presently has two separate well field sites and additional wells are drilled as water demand dictates. Q. How much has the Eagan area water table dropped since the City wells were dug? A. Water table in the Eagan area has dropped less than 2' per year since the City's wells were initially drilled. Q. Bearing in mind that the Rosewood Corporation is now building 80 dwelling units and that a high-rise is in the planning stages in that same gener- al area, how will Midwestern Association's ocxnplex of more than 100 fami- lies affect the Eagan water supply over the next 10 years? 15 years? A. The proposed development of 84 condo units will use approximately 13,500 gallons per day. The additional quadraminium and townhouse units will raise this to approximately 25,000 gallons per day. This is approximate- ly 0.2% of the present daily capacity of our well system. 2. SEPM(M Q. Does Eagan's present sewage treatment facility have the capacity to handle the additional population? A. Yes. 61 THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. f MRS FRANCES C WINKEL PROPOSED LCNE OAK HEICEITS DEVELOPHENT NgM.MER 9, 1981 PAGE TWO Q. Dere will funding come from to build a new plant when the City needs one? What type of schedule will there be to pay for? A. The Metropolitan Waste Control Com-nission (MWCC) presently collects connec- tion charges for each dwelling unit constructed in the metropolitan area through the affected municipality to help pay for future plant expansions. Q. Where does Eagan's treated effluent discharge? What effect will this complex of more than 100 families have upon the situation? in 10 gears? 15 years? A. Eagan's sewage is treated by the Seneca Waste Water Treatment Plant located in Eagan adjacent to the Minnesota River under the control of the M^ICC. This effluent is currently discharged after treatment into the Minnesota River. This current treatment plant has a capacity of 24,000,000 gallons per day. Discharge frau this complex will result in approximately 0.1% increase of the capacity of this plant. Q. Has Midwestern Associates provided the prospectus required by HUD with re- spect to such services as water, sewage? A. Yes 3. WETLANDS Q. Swamp in the southwest corner of this property (10 acres) is designated as City park. This swamp has served as a nesting and breeding area for ducks and other wildlife. This developer plans to build his quadraminiumunits to within 30' of this area. Although that distance may be within the letter of law, does that meet the intent of the law with respect to preservation of valuable wetlands and other conservation areas? A. The wetlands within the City park southwest of' this property will be main- tained. The building setbacks proposed in this development are adequate for the preservation of the park and the wetlands within the park. 4. SAFI"I'Y Q. What provisions have been made for street lights in this project? A. The developer will be required to install internal street lighting on this project. Installation costs will be the developer's responsibility. Q. None, convent regarding recreational facilities. A. The developer has been required to install two internal tot lots to pro- vide recreational facilities for toddlers and pre-schoolers. Older child- ren will have access to the existing Pilot Knob Park and school or re- creational facilities. It is not felt to be detrimental for these older children to cross an internal street to benefit from the existing recrea- tional facilities on the school or park property. 5. GENERAL Q. None - int regarding price of the units. A. The City presently does not have control over type of financing selected by a developer or his determination of his price per unit. (� 2 'rf MRS FRANCES C WINKEL PROPOSED LONE OAK HEICUTS DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 9, 1981 PAGE THREE Q. None - concerns regarding owner-occupancy. A. The City presently does not have any ordinance that recxuires the developer to build a conplex for rental or owner-occupancy. We hope the above responses helps to answer scene of your specific concerns pertain- ing to this proposed development. We would like to assure that the City Council will review this proposed development in detail to insure that this development meets all existing codes and requirements presently in effect in the City of Eagan. Please let me know if there is any additional information that I can provide in relationship to this proposed development. Sincerely, Eagan City Council Blatta Bloinquist, Mayo cc - Mr. Thomas A. Egan, Councilmember Mr. Mark Parranto, Councilmeirber Mr. James Smith, Councilmember Mr. Theodore Wachter, Councilmember Mr. Thomas L. Hedges, City Administrator Mr. Dale Runkle, City Planner Mr. Thomas Colbert, Director of Public Works • • DAHLEN AND DWYER, INC. REAL PROPERTY ANALYSTS 650 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK BLDG. ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 DWIGHT W. DAHLEN. M.A.I..S.R.P.A. TELEPHONE DANIEL E. DWYER 612-224-1381 BEVERLY H. DWYER December 4 , 1981 Mr . Thomas L. Hedges City - Administrator City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re : Proposed Down Zoning Midwestern Association Lone Oak Heights Eagan, Minnesota Dear Mr. Hedges : In accordance with your request, we have made an inspection and a preliminary analysis of the 14. 09 acres located at the southwest corner of Lone Oak Road and Pilot Knob Road in Eagan, Minnesota. The purpose of this pre- liminary analysis is to determine the loss in value that would occur to the site if it were down-zoned to lower densities by the City of Eagan. The preferred way to determine compensation due to a down zoning is by the "before and after " method. Under this method, which usually is the simplest approach, a just compensation is derived by first estimating the market value of the entire tract before the down zoning and then subtracting from that the market value of what remains in the owner after the down zoning. The difference is compen- sation including both value for the down zoning and any dimunition of the value in the remainder . Presently, the parcel is zoned R-3 (Residential Townhouse District ) and R-4 ( Residential Multiple District ) with a P. D. (Planned Development ) zoning overlaying the entire parcel . The Land Use Guide designates the 14 . 09 acre parcel as an R-3 land use ( Mixed Residential ) with a density of 6 to 12 dwelling units per acre. 64 The parcel is basically divided into two areas according to zoning. The northernmost or R-4 area contains 5 . 41 acres while the southernmost parcel or the R-3 area contains 8 .68 acres . Access to the property will be from Lone Oak Road on the north and Tower View Drive on the south. There is a gas main which crosses the northerly portion of the property. As an aid in visualizing the size and shape of the site, the reader ' s attention is directed to a preliminary site development plan located elsewhere in this analysis . The City of Eagan has asked us to estimate damages occurring to the parcel due to the down zoning based on two separate situations : the first would include down zoning the 5 .41 acre R-4 parcel to R-3 with the zoning for the 8 .68 acre R-3 remaining the same; and the second would be based on down zoning the entire parcel to R-1 . In both situations , the value of the fee simple interest in the property was estimated entirely by sales of comparable vacant land as , in our opinion, the sale of vacant residential land best reflects the thinking of atypical buyer and seller found in the market place . In arriving at the value of the subject proeprty in the before situation, we have made direct comparisons with large tracts and some small acreage tracts sold in the recent past and in the general area of the subject property . The comparison was made on the basis of the subject property having a highest and best use as land for residential development in keeping with the R-3 and R-4 zoning code of the City of Eagan. After analyzing and adjusting these sales , it is our opinion that the value of the R-4 zoned land is $22 , 500. 00 per acre while the value of the R-3 land is $12 , 500 . 00 per acre. When applied to 5 . 41 acres and 8 .68 acres res- pectively, the value indicated to the subject property as zoned or in the before situation would be $230, 000 . 00 rounded. Based on the first situation of only the R-4 parcel being down zoned to R-3 , the same sales were analyzed and adjusted to reflect the value of the entire parcel if zoned R-3 . The value of the entire parcel after a down zoning of the R-4 parcel to R-3 was estimated to be $12 , 500 . 00 per acre or a total of $176 , 000 . 00 rounded. The value in the before situation was previously estimated at $230 , 000 .00 indicating damages of $54 , 000 . 00 if only the R-4 portion of the property were down zoned to R-3 . bs Based on the second situation where the entire parcel would be down zoned to R-1 , we have analyzed sales of comparable vacant R-1 land as, in our opinion, the sale of land with this zoning best reflects the thinking of a typical buyer and seller found in the market place. After analyzing and adjusting these sales, we feel that if the property were zoned R-1 it could be marketed at $9, 000 .00 per acre or a total of $127, 000 . 00 rounded. Based on an "as zoned " or before value of $230 , 000 .00 , damages of $103 , 000 . 00 are indicated if the entire parcel is down zoned to R-1 . Therefore, after an analysis of all factors, it is our opinion that the following values are applicable to the subject property as of December 4 , 1981 : Value Before Down Zoning : R-4, 5 . 41 acres @ $22 , 500/acre $121, 725 . 00 R-3 , 8 . 68 acres @ $12 , 500/acre 108 , 500 .00 Total $230 , 000 . 00 rounded F Value if R-4 Portion Down Zoned to R-3 : 14 . 09 acres @ $12 , 500/acre $176 , 000 .00 Damages if R-4 Portion Down Zoned to R-3 : $54 , 000 . 00 Value if Entire Property Down Zoned to R-1 : 14 . 09 acres @ $9 , 000/acre $127, 000 . 00 Damages if Entire Property Down Zoned to R-1 : $103 , 000 .00 If you have any questions regarding this preliminary analysis or need additional information, please feel free to contact us . Yo rs very truly, D HLEN & DWYER , C. nlel E. Dwyer , 'Presi nt D ight ahle , M . A . I . , S.R. P. A. DED/ms �• LONE OAR ROAD CO ROAD M =01 71� C, fu.= .r.f0• � $ ly- �-' "�•r p. la. � ate` • '�° - - - --- - -� -� X441 .-- - -. . is L— moo_ �—,_-•� � � . I =• LL CL ft Cb UJ Li r t . 1 w • � / _ ' - _ 1, i `- A/W Q4p ae rpwENEw, r ° IaOAD —f. .. s=�3 / /--��-1'—�%��=alai•-.—_:.--__'_.. YL�'_;,-'~ - '_}_ - a s / ,•1 `� /,^\` , C:� si =JV � f 1 / 1 / 1 •�[ t yty -ATO 1 i LONE OAK ROAD - r l-W ` t 11_ , a _ 1CO. POA DPOP 261 rN 71 Ac - 1� St 2' ■ r... _- _ _ <-_ _ iii _ t� �-� - 1 e• �E i� 4 7� � _ f s p 'n" 1 �• OQ . CL uJ � -- _ __ :: - _ _ - i j� �' :'! •res LLI lop I -) A %) . 0000 all G. Z. Cannow now QOY too >a // ''70WERVfEW 8040 J = Z--4 X69 - �~ �� _ ' _• - -Milk N •�- � - - -• nRB Ind GOLF Ind. Ind ... _. p Ind. _.. _ � • • = 8 ...• _:. R•N RI .. ., .. __ Ind. Rg R..V R•111 - ' . ._... - /- ._ _ � • Ind. _ _ ffNB LBR-II P 4 R r LB R II CSC P GCr RAI RIF RI11 '•it- ..• R-1 R-I E R-11 R-11 R-IV R•111y CITY HALL Ind R} P H -- _ R-I C'SG P Frl HS R-II R-1 B A R-1 R-11 E R-: P { GB R-I - P O -RI - - 1 R-11 R_II M R-III LB h E LB p L7 M n� R111 RB - t R-I R-Ir R•ul _. 1. 1 CSC/C� i R'1 _ R-II R-1 R-III �, ,�_I• R-I� - CSC P E R-11 R-11 p R41 R-11 - R.I I B R-11. �. _., y _R-I P R I LB LB C CSZ R. LB R3 LB - R-I P R-I R-I P - - - R-I R-II 0 R-1; F R-11 R-11 R-11 a F �, - •• n 'JST SPJ'` 1! t 11 \ " _0'JNrRti �. E '�GAal. CLUB C E.N T E R ` PF �y ; 14044 LA r rNo 3 A RD - rALLEY HIGH VIEW R P A RK f AElACOU TRY - NQ' PLATEA ' ' i it-it rp - HOM t FTR,EFFLE ACRES J ( I • 7J ZEHNGE5 -1 A R- IT f�. i R- 1 ,TGE R;4 A .N OPPLE off- , PF R 3 P F R �a� S 7 - i� R- 4 ,� 74- R-3 RDftr C� i - -- - R-4 E- ADDiTiON R-i R- 4 V NB R - 4 " O - 1Q - GB G [':PK ' A RIDGE " A N 3 G B R-4 N 8 A . •fr< < lKc�tL - 4 - `-Fti •aw GB RB i Ra LB PT p1) CSC R R 4 75- 3 WPRAISAL QUALIFICATIONS • OF DANIEL E . DWYER 650 Northwestern National Bank Building, St . Paul , Minnesota 55101 Phone ( 612 ) 224-1381 EDUCATION: Graduate of the College of St. Thomas 1967 Course 1-A - American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers 1971 Course 1-B - American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers 1973 Course II - American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers 1974 Course IV - American Institute of Real Estate -Appraisers 1979 American Appraisal Company Cost Estimating Seminar 1973 EXPERIENCE : Since 1971 actively involved in the appraisal of residential, commercial, and industrial real estate President, Dahlen and Dwyer, Inc. , a Minnesota Corporation Instructor, appraisal seminars, Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area Qualified as expert witness on real estate values y APPRAISAL ASSIGNMENTS: Homequity, Inc. Residential Relocation Service Corp. Employee Transfer Corp. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. General Electric Co. International Business Machines St. Paul Companies U. S. Steel Corp. Deluxe Check Printers Dayton Hudson Corp. Black and Decker Manufacturing Co. Eli Lilly Co. Northland Mortgage Co. First National Bank of St. Paul First Minnehaha National Bank First Grand Avenue State Bank Western State Bank Commercial State Bank Northwestern National Bank City of Roseville City of White Bear Lake City of Vadnais Heights Ramsey County Parks and Open Space Department Numerous attorneys and private individuals -71 APPRAISALQUALIFICATION* RA OF DWIGHT W. DAHLEN, M.A.I . , S .R. P.A. Real Estate Appraiser EDUCATION: Bachelor of Arts, Economics - Macalester College, 1971 Participated in trade course, Institute of Financial Education, 1-72 to 12-75 Architecture - University of Minnesota, 1976 Construction Cost Estimating & Structural Design Theory - St. Paul Technical Vocational Institute - 1976-1977 PROFESSIONAL REAL ESTATE STUDIES : Real Estate National Marketing Institute (R.N.M.I.), CI-101; CI-102 American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers - Course 1A, Principals; Course 1B, Capitalization Theory; Course _I, Urban Properties; Course VI, Investment Analysis Society of Real Estate Appraisers - Course 101, Introduction to Appraising, Macalester College; Attended Instructor's Clinic, Purdue University, 1976; and, various other seminars Completed program of study as required by State of Minnesota Licensing Laws (90 hours) PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS AND ASSOCIATIONS: American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers - M.A.I. , 11-77 Society of Real Estate Appraisers - S.R.P.A. , 7-76 Licensed Salesperson - State of Minnesota Member, American Right-of-Way Association Officer & Director in St. Paul Chapter of the Society of Real Estate Appraisers Approved Instructor - State of Minnesota, Society of Real Estate Appraisers APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE: Staff Appraiser, Minnesota Federal Savings & Loan, 1972-1976 Independent Real Estate Appraiser associated with 0. J. Janski Firm, Minneapolis, Minnesota 1976-1977 Established own independent appraisal firm, 1977 Experienceincludes appraisal of all types of residential properties, feasibility studies, condominiums, commercial, industrial, condemnation proceedings and air rights analysis, acquisition for rights-of-way transportation/communications corridors Clients include: First National Bank; F.B.S. Homes, Inc. ; Western State Bank; Northern Federal Savings & Loan; Northland Mortgage; Knutson Mortgage; United Mortgage; Banco Mortgage; First Minnehaha National Bank; Northern States Power Company; Department of Natural Resources; I.R.S. ; Case Tractor Company; various employee relocation firms; attorneys; and investors -7 2 TO: THOMAS L. HEDCMS, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: DECEMBER 9, 1981 RE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE LONE OAK HEIGHTS PLANNED DEVELOP- MENT PROPOSAL L,hen the Advisory Planning Commission reviewed the Planned Development of Lone Oak Heights, it was noted that the original plan approved in 1979 had two accesses onto Pilot Knob Road. In the plan submitted in September, 1981, the County had indicated that no direct access would be allowed on Pilot Knob Road. 'Therefore, access would have to come from either Lone Oak Road or Tower- view Road. The applicant took these comments from the County and incorporated them into their overall site plan which shows access from Towerview Road and Lone Oak Road connecting the two streets with a private internal street for the overall development. In reviewing the original site plan, the Advisory Planning Commission noted that the applicant had three dwelling units over the allowable density for the overall site. The Advisory Planning Commission recommended approval of this site plan subject to the applicant reducing the density to the overall allowable, or reducing the density by 3 units and meeting all other ordinance requirements prior to the City Council Meeting. The applicant revised the site plan for overall density under the maximum allowable. The Advisory Plan- ning CcRrussion also directed staff,in doing the density calculations,that the applicant provide the equivalent to a city street running north/south between Towerview Road and Lone Oak Road. This street would not be taken out of the net acreage, or used against development in density calculations. Therefore, staff did not deduct the proposed street from the overall calculations. In the chart below, staff has done three densitv calculations. The first den- sity calculation was the calculation in the staff report dated September 16, 1981. The second density calculation is the revised site plan without deduc- ting the road right-of-way. The third density calculation is based on the revised site plan deducting the 60' right-of-way between Towerview Road and Lone Oak Heights. CHART 1 - ORIGINAL PLAN SUBMITTED IN SEPTEMBER, 1981 Parcel Acres Lot Coverage Dwelling Units Dwelling Units Allowed Condo 5.4 22.9% 84 81 Townhouse 8.2 18.4% 61 60 CHART 2 - REVISED PLAN 1,TITHOUT INTERNAL STREET DEDUCTION Parcel Acres Lot Coverage Dwelling Units Dwelling Units Allowed Condo 5.4 22.9% 84 81 Townhouse 8.2 18.5% 55 62 73 • i0 Merro to Thomas L. Hedges Additional Information regarding .Lone Oak Heights December 9, 1981 Page two ` CHART 3 - REVISED DENSITY CALCULATION TwITH DEDUCATION OF THE 60' STREET Parcel Acres Lot Coverage Dwelling Units Dwelling Units Allcxwed s Condo 4.6 270 84 69 Townhouse 7.5 200 55 55 Staff has prepared the three density charts for our review, and if you have an P P Y Y Y Y questions regarding the overall site plan, or would like additional information regarding the development proposal, please feel free to contact me at the Eagan City Hall. DCR/jack 77+ IQNE OAK R_OAp (CO.., ROAD ;-W 26)/,,,., x77 �ee9•a'a•w --•.osis--• It I; . il1�f1 I . illll.t ii .. 11 iIt II �<M1 II III -so 11 . 11111' :Y II . TO i • I � —�- 11 y 1 1 :7 lICALL I Soft it g� 1. _.192 9-- N3Y O'Oh 11 I' -••.0236--_ ! I 1 1 • �I 11 I 11 I I t2 • , /1 l I I L I ' '' �as d �1 • , om 9 8 I 1 n , 1 TD►�vlew se 62- NIIY•09'04.16' ROAD •� TELEPHONE (02)447-2_'U - LONF,_OAK — 1_ (CO. ROAD -14X tlr 1 . P: �4 u0 0 1 I Y! r L•I, _ 43.'a\: } .t_^ ..e,_�. '1I Jl,1 - --_- _ t I I I 1 >=SAri7AR1•SErEx --5-s---- --5- - 92.59-._ \ �Jn --- - -- -�;' , 1 j f 1 16.:S r SEWM _ �-. �►57--- T-�--ff 1• .r- "=`l ---- --•We K---� _ w.< Mwca 114A 611vq t" a R' - l • M'DItY+i ISSE].t3U' 1--.�- 8XVIUM DWI" rl kl JVj - l . 1 � f [. 1 r- 1 w 1 1 .ik I i flk 1 we• 1 I 1 1 I 'I�a� �� / ; IrI�II 'II 11 .. -r rl�,rn►.�r�r� W l J r� I I1 I! III I 11 rrr..�nr rr� tl,� � ..,�, `� �` �__ •�__— F'==` =1;'.1111 � II r..r�v_r.. '.i - /�" SewjwY_ ROAD N a -Ii �� I" 10 380111, - - N A •rAT[71 .• I ,,L,,t MIDWESTERN ASSOCIATES`SVALLEY ENG/NEER/NG CQ, INC - - - I403 LOW OAR IIDAD EAQAN,w mm SUITE 204.WATERS EDGE OFFICE PLAZA PRIOR LAKE,BOMINNESOTA 55372 TELEPHONE (612)447.2570 I 1 vi I iii LONE OAK ROADil _ nen.w r•s.a rm.nn.. (C0 0A0 rsrl to a... 104.35•- ( . 1 / 1.0- CO CO I _ ` Its »::�. E _ __ _.➢ °�_ i:ua is " eraa swzw SEWM . ' 'v')�' ; /` _•�.r` , ;; 1 �a+aw sEtivt ice: _ i)i z 3.. n'Z I � �erroreurr as9oleu' ,f IFS r - 1 ,i.. � .� / 1 i - � r• :.iii � illi '<,✓`�'� .__�.. to *1 - -' a,.r of ------ 1 g - 1 PETITION We, the undersigned voters and residents of the City of Eagan, recognizing the inordinately high concentration of multiple dwelling type housing in Section 9 of the City, hereby petition the City Council to institute proceedings to rezone the Martin Shield's property located in the East Y2 of the NE Yo of the NE X of Section 9 between Lone Oak Road and Tower Road and lying west of Pilot Knob Road from the R-IV(12 units/acre) and R-III (6-12 units/acre) classification to R-II (3-6 units/acre)and R-1(0-3 units/acre). NAME ADDRESS NAME ADDRESS i ail 1504 Red Cedar Road Eagan, Minnesota 55121 E November 2, 1981 Mayor Bea Blomquist City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota Re: Zoning Change of Martin Shield's Property Dear Mayor Blomquist: While this letter is formally directed to you, I would appreciate it if you would also see that it is circulated to the members of the City Council. The plans which are currently underway to develop the Martin Shield's property lying just east of the Pilot Knob School and the Pilot Knob Park area should not be approved, in that it would only perpetuate a mistake made by an earlier administration as far as the R-III and R-IV zoning of that property is concerned. That the current zoning is inappropriate cannot be.disputed. All of the land surrounding this site, except for the Univac property, is zoned R-I (single family dwellings). That is to say, the lots on the east side of Pilot Knob Road are all single family dwellings, as are the properties on the north side of Lone Oak Road. The proposed development borders the Pilot Knob School property as well as Pilot Knob Park. It is only one block from the Timberline Development which, as you know, is all single family dwellings. It is submitted that the proposed development by Mr. Aune is totally inconsistent with existing development and to permit it to go forward would be to compound the past mistakes. First of all, the density which is planned for the 14-acre site will put such pressure on the Pilot Knob Park that it will not be able to remain as a nature center, which was the original intent of the Park Commission. Furthermore, extending a 60-foot wide road from Lone Oak Road to Tower Road which borders the school playground is sheer folly. The erection of a 6-foot high board fence, while it might afford some protection against children running into the path of passing automobiles, it would be very unsightly and totally out-of-keeping with the esthetics of the remainder of the neighborhood. Mayor Bea Blomquist Page 2 November 2, 1981 I attended the meeting of the City Council recently where Mr. Aune made his presentation and wherein the approval of his plat was postponed pending an appraisal to determine what the cost would be to rezone to a lower density. I sincerely hope that this was not an election year maneuver to gain support of the Timberline residents who were at the meeting and who were opposed to the high density development proposal. I believe that the City Council should check with Paul Hauge and verify whether a rezoning from R-III/R-IV to R-I is a "taking" by way of emminent domain which would require a payment to the property owner or whether rezoning is, as I believe, a prerogative of the City Council where it can be shown that the public health, safety and welfare of the area as a whole would be improved. It would not seem that any one individual has a vested right in a zoning when, as you and other City Councilmen acknowledged, the density in Section 9 is already at a point where further development of the type planned would result in a compounding of an already bad situation. At the meeting, Councilman Smith suggested that the Timberline residents, back in 1975, had somehow traded a park donation for the high density rezoning. I do not believe that this recollection is accurate. Let me explain. Back in the late 1960's or early 1970's, the Eagan Township Park Committee was organized and a bond issue was proposed to raise funds to acquire park property. At that time, the Timberline residents, on a whole, supported that effort because there just were no parks or playgrounds in the northwestern portion of the township. It was a least partially through the efforts of the Timberline residents in promoting this bond issue that the vote in favor of it carried. Then, time went on. All of the funds raised by that bond issue were used to acquire sites in other areas of the township. We still had no park facility anywhere within walking distance of the Timberline addition as late as 1975. Then, as I recall, in about 1975 Mr. Shields had been contacted by a developer who wanted to put in a small regional shopping center on that corner. An attempt was being made to have the property zoned for this commercial use. Naturally, the homeowners in the immediate area (not only Timberline residents) were strongly opposed to any such use of that property because it would be wholly inconsistent with the way in which the area had been zoned. That is, it would be a flagrant example of "spot- zoning". It was in this context that the neighborhood residents were at the Town Hall voicing disapproval of the requested rezoning. Some of the residents did raise the point that the City of Eagan had reneged, if you will, on the earlier promise to acquire parkland and develop it. �0 Mayor Bea Blomquist Page 3 November 2, 1981 I am not sure what sort of a deal had been worked out between Martin Shields and the then city government, but apparently the net result was a trading of a park dedication by Mr. Shields for the R-III and the R-IV rezoning of his land. As you can see, the implication which Coucilman Smith raised that as far as the Timberline residents are concerned the chickens have come home to roost is not a fair appraisal of what had transpired. I think that the above background on the park situation is helpful in the context of the present situation. As I indicated earlier, the density which Mr. Aune seeks to impose in his apartment/condominium development would so overcrowd the park facilities there that it would no longer be a neighborhood park, but instead it would revert to an amenity for the apartment/condominium complex. By way of summary, then, many of the neighboring residents are in agreement with you and with at least certain other Councilmen concerning the poor planning, by way of zoning, which has taken place in Section 9. If allowed to take place, the high density construction proposed by Mr. Aune, coupled with the plans by the Rosewood Development Corporation and possibly others along the western property line of Sperry Univac, will tend to make an island out of the Timberline area. It is not believed to be too late to correct this situation. The City Attorney should be requested to investigate whether a further rezoning from R-III to R-1 is a "taking" which would require the payment of an award to the affected property owner as in a condemnation proceeding. If not, then the City should be free to rezone for the good of the community as a whole. If, on the other hand, such a rezoning is tantamont to a condemnation, then an appraisal would have to be made to determine what the cost would be to the City to buy back rezoning. Very truly yours, E � AAA Thomas J. Nikolai TJN/cb c: Paul Hauge Fran Winkel g Agenda Information Memo December 10, 1981 Page Twelve BIL BOARD/NAEGEhE OUTDOOR-ADVERTISING B. Billboard/Naegele Outdoor Advertising Sign Co. -- An application was presented to the City for .consideration at the November 17 ` City Council meeting to consider an advertising sign or billboard for Naegele Outdoor Advertising Sign Company located at 1215 'Cedar Avenue, or more commonly referred to as between the new Cedar Avenue' Freeway and Nicols Road south of the Chicago, St. Paul railroad tracks . There was a question at that meeting regarding the size of the sign due to the fact that the application indicated a request for a 250 square foot sign when in essence the total signage is 686 ,square feet. There was an 'error on the ,application which is addressed in the City Planner' s memo. Also, the City Council asked that visual aids be submitted to determine how the sign will be read from the Cedar Avenue Freeway. There was a, question raised about an assessment appeal on the property proposed for construction` of a sign by Naegele. That issue has been addressed by the ''City Attorney and a letter is enclosed on page For the additional support information- regarding this agenda item, refer to the City Planner' s original report and the additional information as pre- sented by Naegele and coordinated by the City Planner on pages' through 94 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve' or deny an advertising sign board for Naegele Sign Company as presented. PAUL H. HAUGE & ASSOCIATES, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3908 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY EAGAN (ST. PAUL), MINNESOTA 58122 PAUL H. HAUGE AREA CODE 612 BRADLEY SMITH TELEPHONE 484-4224 KEVIN W. EIDE December 8, 1981 DAVID G. KELLER Mr. Thomas L.Hedges City Administrator 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Luther Stalland's Assessment Appeal Dear Tom: An application has been submitted by Naegle Outdoor Advertising for a billboard permit on land owned by Beure' Co. - Luther Stalland on new Cedar Avenue. A question arose as to the status of an assessment appeal that was brought by Mr. Stalland under Projects #198A and #227A covering an assessment roll adopted by the City Council on September 28, 1978. The assessment covered 12.97 acres with a 20% acre credit or 10.38 acres after deducting future roads. The original assessment was $18, 721.21 for the storm sewer purposes, with the balance of 10.38 acres actually assessed at $0.39 per square foot for industrial zoned property. After some negotiation concering the usability of the property for industrial purposes, the Council agreed to grant an additional 10% credit resulting in 384,330 square feet of assessable area or a reduction of a total of 35%. The agreement, however, stipulated that in the event that the owner shall request a use or building permit for industrial purposes that the storm sewer trunk assessment rate then in existence shall be levied against the entire parcel or the portion used for industrial commercial purposes, which amount shall be subtracted from the amount of the storm sewer assessment levied on the property in 1978. Very truly yours, Paul H. Hauge skk t � • TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: NOVEMBER 12, 1981 -RE: AN ADVERTISING SIGN, OR BILLBOARD, FOR NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING CO. LOCATED AT 4215 CEDAR AYE_NM, OR BLTgEE1 NE71 CEDAR AVENUE AND NICOLS ROAD SOUTH OF THE CHICAGO, ST. PAUL RAILROAD TRACKS It has been approximately 3 years since staff has processed an application for an advertising sign, or billboard, in the City of Eagan. The last time staff processed this type of application, it was done through a conditional use permit. In this process, it was determined that a conditional use per- mit is not required for an advertising sign and that only a' pylon sign for a business requires a conditional use permit. In the past month, the Citv Council directed staff that all advertising signs for billboards be pro- cessed through the Eagan City Council. Therefore, staff is processing the application by Mr. George DeGidio of Naegele Outdoor Advertising Signs before the Eagan City Council. The proposed sign is to be located on a parcel 20 south of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis, Omaha Railroad right-of-way and 20' east of the right-of-way of New Cedar Avenue. Enclosed is a site plan for your review.* The proposed sign would be 12' x 25' for a total of 300 square feet of sign- age. The height of the proposed sign is to be beb.•een 35-40' at this loca- tion. In reviewing Ordinance #16, the sign ordinance, in regard to adver- tising signs, it specifies that no advertising sign shall be located nearer to any other advertising sign than 1,000 lineal feet on the same side of the street, or within 300 lineal feet of any other advertising sign on the oppo- site of the street. It also states that no advertising sign shall be located within 200' of any residentially-zoned property whether on same or opposite sides of the street. The rk xirlum amunt of signage for an advertising sign is 250 square feet, and the height shall not exceed 40' measured at lot level or roadway level-whether lot level or roadway level is used is based on the visibility factors on the adjacent roadway. In reviewing the proposed sign application, it appears that Naegele Advertising Sign Co. meets all of the ordinance requirements with the exception that it exceeds the maximum sign- age by 50 square feet. If approved, the advertising sicm shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. No advertising sign shall be located nearer to any other advertising sign than 1,000 lineal feet on the same side of the street, or wit'-iin 300 lineal feet of any other acvertising sign on the opposite side of the street. 2. The proposed advertising sign shall not be located on a platted lot which contains a business sign or within 300' of any business free- standing ground sign or pylon sign measured on the same side of the street. *'The proposed advertising sign, or billboard, appears to have two faces each containing 300 square feet in order that visibility of the signs would be seen from northbound traffic and southbound traffic. 4?4 Thomas L. Hedges November 12, 1981 Advertising Sign - Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co. Page two 3. The proposed advertising sign shall not be located within 200' of any residential zone. 4. The advertising sign shall not exceed 250 square feet of signage. 5. The proposed advertising sign shall not exceed 400' measured at lot or roadway level. DCR,/jach C 5 19 c NEW C I CEDAR N( jiLt►V`� AVENUE C �� BRIDGE lto M U. 7t 5 � fiii� tL71;it C- o T - ' celii I ° JJc�JrH 11\ i t2u--_pl \ i. N •`sc• I i,CEDAR AVENUE •. ' 1! MILE TO STATE HIGHWAY 13 1 . I Y � L I • I 3 V ',LAKE L `.. L-' /• .. ILL � ,__ ,—y y `/' 'FP.. A. 2� .-•_ �' --*- 16 Ll rAEADQ R-4 Y ✓LL -� '� �r-- O- I / I / SIDE T MINA R-1 R- r Ll ti �•• Y �i��. i r A 'a ' •RIDGE+ R-4 NB/( b ORKS s u, FPqo �. c, ysy itl CE L I ! �7 s i �G m u// / INDUS IAL Ag r' F d Y 0v b / , _.— y , 1p R-1 mr ..h�✓ I / '� \ ADDITION _I JCROF / i g1,.ACKH� / A R gCRES i7 — `a1„ CI LI L R-� R- r e ypq� ILIL CigBFGAN MElO CE �TE C R-2-I V '✓� Yti I r- _ L SILL FICE/J`{� K Fl ~' j� Y (� ln,if• se -- _ -4 � �Ir �P CbC PF LI^ oAgf. hwE �L:R" 4t HILLANDALE R-IC A 'l �,`� i {!!! Gp5 CC^" ,A1 R 4 4 f4, i ,� C£ R01�C.'NQ'J -REE I I (, . " j GB �B 1 R-4 q .,_L '% RB i R , t s e iG i tPFm PK u;l, PF P1B- /so "- RB JUNIOR { NB NIQ I S I t PF NB vagi p0 yl R(,� v HIGH RB l �lLL/X/1.'l� B-2 f, ��� »)v A R 4 i! R-4 scHooL : o N t �f " ,7 R-4 A -7te . i A R 3C PK l � J / 7 GAwt ll✓ �. r Fav 1 � � r / 7 �wloIe C p �CRwS_ � C _ b _l r N PK, PF R-4 .r !'K MART y � ka`L R 4 R 4 e, f }ILi I CSC_ t1 , �a a*r ,,<•,�-1mmt ` _v"`c I R-IC R-2 ,;; t : �6v CSC jA�� R-4 \abp ` PK i/•I " wL�ia .4 R-4 �i'x1Ar IS6 Le'caveMn . �t -. TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: DECEMBER 9, 1981 RE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE APPLICATION SUBMUTTED BY NAEG,ELE ADVERTISING CO. FOR A BILLBOARD LOCATED ON CEDAR AVENUE In discussing this application with Naegele Advertising Co. , it appears there was a mistake made on the application form submitted by Naegele to the City of Eagan. The application did state a request for a 250 square foot sign. How- ever, in discussing this with Naegele Advertising Co. , it appears that Naegele only has two advertising signs for freeway or limited access highways. These signs are a 12 x 24 sq. ft. sign for a total signage of 288 square feet, or a 14 x 49 sq. ft. sign for a total signage of 686 square feet. The applicant is requesting a variance from the 250 sq. ft. provision of Ordinance 16 to construct the 686 sq. ft. sign. As you may recall, this would be the same size of sign which is located on Hwy. 13 and Blackhawk Road. It is staff's understanding that the Council also requested additional infor- nation regarding the proposed sign application. Naegele Sign Co. has sub- mitted two photographs: the first is a photograph on Cedar Avenue if you were going southbound toward Apple Valley; they also show the location of the pro- posed sign in this photograph. The second photograph is a picture from Cedar Avenue on the northbound lane. These photographs should illustrate the loca- tion and approximate size as how you would see the sign traveling on Cedar Avenue. The second submittal was a detail, or working drawing, of the proposed sign. This sign, however, does not have any facia on it and it just shows the con- struction and material of the proposed advertising sign. The third submittal is an exact location as to where the sign would be located in relation to centerline of Cedar Avenue. Hopefully, these additional items will be help- ful for the Council to make their consideration on the advertising sign. The memorandum prepared November 12, 1981 defines Ordinance 16 and the sign ordi- nance as to how advertising signs are allowed in Industrial Districts. The only variation from this is that Naegele is requesting a variance for 436 sq. ft. of signage in order for them to construct the 686 sq. ft. advertising sign. Hopefully, this information will be adequate for review, and if the Council requests any additional information, please feel free to contact me in order that this information can be provided for the December 15th City Council meet- ing. DCR,/j ach Y4, OP -*F; • � `, �"_. FC4 'zi1, '�.l}s' y. 1 t a-t-'_.•J�":� •�a-1}_�x"r vv � /' ; .. V �,_',R F.,, yh-..t} +•-1,�.�(JV � � +�.� Lam•-_.3tyy�r •,. '.'Qit bs �, r' ' I •. �� » . _. - .4 �, s ♦ , :••. _ Yid"=' w_.. �- 's;,.- I { � r. + •F+�� � a, � � s 1. V f "�;� ' ' i t_.y�l� ( .,.jam '!. . '�t�•� t}�. ,. �1 �� � ,, ._ � , !`. }�•a� '��—ij``-�' •j -epi.1 1 L ' _-- - __—'--___ _ j'i � ter%'� �''11'r �Y�•t;.'}'�..',C'l - �1�, ;• ti�x lam, �,L����;,c�•;;� ,. �'.f - j � � ,�/.'� i 1:�r T•�.qtr -yj i.:•t�-•f _.. t yr �./ 1 • .7 _A 1,�•1�� I � '•' �-��.�. • SU'-o e 8.0 419- 4.0 uD CTI (-� �^ �F:':,~• . Cr LL- LuI .✓ IT I► r \ _ • •O � II P� 7Dx•25� I�L� i - f '•. !� .. . lI) �,�Y2f,-�;lf� Y _. .!�\ � • 1 �L•4 x, :41 �, -� - •.• r i - f i 4'/: I'V2 1'.V^ 4'12 Pr'c 70 O 1�• • • I I H j i � i Y.Z� l� tjj _ Pier G01,. LU , I •I �I EAS DE f4'_ . �----�.��1 Z� ;I• IT O ; I_ ? I u, �I� " � I �- I �,.:1 x•25. •lb � �-' �-� �~i . � - z I LU, I d 1 .. 1. {-- ,iCJ•.CJ4LON. 1 rGU..:7anpr•.J _ .. . I F. IG 30-- :1�P,.�2 fI 15'0 ---� _� `i.7 rr�i 14p�•721 Ir=p 1 � ••� - r — —�•�iC :..�.i.��r,�, ��lt 79;: TYPICAL SECTION: PAGE THREl t GO l�T �OT U 1 i 1 TJ � Z T- �j t 9 2 DR, WN BY.' So/z- TEST BOR/NGS /OB NO. ,z3/vo CLU Y •.I / .... ��, LANE E7._ =� - %, .. �� �� �'. - ► Irl 7 .. e, FP,,, 1„ • :j � C�� � to 1. - `_ � _, _ I 1 }tf •v�� ' Sr ey7"A,tir•,a IrJ tREa I` HK R`li i-' R.y -tic �`� Y w x/n LI \� \A If kR-4J — r / 3 ••- k a %:'RL'i PK ` — r ... Y, � '` A :gyp wca t a —tLA -- --L---- vp �B/ 111 , i r it-.4 L I q9 ox N # r Y A .. Qak'/ INDUS IAL PAR �` A R 4 s _ 1$ R,I ; I,,!;? I•IG.Gi'AL� I I L., - ._ tti . . - - �i L I R.I -4 A R4 / xrr A C)4 ,. c .LI 1 A: is LI �iL R- R- AG R bL irrl` �- K rET t0 CE 1TE .-J°ire-9 R-I I ti y W 1'li� I Ltnor, 91j Hc{ L{ _ -R- L 2 I vti t / \� __-�I LB Z _EI�R L) I�Ai• rl. A '111* f* _'T .-•- f '�C`\ A K F' y, r tJ P 1 Lt y•f CSC - kGp�,y. t�, j{ ;L �I�` CCY1+:1 r,;! •i...�. t r R-4�� C$C PF PK a A R-4 e i I2 I HiR LI,. j ter F sf 1 1J� ,FrE,fit. m. 11 A r ' f.0 I,v GEI GB. „r E�. PD R•4 R-4A 7j' ` AFM NKA �(1 1 Ir _F f , 1(13 _F i NB- �. NC' - PF i 1 ;N8 - }p+ A=-= 2 �'r t ,T� ` r �iTii p --NIB I" A B scHoOL :' 1" Vr� i r J ;,4, Di f' t r „_ u l f �LaM• tys� A—� R•4 I3, t.L PF„ ,ttR-4 i. I .YI re _ M I,_J i1__ II} )•�1*.. L-._(,f!/j I j-j[- A I•Vr-I�•�... /7, .v ♦tx l .,;r .r,,.-. -, - u `"(;C'k.Yt4r�R;�*J(CJL'r./�Itl •• L•.. • - - .PK .PF • PAY Yy lyi iIi\' i 1 6 TO SECU ii.114G. PERMIT NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING COMPANY OF THE TWIN CITIES, INC. 1700 W. 78th Street • Minneapolis, MN 55423 612-866-3381 !/ Ground Lease No. 7 AGREEMENT of lease made this 7?n day of Q rf-nhe r ,19_$-'L,by and between LUTHER S TAT T AND (BEURE'—CO ) as Lessor and NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING CO. OF THE TWIN CITIES,INC.,as Lessee,WITNESSETH: The Lessor does hereby lease and demise to the Lessee,the entire plot or premises described as follows: New Cedar Ave. , N/O Hwy 13 in the City of Fa a n n for the term of Five (5) years,beginning on the comQletion day of construction 19 and ending on the 55th anniversary day thereafter — _ ,19—,at the yearly rental of -- —•-—————————————————— DOLLARS % )payable in equal installments at the office of the Lessee with the right to the Lessee to extend this*lease from year to year upon the same terms and conditions,it being understood that this lease shall automatically renew itself from year to year after the term hereof,the total of such extensions not to exceed ten years. The Lessee shall have the right to erect,place and maintain advertising sign structures and equipment therefor on the demised premises and post,paint,illuminate and maintain advertisements on such structures.All structures,equipment and materials placed upon the said premises by the Lessee shall always remain the personal property of,and may be removed by the Lessee at any time prior to or within a reasonable time after the expiration of the terns hereof or any extension thereof. Lessor guarantees to Lessee free accesss to and use of any part of any ground or structure on said premises as may be necessary for Lessee to hang scaffolds,or construct,post,paint,illuminate,repair or remove its advertisements and structures. If at any time (a) the signs or structures of the Lessee on the demised premises shall be or become entirely or partially obscured or destroyed; or (b) the said premises shall be or become unsafe for the maintenance of the Lessee's structures thereon,or unable to support such structures;or (c) the value of said location for advertising purposes shall be or become diminished;or (d)there be a temporary or permanent diversion of traffic from the street or streets adjacent to,or leading to or past, the said premises,or a change in the direction of traffic on such street or streets;or (e) the Lessee be unable to obtain from the authorities having jurisdiction any necessary permit for the erection or maintenance of such sign or signs (of special or standard size, design and construction) as the Lessee may desire to construct or maintain for the purpose of its business;or (f) the Lessee be prevented by any present or future law or ordinance,or by the authorities having jurisdiction,from constructing or maintaining on said premises such signs (of special or standard size,design and construction),as the Lessee may so desire to construct or maintain—then and in such event,at the option of the Lessee,this lease shall terminate on fifteen (15) days'notice in writing to the Lessor,by registered mail addressed to him at his address shown below,or such other address as the Lessor may hereafter in writing specify,and the Lessor agrees thereupon to return to the Lessee any rent paid in advance for the unexpired term;provided,however, that if the conditions described in (a),(b),(c),and(d)hereof, or any of them,shall at any time temporarily exist, then the Lessee shall at its option,in lieu of such termination of this lease,be entitled to an abatement of the rent payable hereunder,for and during the period of the existence of such conditions,or any of them,and to the return of any rent paid in advance for the period of such abatement. The Lessor represents and warrants that he is the owner of the premises above described and has authority to make this lease and covenants that tie will not permit any adjoining premises,owned,or controlled by him,to be used for advertising purposes or permit Lessee's signs to be obstructed. It is expressly understood that neither the Lessor nor the Lessee is bound by any stipulations,representations or aggreements not printed or written in this lease.This lease shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the personal representatives,successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Lessee hereby reserves the right,and said right is granted to Lessee to sell,assign and set over all of the Lessee's right,title and interest in this lease to any financially responsible assignee upon the express and written assumption by the assignee of all of the obligations of the Lessee herein named and upon such assumption,Lessee shall be fully discharged from any and all obligations under this instrument. *SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS i NAEGELE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING CO. LESSOR It (L SJ OF THE TWIN CITIES,INC. �L Address 8 0 orthwest Financi 1 Center Bloomington,94 1�PiI. Agenda Information Memo December 10, 1981 Page Thirteen AMCON-CORPORATION C. Amcon Corporation for Rezoning from A to PD to Allow Two Office Buildings & Hotel Complex, Preliminary Plat ` of Ravine Plaza and a Variance to Exceed the Height Limitation in a Commercial District -- The City Administrator is recommending continuance of this item until the January 19, 1982 City Council meeting. This will allow the height limitation committee to meet on December 17 and present their findings to the City Council at the January 5, 1982 meeting. Assuming there are no changes, it would be possible for the City Council to review the recommendation of the Advisory Planning ' Com- mission and give consideration to the applications as presented by Amcon Corporation. The City Planner has notified Amcon Corpora- tion as to the reasons why the City is requesting a continuance. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or `deny' a recom- mendation for continuance until the January 19, 1982 City Council meeting.- GRAVEL-PIT-LICENSE RENEWALS D. 1982 Gravel 'Pit License Renewals -- At the last City Council meeting ,held on December 1, 1981, there was a question raised about one consent item in relationship to the 1982 gravel pit conditional use license renewals. - Chief Building . Inspector Peterson has re- viewed both gravel permit renewal requests and has found' them to be in order for consideration. In a memo from Dale Peterson re- garding the e-garding ` the Arnold J. Leitner gravel permit renewal , he states the following, "The original permit< was issued in September of 1981 for storage, processing and handling of earth products used in landscaping. The operation is in accordance with the applicable' ordinances and conditions ." This permit is located at the end of Meadowview Drive in the proximity ' of Tripp Oil Company. The second gravel permit was granted in November of 1976 to Raunhorst Properties in Sections 2 3, 10 and 11 and has been renewed yearly. This renewal request" is basically for the mining operation located in the , I-35E corridor area of the NES of Section 10. Raunhorst has been obtaining excavation and fill permits at more defined locations as they are needed in accordance with ordinance regula- tions . Therefore, both permits have been reviewed by Chief Building Inspector Peterson and are found to be in order for consideration.' ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny renewal of the gravel permits for 1982. -77 Agenda Information Memo December 10, 1981 Page Fourteen DAVID FURLONG CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AMUSEMENT DEVICES A. David Furlong for a Conditional Use Permit for More thane 3 Amusement Devices in One Building -- A public hearing was held at the last regular meeting of the APC held on November 24, 1981 to consider a conditional use permit to 'allow more than three (3) amusement devices in a neighborhood business district located at 4215 Nicols Road. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending denial for the reasons stated in the minutes , a copy of which is enclosed on page For a copy of the City Planner's report, please refer to pages through ,/QQ . Enclosed on page /a•r is a copy of a letter to the City Admini trator from Rudolph eLuca, principal of Metcalf Junior High School. Also enclosed on pages Z through, 0 is a copy of a memo from Planning Commission m�ember Krob reTrEring position on amusement device licenses. A copy of the Newsweek article as provided by Mr. Krob was copied in the last City Council packet and therefore was not duplicated again for this agenda item. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS 'MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to deny the amusement device license as proposed. 4 5 9G DAVID FURLONG - AMUSEMENT DEVICE PERMIT The hearing regarding the application of David Furlong for conditional use permit for more than three amusement devices in a neighborhood business district at 4215 Nicols Road was next opened by Chairman Harrison. Mr. Furlong was present and indicated that he is proposing amusement devices and the sale of wearing apparel at 4215 Nicols Road, south of Diffley Road. He explained the hours including 11:00 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Thursday, and 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday, and 12:00 noon to 5:00 p.m. on Sunday. Planning Commission member Krob explained his reasons for opposition to the proposal including the following: 1. That there have already been several recent applications for amuse- ment devices in excess of 15 devices per location. 2. He requested that Mayor Blomquist contact the City of St. Paul and acquire information concerning the use of amusement devices in St. Paul estab- lishments where problems have allegedly occurred. 3. He has requested that the City Planner make a determination of the number of machines currently in operation in the City. 4. He objected to the potential adverse effect on children and read a magazine article concerning the results in other cities around the country. 5. He recommended that the Council review Ordinance, Section 73.11, to determine the exact meaning of the section relating to use of amusement de- vices by minors unaccompanied by adults or guardians. 6. He also contended that the location is too close to the Metcalf Junior High School which may create delinquency problems by students. After considerable discussion, Krob moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend the application be denied based upon the reasons that Krob cited above. Mr. Furlong stated that he met with the Principal of Metcalf Junior High School who indicated he had no objection to the proposal. All voted in favor except Bohne who voted No. Gits then moved, Harrison seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that there be further study concerning the Amusement Device Ordinance in light of the large number of applications being submitted to the City. All voted yes. Mr. Bohn stated that he recom- mended that the City not attempt to dicate morals, but to leave these issues to the families directly. q7 • • CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PEPMiIT FOR 3 AMUSEMENT DEVICES APPLICANT: DAVID FURLONG LOCATION: NE; OF THE NtiA4- OF SECTION 30, 4215 NICOLS ROAD EXISTING ZONING : NB (NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: NOVEMBER 24, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: NOVEMBER 18, 1981 REPORTED BY: DAVE OSBERG, PLANNING ASSISTANT APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a conditional use permit to allow more than 3 amusement devices in a Neighborhood Business District located at 4215 Nicols Road . BACKGROUND As requested by a member of the Advisory Planning Cormission, staff has reviewed the other conditional use permits that have been approved by the City. on Octo- ber 20, 1981, the City Council granted a conditional use permit to Leonard Norum for more than fifteen amusement devices in the Silver Bell Shopping Center. On November 4, 1981, the City Council granted a conditional use permit to Lawrence Miller for amusements devices in the A & W Restaurant located at 3998 Sibley Mem- orial Highway. Prior to the adoption of the ordinance regulating amusement de- vices which had taken place at the July 17, 1980 City Council Meeting, amusement devices were located in the Cedarvale Bowl and Cedarvale Shopping Center. A rough estimate of the number of amusement devices in Eagan indicates that there are 48 in the City of Eagan. COPIVUWTS The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for ten to twelve amusement devices in a retail store. The retail store being proposed would be located in the store front property awned by a Betty Dimmer. Renovation of the property would involve improvements to the existing walls and floor with the construction of shirt racks, dressing rooms and counters. The store would be a shirt and sweatshirt retail store specializing in custom printing for school teams, sport teams and local establishments. The amusement devices will be located within the confines of the store. Beverages and smoking will not be permitted in the store. There will be adult supervision in the store at all times. Hours of operation will be: 11:00 A.M. - 9:30 P.M., Monday-Thursday 11:00 A.M. - 10:00 P.M. , Friday-Saturday 12:00 Noon - 5:00 P.M. , Sunday If approved, the conditional use permit should be subject to the following condi- tions: If 1. Fulfilling all the requirements of Ordinance #E73. MD,DOTA :tiiS. } L. 1. i t 1 RB ' I c. o. c • ��. In 6B �- r c TER CLUB 6 ns - in -_ R-1 Ind RI ' Ind .. OR !I = LB o° ; • ��_ s• �R Rlil RIII 4 ,1. ) z SII Ind 7 & R-N R11 , x, Ind. R&b,. - - .'1 u'ie Vtq'✓ -: \ter.� - �— r- -. .-f✓d+ - i ' R 111 P ` R 1 O! ti r 1 - LB 5 Ind. RillAR-Ill R-III i' f' E NB LB a RII - n .-' L R-II lJ -• CSC — - j R-11 HE -- RIIILB RIIIRRIfR III R I - ,, I —__ O �p R. R-III CITYO _Q: HALL R-II I II Ind. _ R-I R- C 'a P. RI HS r R-11 G �. R-IV ;= 11 R I � I GB R-II 0 �/ p R=11 G I M R-II ,I R-III CLE3 N - LB o N ar Y s� RB R 111 M ,{ t RIIII-- - \ L ':-i {►i R I R-Ilt R-11 R I =` sat CSC/GB/LB E R-11 . I J ! R I I CSC R-II R II `P ,< - R-II ' R I P 1 R-11 NB R-I s�E wti ;tip RI k R LB R-III LB �g R! " w,,. CSC ..' (� z R I \ ` LB' E»+:. RB LBJ R-I �; R-I ` _ I L _ - m i R-I R I P GOLF ceu N'y` P R_I ® �AF� { i R-II �P R-II j R-11 ( J I 33 P - I s i R-i R-1I c 2, f i R-11 R-II » APPS[ LLEY �� -' I Q-�ROSEMCUNT ( CSC PK csc PF ^ e R , LB 1 / DAR \ I + ?y A� DT�' - r GBEEN D t R _ 4 , _ T A 796 PF , - - nI R R QNB �r ,. f P v NB R{ r 1-81 Lj o Q t o R-4 P 1 a ij Z. ' -i °' A ti • , PKC ''. � .•'1v.) / ' .• $ MAR I csc PK oL -'�F-- A L E � I A,' A --- - - • L--L—1 .J' i 1., I I I I RIVER ' ' ' � YESr R B A. „ ENTER L6 ' t ♦ � t _ � �Q� ' ;;. y , • . i � T r--- R I -r I i MEMO TO: Tom Hedges, City Administrator FROM: Rudolph P. DeLuca, Principal , Metcalf Junior Hi 56hec4a_ SUBJECT: Conditional use permit for three amusement devices DATE: 11-30-81 Not long ago, I received a notice of public hearing from the city of Eagan regarding a conditional use permit for more than three amusement de- vices in one building. Unfortunately, I received the notice after the public hearing date, so I could not attend that meeting. As principal of Metcalf Junior High School , I have a concern about the hours of operation of the said establishment. With the type of busi- ness and the close proximity to Metcalf Junior High School , I am afraid that some students may opt to spend part of their day playing the machines rather than attending classes. Although our student absences to date are minimal and we do try to account for all students absent from school , a place to go like this amusement device business, might prove to be enough of a temptation for some students to skip school for play. If the hours of the establishment were 5:00 p.m. , Monday through Fri- day, rather than 11:00 a.m. , I would have no objection. co �` `Y v_ .sem- 101 December 6, 1981 TO : Mayor Bea Blomquist and City Council FROM: Lloyd Krob, Planning Commission RE : Amusement Devices in the City of Eagan I am writing to express a great concern I have over the number of amusement devices being considered, or will be con- sidered for the city of Eagan. According to staff there are now machines in the Cedar- vale Bowl, the Cedarvale Shopping Center and the Nicols Land- ing Amusement Center. On October 20, 1981, the Council grant- ed a conditional use permit to Leonard Norum in the Silver Bell Shopping Center. At; the December 15th City Council meeting you will be asked to consider another conditional use permit at 4215 Nicols Road, just a short distance from Met- calf Junior High School. There are , now, approximately 48 amusement devices in Eagan, and in a very concentrated area at this time . Please read the enclosed "Newsweek" article to see what is happening throughout the United States. Investigate the problems they' are having in St. Paul. Listen to the concerns of parents. These amusement devices can be and will be a problem if the city doesn't plan carefully. I realize no city council should ever legislate the mor- als of a community, but, the Council and Planning Commission do have a responsibility of making this community a good place to live and raise a family. Thank you for your concern. Sincerely, j • i � w �oo � aw a :3D~ CC ~ N 0 10 woo a� w o m` S C. to oc p `y CD Dg ".. w.moi�G 0 � � wy3°0° � w Cin CD�wrycD 2.O:--O �mEd cr uo b N ca 0 oQ c° Ho • . �0• 8 0 x»CD .oc <o „oyw c 'mow06 Yo o w C Cl) 0 W G W -40 D C R ... - CY : fI iO , 0,tipoCD `< aop =o, o,� w ax 0aEna� '"o IW Ew a �° w ., 006 wo 9z CL 9`0 rES z oo a ;;w0acoa �M CD Cn 06�i 00 V-O o :3 ~ ~ 0 Cl) w � � .ti�'ap y N n N r lbw e~oEnCeox'aay CD 0 r.w a0 wqc O cD `A' � 0co0x o ° 0 a s,.9 co < e go m b o �w -9 crCL O ti C .. .:.� y Q O O CD CA 0w tr Agenda Information Memo December 10 1981 Page Fifteen CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR-HOUSING OF RUBBISH TRUCKS - FOURNIER B. Eileen Fournier for a Conditional Use Permit for the Housing of Two Rubbish Trucks -- A public hearing , was ' held to consider a building permit to store commercial vehicles in an Agricultural District by Eileen Fournier who resides at 1810 Cliff Road. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of the appli- cation. For additional information on the item, refer to the City Planner's report , a copy of which is enclosed on pages - /b '" through log for your reference. For a copy of the action to en by the APC, refer to a copy of the minutes found on page 110 ACTION TO BE CONSIDEREDON THIS , MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to approve the conditional use permit for Eileen Fournier for the housing of 2 rubbish trucks . 10d CITY OF EA GAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: EILEEN FOURNIER LOCATION: PART OF THE N14 OF THE NE34 OF SECTION 32, 1810 CLIFF ROAD EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: NOVOMER 24, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: NOVEMBER 19, 1981 REPORTED BY: DAVE OSBERG, PLANNING ASSISTANT APPLICATION SUBMITTED An application has been submitted requesting a building permit to store commercial vehicles in an Agricultural District. COT-q=S According to Ordinance 52.07, Subdivision 3B, allows the storage of commercial ve- hicles in an Agricultural District. The applicant lives at 1810 Cliff Road. The applicant would like to construct a 30' x 50' garage to store 2 rubbish trucks. The building would be 12 stories and made of metal or wood frame. It is staff's understanding that the trucks are only stored on the property at night and the trucks depart and return once a day. It is also the staff's understanding that this business is not operated on weekends. A letter from Orrin 'Thompson Homes is attached stating that there are no objections to the construction of the storage facility. If approved, the conditional use permit shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. Only 2 refuse trucks may be stored on the property, and if more trucks are to be stored there, approval must be granted by the City of Eagan. 2. All trucks must be licensed for the current year. 3. The conditional use permit shall be reviewed annually. If there are no com- plaints, the conditional use permit shall be granted for another year. DO/jach j05� OrrinThompson Homes A Division of U.S. Home Corporation 1712 HOPKINS CROSSROAD MINNETONKA,MINNESOTA 55343 544-7333 November 13, 1981 To Whom It May Concern: Orrin Thompson Homes has entered into a purchase agreement to sell the property located at 1810 Cliff Road. It is our understanding that the buyer would like to erect a garage approximately 30' x 50' . We do not believe that a building of this size would negatively effect the adjoining property which we currently own, as long as the building constructed is property located on the acreage and built according to City Codes. Sincerely, �! I J. W. Fria/nks Broker Sales Manager ORRIN THOMPSON HOMES, a Division of JWF:ps U. S. Home Corporation 166 I ' i °251.00 � 1 of =„/ o cr, � o - 0: a H0Lk 31' 8 0 J o c O OY O � 3 •�3ttL , i a .2S4.00 1810 CLIFF ROAD l �o� t E..,D T, HTS. Ind 41, CC R _ sw ttua -- GOLF LAKE a,•. . r Ind. j Ind .t •. tt rnKi - ' r .Ind E LB v ! - -- o ` i? P RIII RIII 1 -- ,�., u j R•II FII Ind 7 a e R N RII -' - . R RIII \yam R I D LB • —-- -- i� Ind = --= R-111 - -1 /�- — R-II y --*-� R-111 NB LB R Ii R II CSC S j y - •, - CEf 4F LB .•—_ _ YI{/ CSI. R-II ✓ I. P LB RIII f /r. R-111 '� ti:,•, R 1 ;y �_"—� RR, . zs — RI P h R-II - - ® N R-IV. '• - � ''_Tt. �, :R-III r " �., CITY .� ,---' ILA *t �: e II R 7- R-II - cl -; Ind. B f HALL F R-I - -- R-II 1 r R NS -B R R-11 R-II LBIP R-111 -0 .T J• LB N 'i i RB R-III - _ -- -- E. •/ M ' I `�!1} ! ' R I RIII R-Ilt R'lll :! r +' CSC/GB/LBC /. R-III - — (AIs t R t •R-I° E D I "^ p RII CSC P � i ' R-11 R-IIP - �n . R-II I - f R-1INI3 _w LB R-III LB CSC »nc z �R-iv� L LB RB LBcr c�> R-I p ' �� 4�� R-I i � •'r s'' L_'� R-I _ p criG' R Ioar�ra R-I R-II O GOLF PAR, P P4Rn P � R-II �; R-11 or.;cawrRApr ( v `y - .� b Ilf -,ROSEMOU`JT APPLE VALLEY ` ` 1 V `T �ti-tom' �.� .�. '^ Wrt<1• �� PDI 77-2 R- 1 C S C T7-T� A I }� SAFARI N ' LE �,_ IN A $ ��., Is E9GAN . L-1--z-.jJo ' --- v Y / r� R I L I cr. + A AD"TI R"3 Y R ILI � r PK PK • ^fir �i yr ` � 471 ^ �.?r.1 }�tiJ�_,�M j"':tiy vfti}� •�'r+! �. J r r>' -t.,. .+-+�. _ �- tiJ JJ. {f ✓a`J� 1'�f,,a>,f'J;) 3 . PK 1J ��jJ 7J? 1 �• \ F `'�� R j�� TT ..i• 1. .a ..f "f �'�' ,1 • � ��+?y �,•�f�^7� ,r•.,J , .J ',�-} ' if�f'f•:� <' .`�_ \ ,' - / aI \J +• :'„} Z `><'../� �'I�Jj )v}�� �'i..)J .. " d' J., J ) -; f � v.}�'.,-7 +� � - .- IL. f `J �,3� '7 , t. .i �. )� , Zf -✓• ! A "'..j,)! •.1 trY .1 i j,., •I••� t.•-J ,f'\.�''. _)J� Jr 7.1 �j. .:+„ ,}�l �krS , �T� e� ''!-1)J'r aj,•7 , ..�>.1.).a ..:l, J.f ,,,�j j. 3'v �S�,)t j':`�r+J��.. .,} ,r l:j� '�.:;cJ �.', i� ..Y.'f�+i J ,b +� }� :J).�') }! I.•�,,1_� "}~s'vT ! w� I .� � ; Sj��J _ J �.i- .��, f �-!, .! •.� - r -J +1:� 4J•,'..�,� ,` 'i�,,,r i � - �S'f }t J:, ,� �.;} �'• ,�.}Jj�_ ���'�v��; L�:;.} } •�-J i�),.J :+j� .�i. ,.J;:):'j.f� J'► ��•��J�.1 ' •� ?. � ,.j" '%'✓.3.%. +�a � � ., j' .S L:;,J � ,7 ( ,?. �iLfkX: I .i �'• ,, t .I A l y Jam'':) ���-`"av✓ \ � T;t}� ,,1 J, >>•, L•^ 1J. - .f j",�y.} 'fir` _y.� :•. � „ ..}� � r ,�,1.•• �'� .)>> > ,,• f , +�J -t `��r�J: y_1 .} .,r ) .) `'A�t.+�-� ` 1)✓..} .1.yj, 4 ,,,,1,' i '} 1 ', > ��Jj J ?>-J) ) i.ln� ?.:%�t•J� l a'.t h> -ii� R) i} ..a�+..a-;' .�1;} 1 ,;.. 3 1� '�•., y _ '.✓.,. 1- �•. ".;�.j.,'T .�.^'tl.'`i��;J� `3�'� ;},T: 1,� `.-; VALLEY A P I Oct APC Minutes November 24, 1981 was noted the owners of the surrounding property of Lot 1, Block 1, Pilot Knob Heights lst Addition are the Minneapolis Jewish Federation and Phoenix Jewish Federation. Harrison moved, Gits seconded the motion to continue the applica- tion until the next regular meeting to acquire more answers to the questions that were raised by commission members. All voted yes. EILEEN FOURNIER - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The hearing regarding the application of Eileen Fournier for conditional use permit to construct a building for commercial vehicles in an Agricultural District at 1810 Cliff Road. Ms. Fournier was present and stated that the property where the Fourniers currently are located and operate their garbage hauling business will have to be moved because -of the I-35E relocation. Her proposal is to construct a 30 ft. x 50 ft. garage to store two rubbish trucks on a 3.7 acre parcel on the south side of Cliff Road, surrounded by the Ridgecliff Addition. It was noted that none of the lots surrounding the property, which is heavily wooded, have been built upon at the present time. The parcel is being purchased from Orrin Thompson Homes which had no objection to the proposed use. It was also noted that there is an attached garage existing on the property. There was discussion concerning potential future complaints and it was recommended that annual review of the application be made by the City. The applicants indicated that they understood the potential for complaints and the possibility of the City cancelling the conditional use permit in the future if there are serious complaints concerning the operation. K rob moved, Bohn seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application based upon the assurances by the applicant that they understood that there may be basis for denial of the permit on an annual basis and conditioned upon the following: 1. Only 2 refuse trucks may be stored on the property, and if more trucks are to be stored there, approval must be granted by the City of Eagan. 2. All trucks must- be licensed for the current year. 3. The conditional use permit shall be reviewed annually. If there are no complaints, the conditional use permit shall be granted for another year. Those in favor were Harrison, Krob, Gits and Bohne; and those against were Wilkins, Turnham and Vogt. Member Wilkins stated that she opposed the applications because the area surrounding the property is all residential and the commercial-type truck operation should not be allowed in that type loca- tion. KNOB HILL OF EAGAN - REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT The hearing regarding the application of Edmund B. Dunn, Blackhawk Park Associates, to rezone approximately 40 acres from Agricultural to Planned Development, containing 10.5 acres of limited business and 19.7 acres of residential, with 84 condominium units and 102 townhouse units, and applica- tion for preliminary plat approval containing 11 lots was then convened. Mr. Jack Boerman, Architect, Mr. Greg Frank, Engineer and Mr. Dunn were present. An attempt will be made to preserve trees and very little grading is planned. 4 116 Agenda Information Memo December 10, 1981 Page Sixteen FINAL RESOLUTION IR`FINANCING FOR FITZGERALD/DRESSER C. Final Resolution for $750,000 I.R. Financing for Figzgerlad/ Gresser Office Project -- The City has received a final resolution for the $750,000 commercial development revenue note of 1981 'con- cerning the Fitzgerald/Gresser officeproject .' ACTION TOBECONSIDERED` ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the final resolution for the I. R. financing issue to Fitzgerald/Gresser. ADVERTISING SIGNS FOR DUCKWOOD TRAIL APARTMENTS D. Duckwood Trail Apartments for Two Temporary Advertising Signs - An application for two (2) temporary advertising signs for the Duckwood Trail Apartments has been received by the City Planner. For additional information on the request for the advertising signs , refer to the City Planner' s report, a copy of 'which is enclosed on pages 117.. through - 115 for your reference. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the two (2) temporary, advertising signs as requested. fit TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: DECMEBER 9, 1981 RE: TWO TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIMS FOR DUCKWOOD TRAIL APAR'IT=S In reviewing Ordinance 16, the sign ordinance, temporary advertising signs are allowed on property zoned Agricultural, Commercial or Industrial. In review- ing the spacing requirements, temporary advertising signs do not have to meet the 1,000 lineal foot spacing, or 300 lineal foot spacing, if signs are located across the street. The spacing requirement may be waived for temporary adver- tising signs for residential development. On November 5, 1981, Mx. Dale Peterson, Chief Building Insnector, informed Nord- quist Sign Co. that they had erected two temporary advertising signs without obtaining a special permit from the Eagan City Council. Mr. Peterson informed the advertising company that they either had to remove the signs immediately, or apply for this special permit for temporary advertising signs. The applicant has made the application. SIGN 1 Sign 1 is proposed to be located in the northwest quadrant of Yankee Doodle Rd. and Lexington Avenue. The proposed sign would be 8 x 8, or 64 square feet, and be no rare than 12' in height. The proposed sign does meet all the sign criteria of Ordinance 16 in regard to temporary advertising signs. SIGN 2 ` Sign 2 is proposed to be located in the southeast quadrant of Pilot Knob Rd. and Yankee Doodle Rd. Presently this sign does exist - it would contain 8 x 8, or 64 square feet of signage,and stand no mre than 12' in height. As you can see at this location, the sign does not block the visibility of any other temporary advertising signs at this location. Enclosed is a site plan showing the location of each of the proposed signs and photographs of the existing signs as they stand to date. If approved, the signs should be subject to the following conditions: 1. The sign shall be set back 10' from all property lines. 2. The temporary advertising sign shall not exceed a 2-year time period, and the advertising sign shall be renewed after the first year. DCR/jach NOTE: This item is not on the December 15th agenda - please add. ��2 J( I I Adlk i . i I �� i ?� z - N e W 2 i 2 6 NY W• j_ W L i } j r ' 1� d i ��"' - r3"�'a„'•.3`:.`�`y, �-t iK.,R"'-3 T�,i��;'Jf�{ �. Y-i -r�,��i"�„-_; �'`"`�'�,ix'.�iw FFa Xccetr.k-Sry v R"tKY ?`' `'•'S � '` 3 '`'� 1' "�'° =�a, i p�; 4s"' `4�-»,C_s azr { 'LC*f'Ta.= ♦ "tt y tS-'',.a i ..3�`ia. �....5r' [�. � �r�'"+�.,3G�^ e'�1 F?� 'C ����.�._�.f.S, '."a�•'Y9a - yr z.. �-�,r„�>.-.t,�, •. •'� -. e-r} r r rr iA �� �;� ,.�„ �.. 3575 t1:Kl'1CfOYAVI: �, � � ,. S Y� ;�,►.i"'. - :JJ" ,A,r r(;}hlYw �� -�R x �.' �•�fs� � �xtth 5{�ar+ "q,,.r ,xsr++x� ��,..i..-�.rhyJ.r�� xr�.Yrx'S"mr; a`.• __:� d...,�r '�- 7�t +,-:.r l�J.` ��� -a=: - �+'f:.ri` t y�"w�`74Yo.Qy .�e+r:"fi,el.5srt'�r S .x'I yam'.�.4' '+��4 _ i�.�E• ��C y. � { � .�. wsy�rh� � �r [a ,. . "t'+w�a-"•r Mgr'..-Ig•.:�,r3�,��,��eYt`ey3".f'S. .y!•„�v`.r �`�i�'+:i�,�: 7ti'" �..1 ��i � �• ..�.; x .+ r t - - iA y P U S POSTAL # SERVICE '.. R-3 L OADDITION NB R - 4 i GB 1 _ Z A A A � R GLB RB GB k5? L B R-4 R T14 f _ 3 -C-sf, I € IfWOOD Lf RAILS R 4 t I- � s t i R- 2 ,-n -- R -4 1 A r- R Fl k �.� wdp -3 R_ I 1�l R- 1 CITY HAS R" I - ;� ' �r R_I PF A R - �. : } 1 / - ES OTT Rt A17 PF r WiNDC/-� IIS A A Agenda Information Memo December 10,` 1981 Page Seventeen STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN A. Metropolitan Council's Draft Storm Water Management Plan -- The City has received a proposed draft of a storm water management plan from the Metropolitan Council for review and comment . The Public Works Department has reviewed this document in detail and has prepared a summary/report highlighting the 'contents of that plan. This report is enclosed for the Council 's information on pages '7 through -12'j, A formal position should be taken by the Counc-ipso that it---c—an--be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for incorporation in their public hearing to be held December 17 1981 . Because the document incorporates 121 pages', it is best to leave the document on file in the Public Works Department for review by any Councilmember if they so desire. If copies of the document or any portion thereof are desired by any member of the Council, please contact the City Administrator' s office and they will be delivered with the administrative agenda on Monday. ` ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve a resolution of position pertaining ; to the Metropolitan Council ' s 208 draft Surface Water Management Plan and authorize the Mayor and 'City Clerk .to execute said resolution. 11 1 • • TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, C/O THOP'TAS L. HEDrES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: DECEMBER 10, 1981 RE: METROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S SURFACE WATER kQMGEMENT PLAN On November 24, 1981, the City of Eagan received official notification from the Metropolitan Council requesting review of a proposed draft Surface Water 11anagement Plan proposed by the Metropolitan Council as a part of a metropol- itan development guide chapter on water resources. We have been requested to review this proposal and provide appropriate comments for the public record prior to the Metropolitan Council's formal action on this proposed plan. I. INTRODUCTION Background As a part of the Federal Clean Water Act (Public Law 95-217) , the Federal government mandated that regional water cruality management plans must be pre- pared dealing with water quality. Subsequently, the Minnesota State Legisla- ture required a regional water resources management development guide to be prepared. Part I, which is referred to as the 208 Plan, dealt with "point source" pollution of area waters from sewage treatment plants, industrial dis- charges, combined storm/sanitary sewer systems, etc. Part I was adopted by the Metropolitan Council on March 9, 1979 and amended August 13, 1981. Part II of the Federal Clean Water Act mandate requires attention towards "non-point source" pollution which is generated by overall storm water run- off at the public waters (lakes, rivers, streams, etc.) . Subsequently, the Metropolitan Council has prepared a 121-page Draft Development Guide for "Surface water Management" for review and comment by affected agencies. If adopted by the Metropolitan Council, it will supersede Protection Open Space and Water Resources Development Guide Chapters adopted in 1973. Part II ("non-point source pollution") is required to deal with the quality of water affected by storm water run-off. The Met Council has expanded this to also incorporate problems associated with the Quantity problems associated with storm water run-off. The Dakota County Planning Department held an informal meeting to discuss this proposed plan with the Northern Dakota County communities on Monday, November 30th. The Metropolitan Council held an area public meeting on Tuesday, Decem- ber 8, with a public hearing before the Met Council scheduled for Thursday, December 17th. II. BASICS OF PROPOSED SURFACE WATER YMAGE7%= PLAN Pollution Source Identification The source of "non-point" pollutions are identified in the urban areas as construction sediments, oil/grease drippings or spills, and heave metals from vehicular and industrial emissions deposited on streets and parking lots Metropolitan Council's Surface Water Management Plan December 10, 1981 Page two and subsequently transported into storm sewer systems. In rural/agricultural areas, the problems are associated with animal feedlot run-off, pesticides, herbicides and fertilizer run-off along with topsoil erosion into local streams and rivers. Study Area During 1980, several state and/or regional agencies measured and monitored pollutant levels in 60 lakes (10 acres or more) in the Metropolitan area. Of the 60 studied, Thomas Lake was the only lake within Eagan to be studied. Regionalization/Watershed Districts In order to manage surface water on a metropolitan-wide basis, the Metropolitan Council has proposed the designation and initiation of 43 watershed districts covering the 7-County Metropolitan area. The major portion of Eagan lies with- in, and also constitutes the major land area, of the proposed watershed district designated as Gun Club Lake. Small portions adjacent to Burnsville lie within the Blackdog Lake Watershed District and the northeastern portion of Eagan lies within the lower,Mississippi River Watershed District as referenced on the at- tached map. The Watershed District governing body is proposed to consist of 5-7 members appointed by the local county from a nomination list submitted by the affected cities within that particular watershed district boundary. Planned Preparation and Implementation The Metropolitan Council's proposal requires the preparation of plans and man- agement programs with the governing county jurisdiction responsible for its preparation, review, coordination of municipalities, and financing coordinations with county projects. The coppleted plan must then be submitted to the metro- politan Council for review, conTent and approval, with final approval by the State of Minnesota. The implementation of individual projects would have to be coordinated through the county who would establish its respective timetable. Met Council's Review Authority This draft plan is recommending that the 1976 Metropolitan Land Planning Act be amended to require all cities to develop approved storm water management plans to conform to the guidelines of this proposed Surface Water Management Plan and subsequently incorporate it into its local Comprehensive Guide Plan document. The Metropolitan Council would then obtain authority to review and approve watershed management unit plans, and also the authority to make funds avail- able for watershed planning in accordance with a distribution formula that has not yet been determined. The Metropolitan Council would consider the ex- istence of an adequate local Storm 11ater Management Plan to be a critical cri- terion in future review of the local comprehensive plans, comprehensive sewer plans and all A-95 review processes. Metropolitan Council's Surface Water Management Plan December 10, 1981 Page three Cost and Financing Although there will be four categories of implementation - (1) Planning, (2)_ Operation of a surface water control plan, (3) Resolution of existing flooding and storm water problems, (4) Lake restoration, this draft proposal focuses primarily on the first two. Planning and program preparation phases under, the first category ar_e estima- ted to cost$6+ million dollars. The ongoing Storm Water Management Control Program under the second category is estimated to cost approximately $43,000,000 initially with $10.5 million dollars per year for operation and maintenance with no administration or debt service costs included. Because reliable cost estimates cannot be ob- tained until the planning phase has been completed, the calculated estimate for existing problem resolutions and lake restoration is guesstimated at $100-500 million dollars excluding the Minneapolis Flood Control Project. The proposed financing would involve four levels: regional (Met Council) , watershed district, local government and individual property owners. The financing of the 6+ million dollars for the first phase of the plan and pro- gram preparation would be by the Metropolitan Council, who would in turn levy a one time property tax totaling approximately 0.567 mils against the assessed valuation of the metropolitan Area. Based on the 1981 assessed valuation for the City of Eagan, we would be contributing approximately $70,000 through this proposed one time property surtax mil levy. Priorities Based on the results of the study and survey done in 1980, 43 watershed dis- tricts have been given priorities for pollution control reduction programs. All three watershed districts affecting the City of Eagan have been designated the lower secondary priority with "no further management practices necessary, but requires comprehensive storm water management plans" due to its low water quality pollution levels as calculated by the computer models extended frit the 1980 sampling program. Top priority has been generally given to the water bodies providing drinking water to St. Paul and high multi-use regional recrea- tional lakes with public access with the lower priorities being designated to- wards single use and aesthetic lakes. III. STAFF COP?IENrS AND RECOTMIENIDATIONS Although the original mandate of the Federal Clean Water Act required the pre- paration of region wide water quality management plans to deal with both point and non-point source pollution, storm water management plans dealing with quan- tity storm water run-off has not yet been mandated by Federal law. However, the Metropolitan Council is proposing to incorporate both quantity and cuality under their proposed Surface Water PlanagemQnt Plan. As with all plans, there are certain advantages and disadvantages to this proposal. The advantage ap- pears to lie with the designation of a watershed district which would be the • • r Metropolitan Council's Surface Water Management Plan December 10, 1981 Page four` governing body pertaining to storm water improvement projects within its respective jurisdiction. The only advantage of a watershed district over cooperation joint powers agreements between affected municipalities lies within the fact that a watershed district has the powers of assessment over all contributory lands without the burden of having to prove "benefit" to the individual properties involved. This singular factor would eliminate a vast majority of assessment appeals and litigations that are commonly associated with storm sewer improvement projects and resulting assessments. The disadvantages associated with this program involve the creation of another governmental jurisdictional body (watershed district) that would be given control over developm nt and growth within individual communities within its boundaries. In addition, it would provide for the Metropolitan Council to become involved in local storm water projects on an approval basis under penalty of future metropolitan area-wide fund disbursements. Many ccn=ities presently have adequate storm water management presently being followed in the city's developmental growth. The plan preparation phase of this program would require the residents of the City of Eagan to pay an additional $70,000 in property tax revenue to initiate a new com- prehensive storm sewer management plan in accordance with the Metropolitan Council's guidelines. Staff feels that this would be a duplication of ef- fort and an additional administrative burden to be placed on the City of Eagan in lieu of more responsive spending of the proposed generated revenue on a local level. Because of the present low priority due to low levels of measured pollutants within our proposed watershed district, the City of Eagan would have to jus- tify the merits of future dollar expenditures to clean up pollution problems associated with other geographic areas of the Metropolitan area who have not incorporated adequate storm water management plans during their developmental periods. To date, representatives of the Cities of Rosemount, Lakeville, Apple Valley, Mendota Heights and the Dakota County Board of Commissioners have all sub- mitted comments objecting to this proposed Surface Water Management Program. A ccmmn concern of all objectors appears to pertain to the logic of initiating new plans and programs when existing programs .. are presently being required to be reduced or eliminated due to current financial crises being experienced by local comtUnities. The staff would much rather prefer to see efforts extended in a revision to the existing special assessment laws pertaining to current storm water manage- ment programs to provide for a more efficient,and ultimately economically,means of providing storm water improvements to local communities. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council take some formal action pertaining to this plan at their meeting on December 15, 1981 so that an offi- cial response can be entered into the record of the Metropolitan Council's public hearing scheduled for 'Thursday, December 17th. Attached to this memo is a sample resolution that the Council may want to review and revise as appro- priate to be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council's attention. I ZO Pletropoltain Council's Surface Water Management Plan December 10, 1981 Page five This memo is meant to serve as a summary analysis of the 121-page document so as to keep you informed of the new proposals being presented by the Metro- politan Council. If any Councilmember would like to review the proposed draft copy of the Surface Water Management Plan in detail, or discuss any aspect of it with me, please do not hesitate to contact rye. Respectfully submitted, 0� 14gL� - Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/jach 12 � • RESOLUTION • CITY OF EAGAN ME'T'ROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S 208 DRAFT SURFACE [MATER MANAGE= PLAN WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has prepared a draft plan dealing with quanity and quality storm water in accordance with the Federal Clean Water Act (Public Law 95-217) ; and WHEREAS, this draft Surface Water Management Plan is required to address "non- point" sources of pollution into public water bodies; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council is soliciting com-ents from affected agencies; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Eagan requests that the follaiing comments be entered into the public record in consideration of ap- proval of this proposed Storm Water Management Plan: 1. While water quality and pollution abatement is a concern of all indi- viduals in an organized society, we feel that its control could be better administered and enforced on a local level. 2. It is felt that technical assistance should be made available on a regional basis in lieu of proposed mandated programs requiring con- formance to area-wide standards that may not be applicable to indi- vidual local situations. 3. While water quality pollution may extend beyond boundaries of local jurisdictions requiring a more comprehensive resolution, planning, administration and control over storm water quantity conveyance and management should remain at the local level. DATED: December 15, 1981 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN THOSE VOTING IN FAVOR: , AGAINST: ATTEST: BY: Beatta Blom-mist, Mayor By: E.J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota County of Dakota City of Eagan I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a Resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan at a regular meeting of Decenber 15, 1981. E. J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk 12�- a :1 , I' _ ✓ f �i J�-f� �P t�1 F"14 rl+'1 a[ f,.5 ��,.�r 1 Y• ly �3-J l Figure 23. SECONDARY 39 WATERSHEDS --fT/RANCIS� BfTM[L I 4 I LAST/(T L 31;PhS I 'JaK GROVE I v ' SUNRISE R. AUfa It ————-� A 1 M SEPTEBER I21i 11w I r [ A C RAMSEY A CO Maus / 0� Q, A YCR NrLAK[ I .V FORES / KE/ I -CANC, A. �t ISR. FORE I I B ?'I+PtN c�z�rr, I OON CA I I 1 f_R! PRIMARY RR/91 ERS•RYG� HASSAN I OATTON _ LINO LAKES r R 8/�[�������.F�G+TW1G CMAYIL C N RAPIDS MAP wVniFlN[TT i I OL E CEN/LRYILL[ 8w �"�/} I RRRN M j . " - NANOYER MUGO I I ELM � LIX Gram CIRCLE Pines W� � oss(o WAS IN ON CO. GREENFIE CORCORAN MAKE aNO 11 MOUNDS 3NOR[YI[r —I �•— BROOKLYN I K VIEW NORTH ' I 22 OCKFORD OLEY 12 OAKS WHI BEAR I STILL'NA7E HENNEPIN CO. E /ROD YN L CENT R NEN I•..... I 'RANT r V 2 (— IB9IGHTON XIGNDNAIS IS 4 SRO CROW R. '['l OR TO I C STAL I n ARDEN25 2�S STIL ATE •+ HILLS +'02 IEw 14 I INOtIENOENCL NA ILTMOUTN I E _10 1 1 ANAO ,.ITTL 30 ROSE LLE ANAOA N [- f AIL[MAIN - Bim^ ST.IPA — -i q I MS — 1 __ _-�LCNG •VALOEi '1}..I. �• AILEW O00 L—rl ',DAL[ LANE yg dAYT N!y� —� ,Par i�L• ____ 1 i RW I I e A".,OrN "O ° r— ` ,ST PAUL RAMSE CO. I i 1 rill', RISTA yp,� EHAEIWpcfG rIKNnONKA S( LOUIS MMS I VALLEYI�E` •V7Ls'•wCt•C• I -c Pr, + WY4 �— V4RK SAINT/1tUt. 1 �lA t: wN •�: ! OLP• ' 2 BR I i ~ 9 '•�// D[EP fY 'INS'.'- i CRgN R. i/ 'a/ '+ ,p =L t- // I sr.crol:of (� 119 s� i EDIKA I ST. I J• w000lut[iF GERMAN• IN ER a� 1 ryl8 I•A UL SOUTH -..��J WEN AF7 WLE RIC NF!f AIRI MEND TA- Sr' Mf WPDRT I ICTORI MAN S PUR ,AR. B� '12' N[I 3 0 N AUL •ACOMIA R11. IN tRAI RI CSMOEN I CONIA KETOwN I'`Al• LMN •• ;••.•.•.•,• ,�•:• Sr.PAUL LOWER OMINGT AN L— I CARVIER ; CMASKA BLU ( I :�'?V*::,: '•:•:, INVER ROVIE 7 CR01x _ 1 :•:.W,CRN.•.• M(1 HTf COTTAGE OY \vaP• 1 — l riRVER CHA-mac AX NG II KaLEAN 20MMNr ICA 0 SHAKOPEE BLCO R I LMS c •I OGNF. aEN i �— PR*RT L. SAY E 1 BURNSVILLE a' DUNG AMERICA I SEh:ON I ' PRIOR APPLE VALLEY ■OSEMOUNT Ab fI BEVENS CR.I U i0U'SVi� c LAR[ 1 - -----t---- _ -- 0® .. INGS 1 I .NcocK SAN` REDIT_ ( OA ---I- _� N � � I I ------a � ISAND CRE I SPRING LA I 'ROLA KE VILLL I RIVERi . EMPIRE I a I �+sRSraN I 1�1 OT C I FARrIMGTOM I VERYILl10N I I Si,l PFNCE'.I JORDAN L.� UMN- :B(1LEI IME i SAND CR. R I ---- -------------- ' 9 LE PLAINE I -IELENa I .� aRnET I I - INA rTro ONES CLA y ROB I _-aR LAKE I I -JREKA I 1 M( "IKEI ;• I MIESV ll[ I N[A/RAG L'[• I I • �a MPTON I „•„•iL=j I KO CANNON R. CHUB CFL �.00L, ,?N CoSko.10 �LEj S :O1 20 25 � ,OPEENVaLE 'wart BLA BLACK DOG LAKE BLU BLUFF CREEKGUN GUN CLUB LAKE MSC MIDDLE ST.CROIX RIVER BMC BIG MARINE-CARNELIAN HBA HAZELTINE•BAVARIA RUR PURGATORY CREEK BRO BORWNS CREEK LMN l flvvcR "ININIFcn-A nl..cr RPI RILEY CREEK