Loading...
01/06/1998 - City Council Regularpa AGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING JANUARY 6,1998 6:30 P.M. I. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES (BLUE) III. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (10 MINUTE TOTAL TIME LIMIT) IV. DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS (BLUE) A. SELECTION of aquatic facility consultant V. CONSENT AGENDA (PINK) A. PERSONNEL 11 EMS B. APPROVE Ski Trail Grooming Agreement C. AUTHORIZE plans and specifications, Civic Arena addition/second sheet of ice D. CONFIRMATION of Findings of Fact, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial, Jon Paul Herbst (Cain Addition) located at 2890 Skyline Drive in the SW 1/4 of Section 4 E. APPROVE National League of Cities membership for 1998 F. APPROVE application and investigation fees for Adult Use and Adult Companionship/Escort Services Provider Licenses G. APPROVE license agreement, drainage & utility easement within Lot 10, Block 4, Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 4 H. AMEND final assessment roll, Project 687 (Biscayne Avenue - Street & Utility Improvements) I. CONTRACT 95 -EE, acknowledge completion/authorize City maintenance (Deerwood Townhomes - Utilities) J. APPROVE Thorson -Cornwell Co. Assessment Settlement Agreements - Projects 682 and 718 K. RESOLUTION to submit Mighty Kids Grant to Amateur Sports Commission VI. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS (SALMON) VIII. IP 9? A. EASEMENT VACATION, sanitary sewer easement within Outlot A, Robins Addition OLD BUSINESS (ORCHID) A. INITIATION of a request for special legislation allowing an increase to the number of on -sale liquor licenses available to be issued B. BUILDING MOVE PERMIT, Jim Simonet C. RECONSIDERATION of approval for Cain Addition - Jon Paul Herbst D. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - Chapter 11, entitled "Land Use Regulations" (Zoning) by amending Section 11.21 Shoreland Zoning NEW BUSINESS (TAN) A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, John Young, to allow a 150' free standing tower and antenna and VARIANCES of 10' from the required 20' side -yard setback, 40' from the rear -yard setback and to the preferred co -location requirement of 1/2 mile for property legally described as Lot 3, Block 2, Halley's Addition, located at 4870 Biscayne Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 30 B. REZONING, Artifacts, from Agricultural (A) to Limited Business (LB) to convert an existing single-family home at 3345 Lexington Avenue to a commercial arts building, located on the southwest corner of Lexington Avenue and Northwoods Drive in the SE 1/4 of Section 10 C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, Nationwide Group, to allow outdoor storage of rental and moving trucks at the Acorn Mini -Storage, legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #10, located at 2935 Lexington Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 3 D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - Transport 21, Inc., to allow leasing and storage of semi -tractors on Lot 4, Block 1, Eagandale Corporate Center, located at 920 Aldrin Drive in the SE 1/4 of Section 11 p/60 p ids pi69 E. REQUEST by Caponi Art Park to support proposed legislation granting special tax and special assessment treatment of a 60 -acre tract of property at 1215 Diffley Road F. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - Chapter 6, Individual Companionship/Escort Services Provider licensing G. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - Chapter 10, Potentially Dangerous and Dangerous Dog IX. LEGISLATIVF/INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE (GREY) X. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA (GREEN) XI. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda) XII. ADJOURNMENT XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, or status with regard to public assistance. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will attempt to provide such aid. Updated 1/2/98 - 9:45 a.m. MINUTES P3F:A:n , 14;; : ;:M ZTING OF THE Ei i 1 Gari COUNCIL Eagan, Minnesota . December 16, A regular meeting of the Eagan City eiLi:10-0).;):00.4Sif on Tuesday, December 16,1997 at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present:wer ;Meyo% Egan and Councilmembers Wachter, Awada, Masin and Blomquist. Also present were City Administrator Tom Hedges, Senior Planner Mike Ridley, Director of Public Works Tom Colbert, and City Attorney Jim Sheldon. END Councilmember Wachter moved,'Coiurir erlIv as:in seconded a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 ViINUrES OF THE PEC*..0.R 3,19.#40.14: -AA MEETING Councilmember Blomquist moi' ti Coiinciltit iii •'Wachter seconded a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 MINUTES' OF THE "DECEMBER 3, 1997 EAGAN }MUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT' tpOARD MEETING Councilmember Blomquist moved, uncilmember Awada seconded a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS AUTHORIZATION T(?f:Fit 'GEED WITH RFP FOR SWIMMING POOL City Administrator Hedges provided an overview on this item. Mayor Egan explained that there is a tremendous amount of process the City Council has to undertake to investigate the possibility of a swimming pool and stated that informational meetings will be scheduled in March. He added that they are in a very preliminary stage at this t•ime::•Gou•c ixMber. Masin stated that she would be voting against this item because she felt the AX?i:'C: hoiild r ei::tov ew this issue, prioritize needs and determine potential sites for this facility. Councilmember Blomquist said that a favi y simil4i 0 this was always a potential use for this site. She added that this is the preliminary stage t said ncttetl that she is concerned about how much money will be expended on this project. Councilmember Wachter moved, Councilmember Awada seconded a motion to approve the Request for Proposal seeking design consulting services related to an aquatic facility and to appoint Councilmembers Awada and Wachter to an interview selecjinp team. Aye: 4 Nay: 1 (Councilmember Resident Jeff Gregory said the:a9i f lG00§:..,.. _wits neighborhood and further said he is not in favor of it. He submitted a petition cMri aifi g sag i tiii : if homeowners of the Windcrest Homeowners Association who are also opposed to the faci1it : CONSENT AGENDA In regard to Item A6, 1998 Compensation/Non-Collective Bargaining Employees , Councilmember Blomquist questioned increasing compensation rates for all employees 3% across the Masin opposed) In regard to Item C, On -Sale Liquor!..eier's of Eagan, Inc. (former Cracker Barrel site), 3010 Eagandale Place, Councilmember Wa tei: i ked when the establishment will be open for business and if highway signage had been coordinated with MnDOT. City Administrator Hedges stated that MnDOT has given approval to the signage. Joe Senser, owner of Senser's, said that they plan to have the business open by May 1. In regard to Item G, Authorizati ix; iai j iii p ..0 Motel properties, 2788 and 2794 Highway 55, preparation of agreement for owner's consent t6':8emolisli:aiid preparation of appraisal, Councilmember Wachter asked about the demolifi i of the biii ding. Assistant to the City Administrator Hohenstein explained the timeline for demolition;::::;: In regard to Item I, Adopt envirOit1''as4comments regarding extension of Runway 4/22 to 12,000 feet, Councilmember Blomquist suggesied't$tat comment four on page 43 of the Council packet be deleted. Assistant to the City Administrator Hohenstein said that Jennifer Sayre with Northwest Airlines indicated the airline is opposed to noise mitigation strategies that will impede progress on the runway extension. After further discussion, the following sentence was deleted from comment four, "The assessment should identify and the MAC, FAA and airlines should implement appropriate noise abatement strategies to:recogpize the situation". In regard to Item 0, Contract 98-01, reward contract (Southern Lakes Water Tower), Councilmember Blomquist indicated she would be voting •against this item. In regard to Item P, Approve 1998,EoristiIb g:eiigmeering rates, Mayor Egan questioned the substantial rate increase of Howard Gre;i5itipany's consulting fees compared to other engineering firms' fees. Director of Public Works Ceilliert explained the rationale for the increase. Councilmember Wachter stated he was not happy with the results the City has received from the firm of Short, Elliott, Hendrickson. Mayor Egan concurred and said that he was not satisfied with the traffic information presented by SEH at the Council work session held earlier in the evening. Director of Public Works Colbert explained that SEH has provided excellent service in other areas and he further explained the pool concept the City utilizes which seri ;s:t :drew:i. i ?e;strei gths of particular firms. In regard to Item V, Termination of Interiiii; rdinan*e:bn communication towers in PF zones, Councilmember Wachter said there are many thinngs:being done to enhance the appearance of communication towers and he suggested that the c't, npanies' :the communication business be contacted to see if they would be willing to improve the appearance of.;€! towers. A. Personnel Items Item 1. It was recommended to approve the hiring of a person to be recommended for the position of Fire Inspector. Item 2. It was recommended to approv.#he;lt#ri;p Kart•;atulich as a police officer, effective January 12, 1998. Item 3. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Ryan:Rsch as a part-time seasonal night supervisor for the Civic Arena. Item 4. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Lynn Hanson and Matt Hanson as seasonal winter parks maintenance workers. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1997 PAGE 3 Item 5. It was recommended to approv'tlie hiring of the following individuals as part-time seasonal winter recreation leaders: Roger Andersiili,';.Martha Buyck, 4xk Cleare, Rachel Collingham, Eric Damann, Meghan Doherty, Scott Ellingsok;iy:hen Erickson,. a$pi Faith, Kimberly Gill, Erick Hansen, Nathan Hauenstein, Ryan Hauenstein, Janie : ielX} ;40wiv Koppang, Dan Klug, Philip Kowalczyk, Jeffrey Lacey, Bryce Meyer, Jason Ponsonby, f i6aki'y;'Molly Simmons, Joe Skoglund, Brittany Stephens, Melissa Stertz, James Wagner and Andy Willenburg. Item 6. It was recommended to approve the 1998 compensation rates for non -collective bargaining employees as follows: (Councilmember.)319 1gt t abs u?ed ;01) this item.) 1) Compensation rates for regular, non -cd lectioe' iargaining employees be increased 3% across the board, effective January$11998. 2) With the exception of election jud e;.rates, caensation rates for temporary, non - collective bargaining employees,liso:be meted by >p to 3%. 3) Car expense allowancesiW0.epiartn ei t; ea(#s be increased by 3%. 4) Mileage rates be set at the IRS amounf'(which is currently $.315 a mile), If the IRS increases this amount, the City's amount will automatically increase to the new IRS rate. 5) The City's contribution for family health insurance would increase by $7.76 a month (half the total increase for 1998). (A motion directing th : ?* rsonne1 Committee to review this item in 1998 was made following the consent• . B. Subgrantee Agreement -1997 CDBG. It ti ds recon i i ded,to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the Subgrantee Agreement between Dakota Cow-VigUiind the City of Eagan for the Dakota County Community Development Block Gi tt:]'?r pm:'fd'r'•the Fiscal Year 1997 project that will be carried out directly by City staff. C. On -Sale Liquor License, Toe Senser's of Eagan, Inc. (former Cracker Barrel site), 3010 Eagandale Place. It was recommended to approve an on -sale liquor license for Joe Senser's of Eagan, Inc., to be located at 3010 Eagandale Place, the former Cracker Barrel Restaurant site. D. Approve contract with OHMS to prow d d p r i0ii tistration of worker's compensation claims. It was recommended to approve a contratwirfi' 7ceiipailbrtal::Healthcare Management Services (OHMS) to provide third party administration of worker's c mpensatf claims. E. Approve 1998 Special Revenue Fund Budgets,*luding Housing Revenue Bond Fund, the Police Forfeiture Fund, the Housing and Redevelopment Authorit ,find, the Recycling Fund, the Economic Recovery Grant fund, the Cedarvale Special Services Fund, and the Cable TV Franchise Fees Fund. It was recommended to approve the 1998 Special Revenue Fund Budgets, including the Housing Revenue Bond Fund, the Police Forfeiture Fund, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority Fund, the Recycling Fund, the Economic Recovery Grant Fund, the Cedarvale Special Services Fund and the Cable TV Franchise Fees Fund. F. Extension for recording the final pia o�€ Lortg�Qalt., .G 4ddition. It was recommended to extend the time for recording the final plat of Lon? »kip M4 t?ipn; 3x months to March 16, 1998. G. Authorization, Airliner and Spruce Motel properties, 27;0:::and 2794 Highway 55, preparation of agreement for owner's consent to demolish and preparatioii:kif.appraisal. It was recommended to authorize staff and legal counsel to prepare an agreement for the owner's consent to demolish the Airliner and Spruce Motel properties located at 2788 and 2794 Highway 55 and to prepare an appraisal of value. H. Recommendation, Economic Development Commission, resolution supporting tort reform proposals, joint and several liability and employer reference immunity. It was recommended to approve resolutions recommended by the Economic DeveloliYitent Commission to'9upport proposals concerning joint and several liability and employer reference imii qunity. I. Adopt environmental assessment comm41.00j0fension of Runway 4/22 to 12,000 feet. It was recommended to adopt comments (as modified) to:IFi:61vironmental assessment worksheet regarding extension of Runway 4/22 at Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport to 12,000 feet. J. Project 726, receive feasibility report/order public hearing (Greensboro Addition - Storm Sewer). It was recommended to receive the feasibifit mort.fo .f'ro eek726 (Greensboro Addition - Storm Sewer) and schedule a public hearing to be held: :l gbnx 'y: j;1 K. Project 717R, order public hearing (Country Home Heighf's ='Street Improvements). It was recommended to schedule a public hearing for Pt' eet 717R ;(04ntry Home Heights - Street Improvements) to be held on January 20,;1998: L. Contract 97-11, approve Change Order No. 1 (Old Sibley Highway - Street & Utility Improvements). It was recommended to approve Change Order No. 1 to Contract 97-11 (Old Sibley Highway - Street and Utility Improvements) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. M. Project 727, authorize feasibility repRrt (Donnywood Addition - Street Improvements). It was recommended to authorize the preparatioii:aa.feasibility report for Project 727 (Donnywood Addition - • Street Improvements). N. Project 733, authorize feasibility report (M4Kee Addition -•Street Improvements). It was recommended to authorize the preparation o0 feasib hty;Mpc rt for Project 733 (McKee Addition - Street Improvements). O. Contract 98-01, receive bids/award &ontract (Southern Lakes Water Tower). It was recommended to receive the bids for Contract 98-01 (Southern Lakes Water Tower) and award the contract to Pittsburgh- DesMoines for Style A (Fluted Column) on the alternate site in the amount of $1,084,500 including Alternates A-1, 3, 5 and 6 in the amount of $36,000 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. (Councilmember B1omrluist.Qpposed).,. P. Approve 1998 consulting engineering rates.' 'It was•2eoininended to approve the general engineering rates submitted by the designated consulting companies for Services to be provided in 1998. Q. Approve 1998 Joint Powers Agreement (Street iitaintena*O. It was recommended to approve the 1998 Joint Powers Agreement for street maintenance and autiaririze the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. R. Project 734, Town Centre 100 Sidewalk. It was recommended to authorize a feasibility report for Project 734 (Town Centre 100 - Sidewalk). S. Project 735, receive petition/authorize feasibility report (k%r scott Hills Drive Extension). It was recommended to receive a petition and utl :ig;t ;j rer4 ton of a feasibility report for Project 735 (Wescott Hills Drive - Extension). T. Confirmation of Findings of Fact, Conclusions & Resolutinti: of Denial, Walter V. Nelson, Lot 23, Block 2, Wilderness Run 2nd Addition located at 4304 Pilot Knob 1R :d. It was recommended to approve the findings of fact of the denial of the rezoning request by Walter V. Nelson for lot 23, Block 2, Wilderness Run 2nd Addition located at 4304 Pilot Knob Road. U. Agreement - McCarthy house. It was recommended to approve a lease agreement with United Methodist Church/Eagan Arts and Humanities Council for the use of the McCarthy house. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1997 PAGE 5 V. Termination of Interim Ordinance oti'tbmmunication to' iei* in PF zones. No action was required on this item. W. Approve revision to Eagan Board reps' to t'.0:;0 0W'CClub Lake Watershed Management Organization. It was recommended to approviheaetiiatement of the Director of Public Works by the City Engineer as the Eagan Alternate to the Board Members of the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization 1998. X. Contract 95-Y, acknowledge completion/ati.tllg,City..mjntenance (Centex Vermillion Addition - Street & Utilities). It was recommended #i k? i?wgr1ed ; th 't i pletion of Contract 96-Y (Centex • Vermillion Addition —Street & Utilities) and authc ize perpeiu 1 City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. . . Y. Contract 96-L, acknowledge completion/an.. .City.•ma.lntenance (Centex Vermillion 2nd Addition Street & Utilities). It was recommend l; i t itow''d' ..pinpletion of Contract 96-L (Centex Vermillion 2nd Addition - Street & Utilities) and authorise' perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. Z. Contract 96 -GG, acknowledge completion/authorize City maintenance (Town Centre 70 Nineteenth Addition - Utilities). It was recommended to acknowledge the completion of Contract 96 -GG (Town Center 70, 19th Addition - Utilities) anct* prize perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. AA. Contract 96-07, approve final payment/aUthorize City maintenance (Hayes/Delosh Additions Storm Sewer Improvements). It was recom n:Ouled tp a' i,64:the final payment for Contract 96-07 (Hayes & Delosh Additions - Storm Sewer) it th inouit}'of $13,887.94 to G.L. Contracting, Inc., and accept the improvement for perpetual Miiitiiiif6nance subject to warranty provisions. BB. Refuse hauler license, Clean Sweep, Inc. for construction/demolition debris. It was recommended to approve a construction/demolition debris hauler license for service provided for 1997. Councilmember Wachter moved: Councilmember Awada seconded a motion to approve the consent agenda. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Blomquist moved, Coun iknember Mchter seconded a motion to have the Personnel Committee review the City's compensa sin prograiti. during 1998. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 'UBLKC i1EARII4CS BUILDING MOVE PERMIT - JIM SIMONET City Administrator Hedges provided an overview on this item. He noted that a letter was received from Peggy Carlson requesting the house be movet 4 the site via the field in order to avoid damage occurring to the area land and vegetation. Mayor Egan opened the public hearing to anyone wishing to speak. Jim Simonet, applicant, said that lie feels the #souse will fit well in the proposed location and it will also be nice to keep the structure in the City for histori ipurposes. Councilmember Blomquist asked about the need to break out the windows in the hous ;;.;i,vIr. Simonet explained that the second floor windows do not meet fire the code requirements. Councilmember Blomquist asked how this will affect the historical value of the house. Councilmember Wachter said it will be partially destroyed. Councilmember Masin asked if the City Council has the authority to grant an exemption in order to retain the integrity of the structure. Councilmember Wachter said he would like to get information from the Building Inspections Department to see if something could be worked out with regard to the code EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1997 PAGE 6• requirements. Councilmember Blomquis 'further said she wtiiikd like to see the architectural integrity of the building maintained, including the pctx h and the window. is Peggy Carlson, 3434 Highway 55,s ted 2 1 ;J n favor of the house being located near her house as long as it is moved in via the field. §1:14ifiliiialifit she would like to see the veranda put back on the front of the house. Senior Planner Ridley indicated that these concerns will be taken into consideration before the route is determined. PROJECT 687, FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING (BISCAYNE AVENUE - STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS) City Administrator Hedges prdicled,an overview on this item. Director of Public Works Colbert gave a staff report. He noted that five o' ije ti ffs. t .. jhe. assessment were received. Mayor Egan opened the public hear* to any s ing to speak. There being no one wishing to speak, he turned the discussion back to ther.Councx1.. J ,sail :that this was an area the City considered rezoning, but at the request of the industrial.i iet8.eity'did not change the zoning. He added that the owners were required to comply willl::Cirty: taidards. Councilmember Blomquist asked how much cost was added to the assessment roll with regard to the administrative legal fees. Director of Public Works Colbert provided the amount of the legal fees. Councilmember Awada moved, Councilmember Wachter seconded a motion to close the public hearing and approve the final assessmeii i) t r?r*j t: rM,•'£ scayne Avenue) and authorize its certification to Dakota County for colleCtiori:''AY'e':'5' Nays 'fl' PROJECT 725, (OAK CHASE 1ST - 6TH;4DITICiNS -STREET IMPROVEMENTS) City Administrator Hedges provided an overview otitis item. Director of Public Works Colbert gave a staff report. Councilmember Blomquist stated she would be abstaining from participating in the discussion on this item and also on the vote since it involves her neighborhood. Development/Design Engineer Gorder provided further information regarding this project. Mayor Egan opened the public hearing to anyone 'ing to speak. Rick Arbour, 4467 Oak Chase Lgtg.: ieated• e;.4v s,#he representative for the neighborhood. He distributed a handout which addres ;*N k to ;arid history of the situation, concerns of the residents, the financial impact, alternatives consideredby tli'neighborhood and a recommendation to negotiate the cost to residents and proceed with the reconsfOetion project. Roger Martin, 4435 Oak Chase Road, said a major concern is that maintenance and repair of the streets was discontinued in 1986. He further said that residents were told at a meeting with staff that the maximum assessment would. be $2,400, but now it is much higher. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1997 PAGE 7 Bea Blomquist, 4504 Oak Chase load, stated that it *a 'believed that the Oak Chase development was developed under the direction of thO; ity's consulting gr3gjneers at the time according to City standards. She added that the residents o;G Chase have;id a lot in taxes. There being no one else wishing to speaNtayo Egan turned the discussion back to the Council. Councilmember Masin referenced the design information presented in the handouts and questioned who did the work at the time. Director of Public Works Colbert explained that the original developer was contacted and he then pro d th9,.devekq ?VF's recollection of the situation. Further discussion occurred regarding the lack o i;xec.0:t gt.:biittenance of the streets. • •Councilmember Awada stated that it is ctea'r• the projeCf needs to be done. She noted that the value and cost of the assessment is typically examined at thei€imne of the final assessment hearing. She said the City Council and the residents can.wg4 tti ether; tt : idtermine the assessment amount. Councilmember Wachter moved, Councilmember Awada seconded a motion to close the public hearing and approve Project 725 (Oak Chase Addition - Street Improvements), excluding Oak Chase Way. Aye: 4 Nay: 1 (Councilmember Blomquist abstained) Councilmember Wachter stated that if the bids received are too high the Council may choose to turn them down. Mayor Egan said thati;t#iis::is;.the latest of several street improvement projects undertaken in the past six to seven years I t e ty,has worked with the residents to keep the appraised amounts as low as possible. He added'rtiat;l e:h s.come to the conclusion that there is something unique to this subdivision. He further added'that.when streets have not been constructed to City standards the situation must be carefully;§xamine4;to.determine if the residents received the value of the general taxes they have paid. He noted:0 :.1.):e:wil carefully review the bids and will seriously consider the possibility of greater City :tj4ation. He stated that there seems to be sufficient justification for deviation from the standard City assessment policy. Director of Public Works Colbert commented that this neighborhood group has been very committed to the improvement and responsible through the informational meetings held by the City and he indicated that staff is committed to w„Q;king with them. VARIANCETCYTIi iibitDTNG SETBACK FOR THE FIRE ADNONISTRA 'J;QN BUILDING City Administrator Hedges provided an evirview cite ;fps item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Mayor Egan opened the public hearing to anyone wishing to speak. jim Horne, developer of the Kingswood Additions, compared their earlier proposal for an office building with the proposed Fire Administration building. HeiCndicated that the Council did not approve their proposal because they felt the site should be developeai:as residential. He stated that the new Fire Administration building does not meet..te ;s:xbarl ;r nj;seets and he added that the spruce trees will not screen the building from the residei tiyt7: a y; : is he would hope the City would meet its own standards and deny the application. Councilmember Masin stated that the proposed bu t #iitg is much more improved and attractive than what is currently on the site. Mayor Egan said that the Council is trying to save the taxpayers money by putting the building on a site it already owns. Mr. Horne commented that the present structure is more in keeping with the residential character'of the neighborhood. He stated that the proposed building is too large for this limited site. Mayor Egan noted that every use which will occur at the new facility is already occurring at the present facility. He added that the City is trying to upgrade the quality of the EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1997 PAGE 8 building. Councilmember Wachter stated::that the City has always strived to keep ambulance service in the center of the City. He further stated tit the location of Ie ;Fire Administration building on this site is advantageous to the developer in many vv ,...He noted ttia%ince the land is available the City should use it for the new building instead of There being no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Egan turned the discussion back to the Council. Councilmember Awada said she has a problem with the two-story nature of the building because it adds to the cost. She further said a one-s#o build g would.be more appropriate. She stated that this proposed facility is being squeezed on tl;:;a� pec# that the land could be sold to purchase another site. She indicated she would be voting agate t kliis rt . Councilmember Wachter stated that the size of the building will serve to accommodate• iture use: Councilmember Masin moved, coyirril00.S.cx:NArtti seconded a motion to close the public hearing and approve a Variance of twen i-spl f.@i t for tie: itillding setback from the west property line for the proposed fire administration building to be located Wf'3795 Pilot Knob Road. Councilmember Blomquist stated that originally the City Council had intended to install cable equipment that would service the building and now the cable funds are not being expended for that purpose but rather are being used for the construction of the building. She questioned if the cost should be paid out of the Community Investmen cuid instead of expending cable fees if the cable equipment is not going to be there. • Councilmember Awada stated that if to trainirig s�• acerwere constructed under ground then the building would only need to be one-story and:vould Stir 4 ire a variance. She further stated that by granting this variance the City Council will,begoi,1g:aggafrist the design standards that everyone else is held to. Mayor Egan said that the build;nttesigned for future use. A vote was taken on the motion. Aye: 3 Nay: 2 (Councilmembers Awada and Blomquist opposed) LD BUSINESS PRELIMINARY SUi TViSitit'VARIANCE (PINETREE PASS) City Administrator Hedges provided an aMview ot;iis item. Director of Parks and Recreation Vraa explained the recommendation made by the APJC at t4jt:last meeting on December 15. He also apologized for a statement made by Landscape Architect/Pais'lanner Lilly that was included in a staff memorandum regarding one of the developer's plans. He discussed three plans that had been developed and the most recent submission made by the developer. He then reviewed the concerns of the APrC for plan number 2 and possible ways to mitigate those concerns. He said that the preferred alternative of the APrC was plan number 2 and they approved this plan by a 57 3 vote. He added that Terry Forbord of Lundgren Bros. Construction presented a revised layout pla :i i response to the APrC's concerns. He stated that there are still some concerns with regard to the gia .es, but he indicated those concerns have been discussed with the engineer who fee3s ;*1tey: ktn:mAls .:tl e•xtecessary changes. He further stated that the proposed well location is now locato.l: it o;o ••>1:#p'lYirector of Public Works Colbert stated this was an acceptable location for the well. Vraa noted the ballfield location and parking lot ini0Or to the park which would make it more accessible to the soccer field and to the baseball field. He continued noting the trail which proceeds to Thomas Lane between homes requiring grading or retaining walls to accommodate an accessible grade of up to 5%. He noted that this plan would probably mean that on -street parking would occur by the residents on Thomas Lane. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1997 PAGE 9 Councilmember Masin inquired about the playgrourtciarea and the proximity to Cliff Road. Vraa stated that there is sufficient distance, but bi4);:ip. added that a f0.)* , would have to be installed in the outfield. He explained that with the placement of il*Sqg.rouncligi0 location there is a natural topographic barrier to Cliff Road. Councilmember Blo riiOgnfi;a`t,SQ::Aj;j4 the majority of the trees will remain. Vraa stated that the majority will remain and those tr2es ii0or condition will be removed. Terry Forbord, representing Lundgren Bros. Construction, thanked staff and the City Administrator for the time and effort they spent in coming up with a plan that Lundgren is also pleased with. He indicated that alternative 3 or 4,is efer•1+ltid,Py, .thp,.>}i, .: Councilmember Awada commented on tb : jnall frcMpoges of the lots on the new plan. Senior Planner Ridley stated that the lot width standard needs to be net at the 30 foot setback. Director of Public Works Colbert,t& t' alit e.p14f:Aapproved with the conceptual park layout may contain some deviations from City iidariti igt.4:iie questioned if the City Council was granting any variances. Councilmember Awada referenced her previous comments and stated that the City Council was not granting any variances to performance standards. In response to a question, Director of Parks and Recreation Vraa noted that although there may be minor adjustments made in the park plan as shown for grades, he felt it was appropriate for the Council to approve this park plan as part of the;000:ruision approval so that the neighborhood and new residents of this subdivision understand the relatio ith •efwEert the homes and various park uses. Councilmember Awada moved, Cou cilmember Wachter seconded a motion to approve a preliminary subdivision (Pinetree Pass) for 12:lots.and;f04:iiitlots located on approximately 72 acres, south of Cliff Rd., west of Thomas Lane tinct W 1 6::Dfive, north of Wellington Way and east of Cambridge Drive and Covington Lane ii;ie4kiE''%4 of Section 33, including park concept plan no. 4, and a 2% variance to the maximum 8% .cul-desac grade subject to the following conditions: Standard Conditions 1. The developer shall comply, with tbw,standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February! 3, $ ;:. Al, B1, B2, B3, B4, C1, C43, D1, Ei:E1, G1, and H1 Tree Preservation 2. To acknowledge that Individual Lot Tree Preservation Plans will be required for the following lots at the time of building permit application: Block Lot 5 10,11,12 8 4,5,6,7,8,9,�Q 10 1,3,4,5,6,7 3. Tree Protective measures (i.e. 4 foot polyett[yne laminate safety netting) shall be required to be installed at the Drip Line or perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved during both initial site development and individual lot development. Water Quality 5. The development shall meet water quality treatment requirements entirely through on- site ponding by raising the normal water level of Pond BLP -6 to an elevation of 898 MSL. The pond design, includixyg$tjapiny clearing/$rubbing, and re-laying of pipe, should be approved by the water isesodir fi i *44. 6. If the normal water level of Pond' i,P-6 is radse'ei for water quality ponding purposes, the developer should be responsible •fi i;;modify g:the existing inlet and outlet structures and piping to match the new nor 8 ; hater level :�4iso, the developer should be responsible for the removal of all sigitiftEica vegetafiori:lielow the new normal water level of Pond BLP -6. ' Wetlands 7. Filling or draining of the two jurisdictional wetlands on the site is prohibited. Grading • 8. Detailed plans and specificatkns shall ti.submatted with the final grading plan covering the proposed retaining walls:atong T pi*iLal a Road. The developer shall install a permanent barrier fence at ih top f: e'retaining walls. • 9. The developer should b:'responsible for installing and maintaining erosion control measures in accordance with the City Erosion/Sediment Control Manual Standards. Well Site 10. The developer shall det ica e: ; i?tlot p :ttpe final plat with a minimum size of 100" x 100" along the west ed'ge''ofiii' ftifi ty :ittiiilti of the existing wetland (Pond BLP -57) for acquisition by the City for the welt:We. The; cessary raw water transmission lines to serve the well shall be installed ague of thi:development. (With the latest revised plan, the well site has been located witt the par :{tedication in the central area of the site). Street/Access 11. The developer shall be responsible for the removal of the existing street Trenton Lane street stub and restoration of the Trenton Lane right-of-way, including construction of a bituminous trail. 12. A sidewalk connection.sktg.p.N?rA id tw en the proposed trail within the Trenton Lane right-of-way and, p kat a: ; toi:theast corner of the development and also along the north side of Covingtoi L aiie #rom Thomas Lake Road to the west edge of the development. 13. The public right-of-way width dedicated on the final plat shall be a minimum of 65 feet over all streets with sidewalks. Easements 14. Drainage and utility easenoer shall be.prz %' 4ed over the existing sanitary and storm sewer lines to a width of tvvq;: }**04i1. of the pipes twenty feet deep and less. All pipes which are more than twi?*.:Kiisfi'iieep shall be covered with twenty -foot wide drainage and utility easements. 15. Street easement shall be obtained by the developer for the necessary temporary turnaround cul-de-sacs of 4.10: ee.Tr ii,and,Pircetree Pass on Outlot A, Walden Heights Addition. Land Use 16. The City should initiate a Ctu xef sive Guide Plan Amendment and to bring a Rezoning the proposed par1da ; ed ca s; onformance with the City Code. Homeowners Association 17. A copy of the Homeowners' Association Restrictions and Covenants shall be supplied to the City with the final subdivision. Plat 18. The property must be plattecfi:; 19. The applicant shall coney,... C!!;:tci' EFie City free and clear of all encumbrances and shall be responsible to reeq:'rd:the conveyance with the plat. 20. The applicant shall convey Outlots A, 13, and D to the Homeowners Association with the filing of the plat. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 CERTIFICATION OF•'i94'0irOkt`i'Y`'' 'i EVY, INCLUDING CITY, TRANSIT AND SPECIAL SERVES DISTRICT City Administrator Hedges provided an o +*view on:Tis item. Councilmember Wachter moved, Councilmember Awada seconded a motion to approve the resolution certifying the 1998 Payable Property Tax Levy. Councilmember Blomquist stated she has been concerned about the budget. She said she feels that some improvements have been made, but she added sli i?vould like to see some changes in the areas of licenses, permits, service charges, streets and highways. indicated she was voting no on this item with hopes that next year the City Coun*w1.1: t u*;towork on these areas and improve them. A vote was taken on the motion. Aye: 4 Nay?' 1 (Councilmember Blomquist opposed) APPROVAL OF 1998 GENERAL ! .. D BUDGET AND 1998 ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS, INCLUDING WATER, SANITARY SEWER, STREETLIGHTING, STORM DRAINAGE/WATER QUALITY AND CIVIC ARENA City Administrator Hedges provided an overview on this item. City Administrator Hedges pr vi letli :4 ie. iijf item. He noted that a letter was submitted by Al Baker requesting this this'iteii'il36.:toritriri gftc h January 6,1998 City Council meeting. Councilmember Masin moved, Councilin tiber Wac%}er seconded a motion to consider a continuance of this item to the January 6,1998 Cit):Council Meeting. Aye: 4 Nay: 1 (Councilmember Awada opposed) Councilmember Awada stated that she did not feel this item should be continued, but rather it should be approved by the City Council. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - C14ft. ER 11 ENTITLED "LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING)" BY AM13 . ING SECTION 11.03 BY ADDING THE DEFINITION OF ADULT g,5,:TABLI§IMEN .AND BY AMENDING SECTION 11.20 REGARDING ADULT ESTABLISH1I+#8NT;: S ,A: ,t .f.:T TED USE IN LIMITED INDUSTRIAL, RESEARCH AND DEVELOI"ME1$1r.kS'bBUNINESS PARK DISTRICTS; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY COIE;:CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 City Administrator Hedges provided an overview on this item and the following item concurrently. Councilmember Masin stated that the these activities cannot be banned from the City, but she added that the City Council has tried to locate them in areas where they are least obtrusive. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1997 PAGE 13 Councilmember Awada moved 'Cbuncilmember Bldiliquist seconded a motion to approve an Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 11 ert # ed "Land Use Rggu ations (Zoning)" by amending Section 11.03 by adding the definition of adult este# 'ishment and,li;: ,mending Section 11.20 regardingadult establishment as a rmitted use in Limite � ���i;1�'?�1;';��S�ai•ch and Development, and Business Park districts, and by adopting by reference Eagan' C:ti e:t hapter 1.and Section 11.99, and to approve a resolution authorizing publication of a summary ordinance. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - CHAPTER 6 ENTITLED "OTHER BUSINESS REGULATION AND LICEIITSJ;N ,"•.:BX ,ADD!NQ SECTION 6.49 REGARDING AI?„Tit 5:4),3L•,' ,FMB NTS This item was introduced and considered't ith the piet?eding item. Councilmember Awada moved, Coungieiiiber W}iter seconded a motion to approve an ordinance amendment to Chapter 6 en '"••� Bi ness:Regulation and Licensing” p ::�i#ier g" by adding Section 6.49 regarding Adult Establishments and to. approve fh'rsolution authorizing publication of a summary of the ordinance. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - JON PAUL HERBST (CAIN ADDITION) City Administrator Hedges prc. ded,cln overview on this item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a staff report. He noted that a letter was reed;fHpwing the public hearing from a neighbor opposed to the subdivision of the property. •• Mayor Egan stated that the proposediubdivi$1* tis'sgiall and is located in an area of larger lots. He said that this subdivision consists of two qfs i ti s tl'ian two -thuds of an acre. He added that if everyone who owns ,6 acres requested twp::*,,' iecf�nically they would be circumventing the City's ordinance. He asked the City Attorney iii •this request meets the letter of the City Code, Comprehensive Guide and City ordinances. City Attorney Sheldon stated that each subdivision has to meet the zoning and comprehensive guide plan requirements. Mayor Egan said that this proposal does not meet the 0-3 units per acre because two lots are on less than two -thuds of an i; ;;an te*ucall; ,;this subdivision is more dense. He further said he is concerned about establishing'fhis' i,i edei t:: •::. : Carol Hills, 2880 Sibley Hills Drive, stated ;#fiat all hones in this area are set way back from Sibley Hills Drive. She added that if Mr. Herbst is allow:ed;:to subdijde the lot the house will sit in front of every house on the street.. She questioned the elevation and:ii►ether the drainage could affect her property. Jon Paul Herbst, applicant, stated that this lot could be accessed from Skyline Drive or Sibley Hills Drive. He said he has agreed to plant shrubs and which will screen the property. Councilmember Awada asked if the access could bg,ited to Skyline Drive. City Attorney Sheldon indicated that the City Council ,C ul,d; .dsi, ate.that.a.safety/welfare problem exists and require access restriction onto Sibley Hills Councilmember Masin said this will change how titOhole area looks. Councilmember Wachter stated that he did not feel the subdivision should be allowed::::Mayor Egan commented that if the City Council approves this request it will be setting an adverse precedent. Mr. Herbst said that the house is more characteristic of the neighborhood along Skyline Drive versus the neighborhood along Sibley Hills Drive. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1997 PAGE 14 Further discussion occurred regafding the potential 1'dcations and orientation for the house. Mayor Egan stated that this would be like;jAutting a second.?ouse in someone's front yard and he again indicated he is concerned about the preceilnt:tbis will sit:: 1 'added that this request violates the spirit and letter of the City Code and the Compre'Ti iit 00i [an by exceeding 0-3 units per acre, the effective result of this would be to have a setbaCk'iitiic1icloser to Skyline Drive than the other houses surrounding it and it would be incompatible with the surrounding area. Councilmember Wachter moved, Mayor Egan seconded a motion to deny a Preliminary Subdivision (Cain Addition) for 2 lots located:on; pprgxu;*tely .6 acres, west of Sibley Hills Drive, north of Skyline Drive, and east of Rustic Hills:Diii? :isi::t e :i,4:q : tion 33 and directed the preparation of findings for denial for the January 6,1998 City Cci,1ii it meet i' Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AMEMENTX; 'RELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - RAHN RIDGE AS$QGIAT ;($.AAHN.ItIDGE 3RD ADDITION) City Administrator Hedges provided an overview on this item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Emmett Erpelding, General Partner -Holiday Inn Express & Suites, indicated that they need additional parking for the park and fly operation. He explained the proposed operation and said he thinks it will be a great complement tot .e: +ro. hotels. He. stated that only hotel guests would be able to park their cars in the park and fly lot and ted to.the airport. Mayor Egan commented that the two hotels have 24-hour security. .r Councilmember Wachter moved, Cousici]znemb§X;A da seconded a motion to approve a Preliminary Subdivision (Rahn Ridge Third Z:401:ifi »:consisting of two lots on 2.42 acres currently platted as lot 2, Block 1, Rahn Ridge See i... :;Md tion, subject to the following conditions: Standard Conditions 1. The developer shall comply with these standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on C4, D1, and El. 2. The property shall be platted'' Easements 3. A joint parking easement is required betwekii) proposed Lots 1 and 2, and b) proposed Lot 2, and the Hilton and Holiday Inn properties. A joint access easement shall also be provided between proposed Lots 1 and 2, Rahn Ridge 3rd Addition and Lot 1, Block 1, Rahn ridge 2nd Addition. These easements shall be submitted to the city attorney for review and approval prior to final subdivision approval and shall be recorded with the plat. Parks and Recreation • 4. Water quality mitigation shall be met throw&h:a cash dedication in lieu of on-site ponding. 5. Parks and trails dedications shall be fulfilled through a cash dedication. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 1. A Preliminary Planned Development Agreement shall be executed prior to final subdivision approval. The Agreement shall be recorded at the County Recorder's office with the plat. 2. The term of the Preliminary Plant 4:Develop bent shall be five years. 3. The following exhibits are requir€or the T*tned Development Agreements: Preliminary Planned Devi li trit Final Planned Development: Preliminary Site Plan Final Site Plan Preliminary Landscape Plan Final Landscape Plan Preliminary Building Elevations Final Building Elevations Final Site Lighting Plan 4. All building, parking/d ;•isles, and landscaped areas shall be properly maintained. • • 5. A joint parking easement is regiiii'e4;pie w en. a) proposed Lots 1 and 2, and b) proposed Lot 2, and the Hilton and Ho it4ay Inn pi'opexties. A joint access easement shall also be provided between proposed: is 1*42;;.ig4.:hiii Ridge 3rd. Addition and lot 1, Block 1, Rahn Ridge 2nd Addition.. Thes :v siei i rits shall be submitted to the city attorney for review and approval pr or tp;fi tat subdivision approval and shall be recorded with the plat. Trash Enclosure 6. All trash/recycling containers shall be stored within the principal buildings or shall be within an enclosure at 0.k:: d: td: e p xkpa;I,9tTucture, consistent with City Code requirements. Landscaping 7. Prior to final subdivision approval, the landscziPe plan shall be revised to include grading contours. Architecture/Building Elevations 8. The office building on Lot 1, Block 1, Rahn fCtge 3rd addition shall be constructed with exterior materials of brick and asphalt shing1 s•with a gable roof. The exterior materials shall be compatible with g.j* .of:#}► .exis#itg office building on Lot 1, Block 1, Rahn Ridge 2nd Addition. Signage 9. One ground sign not exceeding seven feet in height is allowed for Lot 1. All signage shall comply with City Sign Code provisions for location, size, setbacks and height. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1997 PAGE 16 Lighting 10. A detailed site lighting p trncluding p oidietrics shall be submitted prior to Final Planned Development appi' v $i::;Fig: ecw i*y reasons, lighting shall not be less than one footcandle throughout the pariCft gilitii:' Parking lot light fixtures shall be shielded and directed away from adjacent property. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENtmbiti `: : tELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CENTRES GROUP EAGAN (P.M.K tEli.'• 'ER SIXTH ADDITION) City Administrator Hedges provided an 0.0rview o ;tis item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Kaare Birkland, partner in Centres Group, provided background on why this site was chosen and explained that it was a good mix with the other retail in the area. He said that two major concerns have been raised with regard to traffic and parking. He further explained that the owners of Regal Cinema want to have sufficient parking on site. He added that the parking ratio of 1 space for each 4 seats is sufficient. He noted that turnover at the cinema will be staggered. John Payton, Westwood Professioiia:r;Gro: ,,discussed the site plan and design configurations, Jack Amdahl, KKE Architects, discussed the liiiiltl'ittg:;iatials, and Mr. Birkland discussed the interior of the building and noted that the 60 foot margti,s is impoftant fpr their facility. Michael Supina, 1656 Sherwood is too dense for this site and traffic is a concern. He added that the proposal doefi; iifa ieet the parking ratio. He further added that a smaller theater would better suit the neighborhood. Martin Colon, property owner, stated that the original Planned Development allowed 85,000 square feet of retail. He said this building will only be 65,000 square feet. He noted that the 4:1 parking ratio has been proven to adequately meet the parking needs at the Mann Theater in Town Centre. He further noted that this is an ideal use fci.iri:.440ii*.iw.gog.f.Nat the peak usage is not in conflict with other peak traffic times. He agreed that iFie'deve ebur' 'skoiiYti'get a written agreement with the Dakota County HRA to lease or purchase the neighboringi::4nd for additional parking. He commented that this use will help out the retail and will serve to revitailz the arai.; Councilmember Awada stated that she voted against ;tie Mann Theater located at Town Centre because of the configuration of the parking: She noted that this cinema will have plenty of parking and will be in the correct location. She said the other issue is with the height of the marquis. Mr. Birkland said they would be willing to minimize the size of the sign area if they are allowed to construct a 60 foot marquis. Mayor Egan stated that he fee:th'i:.t?s?:;wall. Y :the area. He indicated that he did not have a problem with the proposed parking Councilmember Masin noted that the City Code r'tites a 3:1 parking ratio. She stated that it is important that the extra 80 parking spaces be provided. Se06Planner Ridley explained that there is a condition of approval which requires the developer to purchase or lease the HRA property for additional parking. Councilmember Awada moved, Councilmember Wachter seconded a motion to approve a Preliminary Subdivision (Park Center 6th Addition) for one lot located on approximately 10 acres located Standard Conditions 1. The developer shall comply with these standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 3,1993: Al, B1, B2, B3, C1, C2, C4, D1, El, F1, and H1 Platting 2. The property shall be platted. Water Quality 3. A cash dedication in lied:of :0-sife p i irli will be required to meet its water quality dedication. Tree Preservation 4. The applicant shall fulfill tree preservation mitigation by providing contractual installation of 42 catego i3.tiees (or an equivalent number of category A or C trees) into a nearby park per city staf#p. :aced landscape plan specifications. Installation to occur spring 1998. 5. A tree preservation plan sha11:3ie sulitOpOi4ii1 approved by staff if additional tree removal occurs for develo t# s it••rel4t 'to the proof of parking area. Landscaping 6. All plant material should meet minimum size requirements. 7. The landscape plan should be revised to show additional landscaping along Cliff Road and Cliff Lake Road al it a�r I ed id:v 3eci:plant material mixture in the extreme northwest corner of the''Sfte:' • 8. A three-foot high landscape berall be cs m qtructed within the parking setback areas along Cliff Road and Cliff Lake R:s a to screen the parking lot for the development. Grading 9. The proposed retaining wall shall be located at the north property line at the edge of the drainage and utility easements. Easements • 10. The developer shall prs vi!e i0... si s .easement for the revised sidewalk alignment in the northeast corner of't& development. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Awada moved, Councihnember Blomquist seconded a motion to approve a Planned Development Amendment to change the existing planned development from retail to a 16 screen, 3,212 seat movie theater located on proposed Lot 1, Block 1, Park Center 5th Addition, north of Cliff Road, and west of Cliff Lake Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 30 subject to the following conditions: Final Planned Development 4. All trail and sidewalk its located within the parking lot should be striped and •:•:•:•:. • painted. 5. The developer shall provide written between the HRA and the developer to ensure that the. parking is avgIable,...:TI40;104inent shall be submitted for review and approval of the City attornepiiOt:tifilki*City taking action on the Final Subdivision or Final Planned Developi:•:•" Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Cities. OGISLATIVONITERGOVERNIVIENTAt"AFFAIRS City Administrator Hedges asfaW.diiQiiiiiii0kOding membership in the National League of Councilmember Masin moved, Councilmember BloitOguist seconded a motion to schedule the NLC membership as a consent item on the Januart i;:0, 1998 Qty Council agenda. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Blomquist noted that there are many valuable workshops at the NLC Conference and it is important for the City Council to attend. City Administrator Hedges mentioned that there will be a Dakota County League of Governments meeting on December 17. IMAOTOTAI CONSIDERATION TO idiA:IN tiit•gtitikis OF INGRAHAM & VOSS City Administrator Hedges provided an overview*this item. Councilmember Blomquist moved, Councilmember Wachter seconded a motion to approve the proposal from Ingraham & Voss to provide consultant services for the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Plan update and set the budget up to $33,000 for the Comprehensive Guide Plan update process to be funded from the General Fund Contingency. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Wachter commented on new signal lights that he became aware of at the NLC Conference. He said the red light bulb only draws 15 watts of energy and the City of Philadelphia recently saved a large amount of money;;.. ;akso.commg}ted ;that rent is received on all electric poles located in the City of Philadelphia. He sta i#:tbiit:I e.wat 4 t, the City of Eagan to check into this • further. He noted that he would like to know who: iiplds them ney that is collected for fiscal disparities and who gets the interest money and the City AdiiliriistratorVits directed to check into this matter. Councilmember Awada stated that,a..or #io; 'w3U be held at her company in Eagan December 19. Councilmember Masin commented that at the Burnsville City Council meetings the Mayor sits at the end of the dais. She said the reason for this seating arrangement is so that the Mayor can see the rest of the City Council. Mayor Egan stated that he does not feel this seating arrangement works well. Councilmember Masin added that it would be .nice to have a list of activities and organizations City Councilmember and staff are involved avitki; Councilmember Blomquist commented'o'ii t e:i eisus.and said that the City could conduct one in partnership with the Census Bureau. She sta€fid that it i's' important that the City retain the best information available to help qualify for cert k fund .rig,or;programs. She said it is important to inform the public that a census will be conducted. ; i einioxied that she attended an interesting work session at the NLC Conference on the economi 4ue:of an airport to a city. She stated that the people of Oak Chase 6th Addition raised a concern wili'regard to the minutes of the informational meeting. She said that statements 4 and 18 in the minutes seem to contradict themselves. She added that problems with the structure of Oak Chase Way have been detected and she said the residents are concerned that this street has not had any maintenance and are questioning what can be done to help extend the life expectancy of the road. Director of Public Works Colbert'saidlhe was'iiot;s ire:why the residents feel Oak Chase Way is in poor condition. He stated that the minutes reflect:a;i uestiork:t4 at was addressed by the residents assuming the street was in poor condition. He fut;t#jer statecliihiat the pavement evaluation indicated the road is in good condition. He added that staff wittiOeck the th6::giaintenance history .and re-evaluate the condition of the road. He asked for clarification if the City C,tstincil intended to delete Oak Chase Way from Project 725. Councilmembers concurred that they intended for Oak Chase Way to be deleted. Councilmember Blomquist requested that Director of Public Works Colbert get the information to her as soon as possible and a letter be sent to the residents onOak Chase Way explaining the situation. `HECK REGIS Councilmember Wachter mov1l4►4ay9r.•EgRx�;secox d a motion to approve the check register dated December 12,1997 in the amountiti :$ 9.M: f4 O:. 5 Nay: 0 nJOURlN W1!: The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. MLK MINUTES ;DFA SPECIAL MEE :NG OF THE ,EAGAN CITY COUNCIL ;:Eagan, Minneso :; 'Deit ern1 ei ' G ;1997 A special meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on Tuesday, December 16, 1997 at 5:00 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Egan and City Councilmembers Awada Blomquist and Masin. City Councilmember Wachter arrived at 5:35 p.m. Staff members present included Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa, Direptor;pf. Public Works Colbert, Director of Finance VanOverbeke, City Engineer Matthys, Superintendent Q.:.:$ : :£r( ai 04:.: illperintendent of Utilities Schwanz and.City Administrator Hedges. "' VISITORa TO BE HEARD Mayor Egan noted that tit r :W&e no vigitnis:t6 be heard. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM/PART III City Administrator Hedges stated that Parts 1 and 11 were reviewed by the City Council at a work session on November 25; however due to time restrictions, Part III, which addresses the public infrastructure and park site acquisition .and development, was continued to this meeting. He stated that Public Works Engineering staff needs r > oR on both budget 1998 for project implementation and for the ability to begin the planning and data arralySlS fpr:;projects proposed for 1999. He further stated that the public improvement projects require approximateliti:1:5 1;$;: months lead time in order to coordinate a successful construction season. Director of Public Works Col#ertp0sifed'Part III, summarizing the proposed arterial and collector improvements, local street irr3pprtitii?.r;'ijerits,' local street sealcoat, signals and streetlights, water trunk distribution, water system operatio0;•sanitary sewer trunk and sanitary sewer system operations. City Administrator Hedges stated that the .storm drainage conveyance and water quality management were reviewed at a previous budget meeting. Director of Public Works Colbert spoke to the philosophy pertaining directly to the preventative maintenance projects ani.:.eolte qtr:•;Foads,•;:s.9.ch as Johnny Cake Ridge Road extending through the Bieter property and the arttMpafed:3t xouetn0nt:of Dodd Road. Director of Public Works Colbert also spoke to the water supply and distribution, stating'that the water department has been able to shave off peak usage as a conservation measure, which hastninimized the number of wells that need to be constructed throughout the community. City Councilmember Awada asked about::the financial status of the major street construction fund. Director of Public Works Colbert stated that at the present time, there is approximately $10,000,000 in the fund. City Councilmember Blomquist stated that projections in the CIP are based on special assessment policies. She further stated that in her opinion, the assessment policy needs to be reviewed. Director of Public Works Colbert, in response to questions from the City Council, spoke to the state aid formula and how the gas tax is allocated to cities.:itTler discussion of the street construction fund, City Councilmember Blomquist again stated that she disagrOi with parts of the assessment policy. Mayor Egan stated that if there is a policy char ,,the. City, Council'will need to readdress funding allocations as a etrd Council policy change. City CouncilmMain; f0i 04:iit would be helpful to know specifically what parts of the assessment policy requird'hirlfieteview::thict: titi edification as stated by City Councilmember Blomquist. City Councilmember Wachter was present iat'ipproximately 5:35 p.m. Mayor Egan asked if there was any further status on the upgrade of TH 13 from Silver Bell to Yankee Doodle Road and further asked if MnDOT is giving consideration to improvements from Yankee Page 2/Eagan Special City Council Meeting fli.iiFiUtes December 16, 1997 "' Doodle Road to the Lost Spur Country d104:; .Director.of Piifblic Works Colbert stated that there are no plans to upgrade TH 13 from Yankee Doo .: c,tti]:t •Lost Spur. He further stated that plans are continuing by MnDOT to award the Super 2 •iimpidtiiiirii nts on TH 13 from Silver Bell Road to Yankee Doodle Road in May 1998. Mayor Egan asked if there was any further update on Yankee Doodle Road extended from TH 149 into Inver Grove Heights. Direetox .pf.l?ublic. Works Colbert stated that the analysis regarding options to improve Yankee Doodle Roa f:;S+u i l9 ei dt:txipd by the consulting firm of Short Elliott Hendrickson and to the disappointment 'oi•'the 'C ;; i-id•'iSki ;:County, the results of that study have not been completed. He further stated that the transportation stitay: regarding Yankee Doodle Road extended has been given to the firm of Strgar, Roscoe &;:Fausch.;;kle stated that as soon as the results are completed, an update would be shared with the:Council;:; There were no further giestiniis'regardirg:part III. Mayor Egan thanked staff for their work on the five (5) year CIP, especially Part III. He stated that it would be presented for final consideration at the December 16 regular City Council meeting. 1998 PART 111 PARK IMPROVEMENTS City Administrator Hed6e ;;•stated that during 1997, the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission was directed to prioritize'pa>k; mp ovements, assuming $2,000,000 of available funding. Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa stated that'i#tiiititi097,;the only project completed was the Lexington Diffley parking lot. He further stated that the APrC is recommending four (4) projects during 1998 that total $710,000. He reviewed the projects as feilows: ..1:},;V%i#iiil Heights park development; 2) four (4) playground replacements at River Hills, Highview,•;fiNDti h Ve'n and Evergreen; 3) Lexington Diffley athletic field's park shelter and restroom buiidinga,;atxt 4}'Rahn tennis court replacement/repair of the north courts. Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa also stated that the APrC is suggesting that there may be some smaller projects that would come from the small projects set aside portion of the parks site fund for landscaping, security lights and park signage. Mayor Egan thanked t.:[:.' ?ptpr:�f;# a r4.4.Recreation and APrC for their work on the five (5) year CIP. City Councilmembers stated::tti'at; fik:i>*Otii'iitti ndations by the Commission are consistent with the Park Master Plan. After a brief discussion, 'Mayor 4gan stated that these recommendations will also be considered as part of the five (5) year CIP Otte Decfitber 16 regular City Council meeting. EXECUT VE SESSION Mayor Egan adjourned the special work session into executive session for the purpose of providing direction to the City Administrator on negotiations with the Police Association. The executive session was adjourned at approximately 6:25 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further busuj sa,.the meeting, was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Date City Clerk TLH MINUTESZ:OF: :SOkfAt:Mt il0 OF THE : g:AGAN CITY COUN(I i Eagan, Minnesota'e":' •::;:AlQVember 25, 1 'J;.,: A special meeting of the Eagan Cify:Qoup it wee•'held on Tuesday, November 25, 1997 at 5:00 p.m. in the Eagan Municipal Center Community Room. Present were Mayor Egan and City Councilmembers Awada and Wachter. City Councilmember Blomquist arrived at 5:50 p.m. and City Councilmember Masin arrived at 6:10 p.m. Also present were Communications Coordinator Foote, Assistant to the City Administrator Hohenstein, Chief Building Official Reid, Chief of Police Geagan, Superintendent of Parks Olson, Superintendent of Recreation Peterson, Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa, Director of Public Works CglbeIti..Pirector of Finance,VanOverbeke and City Administrator Hedges. MLC VIDEO PRES NTh''?IWOlikii,I1$. YOUTH ASSETS City Administrator Hedges stated that the League'of'Minnesota Cities has made a commitment to programs that support "Healthy Youth/Healthy Cities:" H Stated that totMC, in partnership with Lutheran Brotherhood and other foundations, hired The Search Institute..ia Miibrj>irapolis to.deyelop a videotape entitled, "Healthy Communities Healthy Youth." A copy has been loaned to t#jig: l}f:fti>'vie iii ii!E:FiB'seventeen minute tape was viewed by the City Council. City Councilmembers expressed their appreciation for the tape and Mayor Egan thanked the City Administrator for sharing the tape and other information about the various programs the City is participating in to help the youth initiative. .19984002 CIP City Administrator Hedges explained iv.0 f;the,draft five (5) -year CIP (1998-2002). He stated that an outdoor swimming pool and parking are proposed duririy40B:the funding source is the Community Investment Fund. The City Administrator also stated that remodeling Fire Station:#2: t a cost of $250,000 with the source being the Community Investment Fund has been delayed to 1$$9 by,.the:Fire:De siartment Building Committee. He also stated that upgrade to Fire Station #3 at a cost of $150000;wvi(fi;fii :Nridirid source being the Community Investment Fund has been delayed to the year 2000. The City Adi jii*ipiir:further stated that it is the intention of the City to make roof repairs to Fire Station #2 to prevent any furthei:carnage to the building. City Administrator stated that at the November 3 City Council work session, staff was directed to prepare a timeline for construction of an outdoor swimming pool on the Municipal Center Campus. The City Administrator indicated at that work session that Chris Gears, Parks & Recreation Director for the City of St. Louis Park, would be present for this work session and share some comments about the St. Louis Park Aquatic Park Center. Director of Parks & Recreatiort:Vrea pfi tpii:thil:Wmming pool timeline, stating that the first step is to select a pool architect/engineering consulting team during the month of January, hold public hearings during February and March. During the spring and summer, final design 4Wovals artd';euntract awards would occur for the facility. The Director of Parks & Recreation further stated that constructi§ip would red to begin in late July, 1998 in order for the soft opening to occur in late May and the pool to open for the::1:999 sea0ar;.beginning June 1. He introduced Chris Gears, Director of Parks & Recreation for the City of St. Louis'f'ark, who ;eoriimented on the family aquatic center that was recently constructed and opened in his city. Mr. Gears spoke to the''tfistory and rationale for construction of the new pool. He indicated that the City of St. Louis Park did a survey, which focused on the swimming pool project only, and appointed a task force that involved teenagers and community representatives to study the need. Mr. Gears further stated that the family aquatic center would serve up to 3,500 people on days when the temperature was 85 degrees or warmer. City Councilmember Wachter asked about user fees. Mr. Gears indicated that the City charges one price for admission, which allows a customer to use the entire facility. He furti*,:4tated that the City issues season passes, which have been very popular in the community. Mayor Egan asked how::kjie;: iw :; .4tj:; ;er%ai r :a: state-of-the-art facility that won't breed any obsolescence. Mr. Gears stated that the City:gt:$Ii: tO :;Patk;lpteritl .to reinvest every two to three years, depending on the revenue stream, which ensures improvements for maintaining..a state-of-the-art facility, Mr. Gears showed a number of slides that emphasized the importance of zero depth, wateri:slides and other amenities important to a family aquatic center. He further stated that the City received some vale il'e' information from the youth committee that the pool needs to be exciting or it won't be used. He stated that the City'of'St. Louis Park took this challenge very seriously in developing the type of amenities that would be utilized by all ages. Page 2/Eagan Special City Council Meeting Mit} iter::::::::i October 7, 1997 - City Councilmember Awada, ed about the cost f r the St. Louis Park facility if only the aquatic water park were to be constructed. Mr. Gears stater:ttiat to dupiicat:t1e St. Louis Park facility without a land purchase, the cost would be $4 million - $4% million. He fut#iers tt5i:t• fhe:construction and ongoing operation has been an enormous task for his staff. Mr. Gears also stated thPtiAkie: t'i'•iocation is excellent at the Eagan Municipal Center Campus, especially the trail network that would provide opportunities for youth to access the facility on the Municipal Center Campus. City Councilmember Awada asked about the fees that are charged at the St. Louis Park facility. Mr. Gears stated that it is important not to charge. .t, laWest common denominator. He stated that youth that cannot afford a daily or season pass are funded throcim :00.0l'tjntty;:pt fi p e;; He stated that the rates in St. Louis park are $100 for a family of four for a season pass or $$'apiece:'' City Councilmember Blomquist arrivedat 5:50 Off and stated that she had experienced car problems, delaying her arrival at the special work session::; Mr. Gears suggested that a'plop.t:t j;.pfect'*• oLdd:Mead to be presented to the community, possibly a video presentation followed by a community sQtV2ji: In resptiftise:to a question, Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa stated that an RFP has been drafted, but needed further refinement. It was the consensus of the Council that it should be completed and sent out. City Councilmember Masin arrived at 6:10 p.m. Mayor Egan thanked Mr. Gea►s•for his presentation and information he shared with the City Council. City Councilmember Blomquist questioned what;ttje;siattke of the Community Investment Fund is at the present time. The City Administrator reviewed the financial statusi:ai ;:(I e.;O;5prnunity Investment Fund, stating that with money set aside for the Fire Administration building, the current, belei'ieea's:$;464,741. Director of Finance VanOverbeke stated that there are some special assessment funds that; ;will be clOSed..94 generating some additional revenue for the Community Investment Fund. City Councilmember A vadastaatl:lhat he pool facility would generate revenue to pay back a portion of the Community Investment Fund;. PIty C ;i1 ilir:re'mber Blomquist stated that the City should look into all the funding options before the aquatic parkfiaClf is:g► en canal consideration. . I�•. City Councilmember Masin'stated that, in her opinion, the City needs to look at the whole project in relation to other park uses. She further asked when the park advisory commission will have an opportunity to review the aquatic facility and further, if this is the correct site for the project. Mayor Egan stated that because of the time sensitivity of the project, it is kept close to the City Council. However, it would be appropriate for the park commission to review the proposed pool project during this early phase of consideration. City Councilmember Masin stated that she is concerned about the need to have a positive process if a:faf,ily egua'tli ern4erls;t4 ;I a given further consideration. City Administrator Hedges explained tho.:p'rocess •as' outlined in the Park Director's memorandum, stating that to date the family aquatic center has emerged:n.0 of the M.Oicipal Center site plan study. The next step is to determine project feasibility with the consultant and theri;h Id inforrp tional meetings. City Councilmember Wachter stated that this might be an opportunity to provide some c* prograffifi)ing and other media opportunities to inform the public. City Councilmember Awada stated that this is another oppaft :ijity, such as the ice arena facility, to develop a capital project without the use of tax dollars. Mayor Egan commenteii•that a family aquatic park would be an excellent opportunity for the community and is consistent with the survey results that were conducted by The Wallace Group that support a swimming pool for the community. Mayor Egan stated that this item will be placed on the December 16 City Council meeting for further review and consideration, but that staff should continue with the RFRiOrlicess. City Administrator Hedges reviewed Part II of the 'Capital Improvement Program which is designated to provide vehicles and equipment used to cart' :sig it:Cit�rer ;:;:i ;teviewed the history of the Part II CIP, stating that the 1993 departmental allocation system tot ijtiU:OgpiVP was:; 0#1ished and has been used for the past five (5) years. The City Administrator further stated that since these allocations were implemented based on historical expenditures, there has been no adjustment for inflation and the alloe0n does not reflect changing needs or priorities. As a result, concerns have arisen that suggest a change in the systef>:ii jhe City Administrator explained the rationale for changing the Part II Vehicles and Equipment allocation into three (37•silbparts that include: 1) vehicles and equipment between $5,000 and $150,000 which are replacement only, 2) MIS equipment that provides for a City-wide benefit, and 3) specialized equipment which is primarily new vehicles and equipment and the replacement of vehicles and equipment in excess of $150,000, He stated that there are: core detailed factorgjf :each of the three (3) subparts. General questions were raised b it c:R.9ncili .1rpbers and responded to by staff regarding certain equipment. The Council specifically directed that thieligi: Q.0;:(i west to network the fire stations be removed from the 1998 budget portion of the 1998-2002 CIP. After reviewing the three (3) subparts for each of the departments in detail, it was suggested by the City Council that reconsideration be given to an increase in the $500,000 allocation to fund the Part II Vehicles and Equipment. City Councilmembers stated that this .tpachanism is simpler and provides a greater accountability for monitoring the vehicle needs. Staff was directed to complete a revis ;Part II Clf? Which would cover all vehicles and equipment. Department Heads will be charged with the City-wide allooation of the total budget. The City Administrator stated that stgff l a :given oon jderation to an increase in the original allocation method as suggested by the City Council. Discussion of the CIP Part III was deferred to a subsequent meeting due to time constraints. McCARTHY HOUSE City Administrator Hedges stated that City staff has completed the analysis of the McCarthy house, specifically the cost effectiveness of using the property for rental income. He further stated that a cost analysis has been performed, which is outlined in detail by the:: trectof:•cf, Parks & Recreation. Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa provided background on all the City's rental propeities aril a t$etailed analysis of; the rental option, civic use by non-profit option, and utilize the building for City storage of equipment end.,tfiAdals. Mayor Egan asked about the opei?ating costsfiorithoss' proposals that consider rental of the property. Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa responded and;f4ti#t?ht st ted:that the City is not certain how long it will be before the Patrick Egan Park is developed; therefo►' , jt:;'is::difficult to forecast and amortize the operating expenses. Councilmember Awada stated that it is very dj#fidiilffor the City to know the future of the parkland during the next three (3) years. City Councilmember Masin stated that in her opinion there is more of a benefit to the community if the McCarthy is used by the Arts & Humanities Council and Advent United Methodist Church than a single family rental property. Kay Gustafson, representing the Arts & Humanities Council, and Pastor Sauer, from Advent United Methodist Church, addressed the City Council. Ms. Gustafson stated that there is a need and growing awareness in the community for more art, which requires the space for classes and other programs. She further stated that the house could be used for humanities to allow for the ; q.rsrdipatiot} .fir(::lectP.r6 s;.and other volunteer uses. Ms. Gustafson stated there are fourteen (14) members from the corrirmiittAtiO jz at .tire., ,' p lr the Humanities & Arts Council. Ms. Gustafson gave some examples of program, stating that the facility could' be Used 'for pre-school art - grades 3-6, theater production opportunities for youth and various classes for adults. Mr. Bob Doane, Chair of the Administive Counoittpr Advent United Methodist Church, stated that the church has 300 families and could use the facility'kvarious :tis for Sunday School classrooms. Both Ms. Gustafson and Mr. Doane stated that their uses are compatible in the'sarhe facility. Kay Gustafson stated that the necessary building modifications could be performed by volunteers with the appropriate fundraising. City Councilmember Masin asked if the programs designed for the McCarthy house are different from the Capons Art Park facility. Ms. Gustafson stated that the Caponi Art Park facility would also be used and they would not be in competition, however, would enhance the arts in.tt0 community for both facilities. Mayor Egan stated that the City has choices to eith'ei' tent the property with the minimal return or allow the property to be used for public non-proti;fie::: ,%ctsytti rxrper Blomquist stated that she likes the idea of allowing the Arts Council and the United Methal* Metk*tiO*00«iiiIi0014 property, however, with minimum upfront cost. City Councilmember Wachter agreed that the facility is most appropriate for the church and Art Council. Mayor Egan stated that the two (2) groups would need to raise approximately $8;(i0 to retrofit the building. After further discussion, Mayor Egan summarized the direction of the City Council, stating that:Mvent United Methodist Church and the Council for Humanities & Arts need to bring back a plan for review by the'i✓ft' Council with the understanding that non-profit dollars would used to retrofit the facility and that both organizations would be responsible for utilities and further, that the City could not commit the property beyond three (3) years. RAH N;# IFFLEY SIGNAL IZM1ON Director of Public Works Colbert kiii k i0ibttii'the City and County have recognized the growing congestion associated with the four-way stop at the intersection of County Road 30 (Diffley Road) and Rahn Road. He stated that both the City and County have included in their five (5) year CIP' a study to address the problem and propose a public improvement. Mr. Pete Sorenson, from the Dakota County Highway Department, appeared and participated in the discussion. Mr. Colbert, stated that the alternatives include: 1) do nothing, 2) install a traffic signal with the existing intersection geometries, 3) reconstruct Diffley Road•Jo: provide left -turn Janes with a split phase signal and 4) reconstruct Diffley Road to provide left -turn lanes with a sjial::aii><j::a:k::ceiktir;:rnedian. Mr. Sorenson stated that if the City selects alternative #1, the increasing traffic will rie'ed t0''go'' osne*11 t2 ;else. He stated that projections show 27,000 cars a day using this intersection. He stated that the current sikki lion is 17;aA0 trips. Both Director of Public Works Colbert and Mr. Sorenson discussed alternative #2 (a split phase) which could accommodate 21,000 trips per day. Mayor Egan asked if there w:er.a.any,.;o tji i';choicee Qirector of Public Works Colbert stated that the only choice the City has is to encourage traftic::4it::Iocl nei0.lkttoiiidod collectors, which is not a good choice. City Councilmember Wachter suggested that the Citj/ leave the intersetibn as it is. Mr. Sorenson stated that the crash rate is higher than normal. City Councilmember Masin stated that people residing near the intersection of Rahn and Diffley may not want a signal and proposed that the City hold an informational meeting for the area residents. City Councilmember Awada agreed and suggested that the City send out a letter and hold a meeting at a location in the general area of Rahn Road and Diffley Road. Mayor Egan summarized t13A::discussion and direction, stating that staff will facilitate a meeting of an extended neighborhood adjacent to the Rahn:R,.o cl €lley.,Road intersection for the purpose of holding an informational meeting. Staff was directed to report back to'fhe•.CitSe:i Mur}til ;after the neighborhood meeting is held for further consideration on the intersection improvements. ' WE 4NI31•fi34gI,WFIAt0*:' City Administrator Hedges s t,eif:t€iai:~,if a previous Council meeting, authorization was given to staff to proceed with further investigation of the wetfad'tianking opportunity in E'ureka Township located five (5) miles south of Lakeville. He stated that Water Resources Coordinator Brasch has evaluated the technical feasibility of the Eureka Township banking project and identified the City's share of the cost for purchase of banking credits. City Administrator Hedges presented a document prepared by Water Resources Brasch for review. He stated. that if the City was no longer interested in proceeding, the City should withdraw at this time. Mayor Egan noted that it appeared the Council was supportive of this banking project, because of the benefit, and that staff should proceed with participation in the joint project. Date City Clerk TLH EAGAN CITY COUNCIL January 8, 1998 Meeting Department Head Business DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS FOR COUNCIL ACTION: To approve the hiring of a consulting firm for the aquatic facility for the City of Eagan. FACTS: • The City Council previously approved a "Request for Proposal" for the purpose of hiring of an aquatic consultant to prepare preliminary design and cost estimates for an aquatic facility on the municipal center campus. • Four firms will be interviewed on Tuesday, January 6 with the expectation that a firm will be recommended to the Council at the regular meeting. • The selected firm will be expected to have preliminary concepts completed by mid to late February. CONCERNS: None ATTACHMENTS: None city of eagan MEMO MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JANUARY 2, 1998 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR JANUARY 6, 1998 CITY COUNCIL MEETING After approval is given to the January 6, 1998 City Council agenda, the minutes of the December 16, 1997 regular City Council meeting and the minutes of the December 16, 1997 and the November 25, 1997 special City Council meetings, the following items are in order for consideration. Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting The following items referred to as consent items require one (1) motion by the City Council. If the City Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further detail, those items should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Old or New Business unless the discussion required is brief. A. PERSONNEL ITEMS Item 1. Engineering Technician ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Michael Maddio as an Engineering Technician. Item 2. Resignation/Utility Supervisor ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To accept the letter of resignation from Kelley Janes from his position as Utility Supervisor. FACTS: For the Council's information, Mr. Janes has accepted the position of Assistant Utility Superintendent for the City of Chanhassen. Item 3. Resignation/Building Maintenance Supervisor ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To accept the letter of resignation from Howard Favilla from his position as Building Maintenance Supervisor. Item 4. Part -Time Seasonal Winter Sports Officials ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Chad Brown, Kim Campbell, Kyle Cloutier, Jennifer Griffith, Andrew Halverson, Patrick Maiming, Vincent Margens, Scott Prady, Mike Warner and Kerry Wollin as part- time seasonal winter sports officials for adult boot hockey, men's broomball and co-rec broomball leagues. 3 Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting Item 5. Temporary Part -Time Seasonal Winter Recreation Leaders ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Mike Kremenak and Tricia Larson as part-time seasonal winter recreation leaders. Item 6. Reorganization/Planning Division ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a reorganization within the Planning Division which includes the elimination of a Senior Planner position, the downgrading of an Associate Planner position to a Code Enforcement Technician position and an expansion of the current part-time GIS Intern position to a full-time regular GIS/Computer System Technician position. FACTS: Following the resignation of several persons from the Planning Division, staff re-examined the duties and responsibilities of the division to determine the best organization at this time. Staff recommended to the members of the Council's Personnel Committee the above reorganization within that division. The members of the Personnel Committee are, in turn, recommending approval of the reorganization to the Council as a whole. 5� Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting B. APPROVE Ski Trail Grooming Agreement ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve an agreement with Dakota County Parks for cross country ski trail grooming and authorize the Mayor to sign. FACTS: • Grooming for cross-country ski trails at Patrick Eagan Park and the tubing hill at Trapp Farm Park have been done contractually in the past. • Last year the Council approved a one-year contract with Dakota County Parks for this work, since the City of Lakeville was no longer able to provide this service. • Dakota County will charge $100.00 per hour. • Grooming in Eagan will be done after all county needs are met and only if requested. • The 1998 budget provides funding for this work. CONCERNS: None. Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting C. APPROVE plans and specifications and authorize advertisement for bids for Civic Arena Addition ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve plans and specifications for the Civic Arena Addition and authorize advertisement for bids. FACTS: • On Nov. 18`h the City Council reviewed revised cost estimates for the Civic Arena Addition and gave approval. • At the November 18`h meeting the Council authorized the advertisement for bids for pre -cast wall panels and steel because of the long lead time in obtaining these items. • On Dec. 16th the bid packages for steel and pre -cast were received. The results of those bids were favorable in that the bids were approximately $35,000 less then the November 18th estimated costs. • Remaining bid packages are being prepared and reviewed. Authorization to advertise for bid would be in order at this time. Two additional bid packages will remain; the hockey dasher boards and refrigeration system. CONCERNS: As before, soil conditions in the northwest corner of the building may require soil corrections or deeper footing design. The Construction Manager and City Staff were scheduled to do additional soil testing and analysis the week of December 29. 6 Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting D. CONFIRMATION OF FINDINGS OF FACTS, CONCLUSIONS & RESOLUTION OF DENIAL — CITY OF EAGAN ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve Findings of Facts, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial of the Preliminary Subdivision requested by Jon Paul Herbst (Cain Addition) located at 2890 Skyline Drive in the SW 1/4 of Section 4. FACTS: • At its regular meeting on December 16, 1997, the City Council denied Jon Paul Herbst's request for a two -lot preliminary subdivision (Cain Addition). BACKGROUND/ATTACHMENTS: (1) Findings of Facts, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial, pages g through /6 . SENT BY: R=93% 12-31-97 ; 13:42 ; SEVERSON SHELDON-) 612 681 4612;# 3/ 5 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAOAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA In Re: Application of John Paul Herbst FINDINGS OF FACT, for a Preliminary Subdivision CONCLUSIONS AN D for Cain Addition RESOLUTION This matter came before the Eagan City Council at its December 16, 1997 mating The Council received, considered and discussed the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation, input from staff and residents and the planning reports, together with all existing files, records, prior proceedings and the input from the applicant and citizens as presented to the Council at its December 16, 1997 meeting. Based upon all oldie files, records, prior proceedings and input which was presented at the meeting, the City Council makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Resolution. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The matter of the Preliminary Subdivision is properly brought before the Eagan City Council. 2. The proposed Prelitninary Subdivision consists of approximately .6 of an acre of land and the development of 2 lots within the Preliminary Subdivision. The property is located east of Rustic Hills Drive and west of Sibley Hills Diive and north of Skyline Drive on property legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Post Addition. The 612 432 3780 12-31-97 02:54PM P003 #39 SENT BY: R=93% 12-31-97 ; 13:42 ; SEVERSON SHELDON-) 612 681 4612;# 4/ 5 applicant's proposal is more particularly shown. on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. 3. The property of the proposed subdivision is designated as D -I (Single Family) with a density of 0-3 units per acre on the land use plan of the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan. 4. The proposed plat of Cain Addition allows 2 units on .6 of an acre. 5. The proposed density of Cain Addition exceeds the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan insofar as the proposed subdivision would exceed the maximum density on a per acre basis. 6. Development of the proposed Lot 2 of Cain Addition would place a structure significantly out of alignment and nearer to Sibley Hills Drive than the other existing structures to the north of the proposed subdivision, which existing houses front on Sibley )Kills Drive. 7. Information was presented to the City Council that the location of a home on Lot 2 of the proposed Cain Addition would not be compatible with the existing houses to the north. CONCLUSIONS 1. This matter is properly brought before the Eagan City Council. 2. The density of the proposed subdivision of Cain Addition exceeds the City's Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan range of allowable density for the D -I designation. 9 612 432 3780 12-31-97 02:54PM P004 #39 SENT BY: 12-31-97 ; 13:42 ; SEVERSON SHELDON-' 612 681 4612;# 5/ 5 3. Development of Lot 2 of the proposed Cain Addition would be incompatible with the existing houses to The north. 4. By the greater weight of the record and information presented, it is hereby determined by the City Council of the City of Eagan that approval of the Preliminary Subdivision is not warranted. RESOLUTION The City Council of the City of Eagan docs hereby resolve that the applicant's request for a Preliminary Subdivision to allow 2 lots on approximately .6 acres of land is hereby denied. Dated at Eagan, Minnesota this 6th day of January, 1998, CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor By: E.J. VanOverbeke Its: City Clerk /e& 12=94% 612 432 3780 12-31-97 02:54PM P005 #39 Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting E. APPROVE NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES MEMBERSHIP FOR 1998 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve City membership in the National League of Cities for 1998 as presented. FACTS: • The City of Eagan has participated in certain of the National League of Cities activities through its affiliation with the League of Minnesota Cities. • Upon review of the other services and advantages available through direct membership in the organization, the Council directed that this item be placed on an agenda for consideration. • Annual membership dues for Eagan would be approximately $3,200. The National League of Cities has a policy to permit new members to participate at 50% of the regular dues for their first year. • As this membership was not anticipated during budget preparation, it will be covered by an allocation from the budget contingency and this item will be included as part of the 1999 budget. /1 Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting F. APPROVE APPLICATION AND INVESTIGATION FEES FOR ADULT USE AND ADULT COMPANIONSHIP/ESCORT SERVICES PROVIDER LICENSES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the application and investigation fees for adult use and adult companionship/escort services provider licenses. FACTS: • In official action at the December 16, 1997 City Council meeting, an ordinance amendment providing for the licensing of adult establishments was approved. • Adult companionship/escort services establishments are required to be licensed as an adult establishment. • An ordinance amendment which will require the licensing of adult companionship/escort services providers is being considered later on this agenda. • Both of these licensing requirements make reference to license and application fees to be set by the City Council. • The City Clerk's office has reviewed the various fees in neighboring communities, reviewed the AMM fee survey and discussed potential investigation and enforcement requirements with the Police Department. Based on this research, it is the recommendation of star that the following fees be set by the City Council. Adult Establishments Adult Companionship/Escort Services Provider Investigation Annual License Fee Fee $300(1) $5,000 $300(1)(2) $ 850(2) (1)$300 is the base fee; in addition, a $1,000 escrow will be collected to cover expenses of the investigation. Any balance of the $1,000 not used in the investigation will be refunded. (2)One annual license for an adult companionship/escort services provider is included with the adult establishment investigation and license fee. Each additional license for an adult companionship/escort services provider is subject to this additional fee. • These investigation fees are the same as for liquor licenses and the annual license fee is $1,000 higher than an on -sale liquor license. Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 G. LICENSE AGREEMENT — JESKE COMPANY, INC. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To enter into a license agreement with the Jeske Company to allow the construction and maintenance of private storm sewer on City property. FACTS: • The Jeske Company has applied for a building permit to construct an industrial building on Lots 17,18, and 19, Block 3 Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 4 on the west side of Mike Collins Drive. This building and associated pavement area will create storm water runoff, which will require the construction of a storm sewer system on the site. Storm sewer of sufficient size and capacity is not readily available in the area for connection and discharge by this development. The closest available point of discharge for the site's storm sewer is east across Mike Collins Drive to Pond EP -2 within City property designated as future City park land (North Park). • This license agreement would allow the Jeske Company to construct and maintain the needed private storm sewer system across City property (Lot 10, Block 4 Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 4). The City can terminate the license agreement at any time. • City Parks and Recreation staff have reviewed the storm sewer plan in terms of impact to future development of the property as parkland and find it acceptable. ATTACHMENTS: • License Agreement graphic, page/If . 19 18 17 MIKE COLLINS DR. ALDRIN DRIVE H: ECIP4 POND EP -2 011-75 PROPOSED STORM SEWER EASEMENT 16Q 12-16-97 City of Eagan PROPOSED STORM SEWER EASEMENT k 0 C2. o Cr 9 ... o 'tarn V .1,2/. /J/ 10 --//-//1- �1 o Q '' 11 C/) 4J o �� 12 a P� � � 0 44 13 0 CD <c./ 14 POND EP -2 011-75 PROPOSED STORM SEWER EASEMENT 16Q 12-16-97 City of Eagan PROPOSED STORM SEWER EASEMENT Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 H. PROJECT 687, BISCAYNE AVENUE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To amend the final assessment roll for Project 687 (Biscayne Avenue) based on the appraised benefit amounts and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection. FACTS: • Project 687 provided for the installation of street and utility improvements along Biscayne Avenue within the Hailey's Addition located between Red Pine Lane and Gun Club Road. • The final assessment roll was approved by the City Council on December 16, 1997, after the scheduled public hearing. No one addressed the city council at the public hearing regarding the assessments. • Staff had met with some of the property owners at an informational meeting December 4, 1997, to discuss the proposed assessments and address any concerns regarding the improvements. The property owners were aware of the appraisals completed for the City of Eagan in regards to the improvements. The consensus of the property owners present at the meeting was acceptance of the appraised benefit amount in lieu of the proposed assessment amount. 5 of the 8 property owners had objected to the assessment amounts received in the public hearing notices prior to the informational meeting. • The appraised benefit amount for Lot 1, Block 1 is $26,000.00 (Lot 1, Block 2 is equivalent in shape and area). The appraised benefit amount for Lot 3, Block 2 and Lot 4, Block 2 is $31,000.00, respectively (Lots 2, 3, & 4, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 2 are equivalent in shape and area). The final assessment roll previously presented to the City Council established the assessments as follows: Lot 1, Blk 1 = $30,341.58 Lot 1, Blk 2 = $30,079.92 Lot 2, Blk 1 = $36,476.67 Lot 2, Blk 2 = $38,530.05 Lot 3, Blk l = $38,791.29 Lot 3, Blk 2 = $39,449.43 Lot 4, Blk 1 = $36,229.29 Lot 4, Blk 2 = $36,590.07 • The total difference between the sum of the appraised benefit amounts and the sum of the final assessment amounts is $48,488.30. The various Trunk Funds would finance this difference accordingly. Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 I. CONTRACT 95 -EE, DEERWOOD TOWNHOMES ADDITION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To acknowledge the completion of Contract 95 -EE (Deerwood Townhomes Addition —Utilities) and authorize perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. FACTS: • Deerwood Townhomes Addition was constructed on the north side of Deerwood Drive, on the east side of the Deerwood Drive overpass of Interstate 35-E. This development required the installation of sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer, which was performed privately by the developer under the terms and conditions of the development contract agreement. • The improvements have been completed, inspected by representatives of the Public Works Department and found to be in order for favorable Council action for acceptance for perpetual maintenance subject to warranty provision. Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting J. APPROVE THORSON-CORNWELL CO. ASSESSMENT SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS — PROJECTS 682 AND 718 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the Thorson -Cornwell assessment settlement agreements for Projects 682 and 718. FACTS: • The City Attorney's office, working with City staff, has negotiated settlement agreements for the Thorson -Cornwell property for assessments related to Projects 682 and 718. • The payment terms covered in the stipulations are similar to those agreed to earlier for the Frank Rechlzigel, Earl Doehling, Todd Franz and Henry Franz objections to their assessments for Project 682. ATTACHMENTS: • Cover memo from Assistant City Attorney Bob Bauer summarizing the proposed agreements on page 1 • The Stipulations of Settlement are enclosed without page number. /9 MEMORANDUM TO: Gene VanOverbeke, City Clerk FROM: Robert Bauer, Assistant City Attorney DATE: December 30, 1997 RE: Special Assessment Appeals Our File Nos. 206-15257 and 206-15374 Court File Nos. C3-97-9101 and CX -97-9757 Project Nos. 682 and 718 Gene, Enclosed for the Council's review are proposed Stipulations of Settlement concerning the above - referenced special assessment appeals. As you are aware, the property owner, Thorson -Cornwell, has appealed the water area assessment in connection with Project No. 682 as well as the sanitary sewer trunk and sanitary sewer lateral charges in connection with Project 718. The Property owner submitted objection letters and validly perfected its appeal by serving you and filing with the District Court within ten (10) days as required by Minn. Stat. §429.081. Immediately following the appeals, we have attempted to explore settlement with the property owner. Following initial settlement discussions, as well as conferences with City staff, we met with the property owner and its attorney with the hope of arriving at a comprehensive settlement for both special assessment appeals. The enclosed Stipulations reflect the settlement terms and we recommend that the Council adopt the settlement and execute the Stipulations. Under Project 682, the property owner of the property was assessed One Hundred Four Thousand Three Hundred Four and no/100 Dollars ($104,304.00). The property owner has agreed to pay the sum of Ninety-eight Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty-five and no/100 Dollars ($98,785.00). The assessment will be payable according to the terms of the Stipulation. Under Project 718, the property owner of the property was assessed Thirty-one Thousand Three Hundred Sixty-five and 13/100 Dollars ($31,365.13) for water trunk charges and Twenty-four Thousand Fourteen and 86/100 Dollars ($24,014.86) for water lateral charges. The landowner presented several arguments concerning the benefit to its property concerning these charges. Nevertheless, the property owner has agreed to accept an assessment of Twenty-nine Thousand Two Hundred Fifty-nine and no/100 Dollars ($29,259.00) for the water trunk charges and Twelve Thousand and no/100 Dollars ($12,000.00) for the water lateral charges. The payment terms are listed in the Stipulation. /g EAGAN CITY COUNCIL January 6, 1998 Meeting CONSENT AGENDA K. APPROVE Resolution to submit Mighty Kids Grant to Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Approve a Resolution to submit Mighty Kids Grant in the amount of $12,109 to the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission. FACTS: • Youth Development is submitting a grant to expand existing youth programs emphasizing equal access to programs for under served youth and youth at risk. • The objective is to make all fee programs available to those without financial resources to participate, improve the skill level of basketball league participants, emphasize participation of under served and at risk youth in basketball league, improve the skill levels of the volunteer basketball coaches and expand on youth programs, focusing on the diverse needs of the neighborhoods. The grant requires a one to one match. • The in-kind and dollar match has been budgeted in the Youth Development's 1998 budget. CONCERNS: None ATTACHMENTS: Resolution .pig e o�d / 9 RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF EAGAN MIGHTY KIDS GRANT WHEREAS, the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission (MASC), via the State General Fund, provides funds to assist political subdivisions of the state of Minnesota for the development of youth sports and recreation programs, and WHEREAS, the City of Eagan desires to expand on existing youth programs emphasizing equal access to programs for under served youth and youth at risk beginning with the expansion of the youth basketball league, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE City Council of the City of Eagan: 1. Estimates that the total cost of developing said program shall be $24,218 and the City of Eagan is requesting $12,109 from the State General Fund. 2. That the Mayor and/or City Clerk is authorized and directed to execute said application and serve as the official liaison with the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission. Motion made by: Seconded by: Those in favor: Those against: Dated: CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: Its Mayor Attest: CERTIFICATION Its Clerk I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Eagan at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the 6'h day of January, 1998, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. E.J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk City of Eagan Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 1UBLIC HEARINGS A. EASEMENT VACATION — OUTLOT A, ROBINS ADDITION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To close the public hearing and approve/deny the vacation of a public easement within Outlot A, Robins Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • City staff received a petition from RES Investment Company to vacate a sanitary sewer easement within Outlot A, Robins Addition. • The vacation is being requested due to the pending sale of the property. The buyer has made the vacation of the easement a condition of the sale. • The easement was dedicated in 1970 in conjunction with Public Improvement Project No. 49. The project was constructed, but did not incorporate this easement. Subsequent public improvements were constructed to connect to the sanitary sewer, but no improvements were made within the easement. • The existing sanitary sewer follows the property lines along the perimeter of the outlot. The easement runs through the outlot. There would not be a need in the future for any such easement without the final plat of the outlot. • Public notice for the easement vacation was published in the City's legal newspaper. Additional notices were provided to public utility companies and adjacent property owners. No objections have been raised prior to the preparation of this report. • This vacation request has been reviewed by the Engineering Division and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ATTACHMENTS: • Location map, page )02 • Vacation Description, pages W3 and . C ',ENDO TA HE7GHTSI NTERSTATE II Q GENTIAN PROPOSED VACATION BEATRICE ST. McKEE ST. I • • J -s I \ KEEFE ST. l CO.RD. 26 cc) v 0 w Z 0 -J LONE OAK TOAD OVA i S ROAD SECTION 2 cc z -J 1000 figitmixamin city of eagan PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT as LOCATION MAP 0 0A Q� FAX 476-0104 (612) 476-6000 ..1TE 1C14 SATHRE - BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN 55391 1111.826 GE'_ Vacation of that part of a perpetual easement for sanitary sewer purposes as granted to the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, according to Document No. 378272 and Document No. 378263 more specifically defined in said documents as follows: A 10.00 foot perpetual easement for sanitary sewer purposes over and across the following described premises: Lots 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8, THE ROBERT O'NEILL HOMESTEAD DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds, Dakota County, Minnesota. The centerline of said easement is described as commencing at the intersection of the west line of Lot 3 of said THE ROBERT O'NEILL HOMESTEAD DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA and the northerly right-of-way line of State Highway No. 55; thence northwesterly along said right-of-way a distance of 432.72 feet to the beginning of the centerline of said easement; thence northeasterly deflecting to right 84 degrees 35 minutes 45 seconds a distance of 116.74 feet; thence northeasterly deflecting to the right 0 degrees 48 minutes 11 seconds a distance of 250.00 feet; thence northerly deflecting to the left 18 degrees 19 minutes 18 seconds a distance of 400.11 feet; thence northeasterly deflecting to the right 52 degrees 01 minutes 57 seconds a distance of 299.53 feet where said centerline terminates. Said 10.00 foot easement lies 5.00 feet on each side of the above described centerline. Which is embraced by Outlot A, ROBINS ADDITION, Dakota County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof. Said Outlot A is a plat over portions of Lots 1, 2 and 8, THE ROBERT O'NEILL HOMESTEAD DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA. (Attached Exhibit A) a3 ao /•' I �v \ pr \ / , ' ' SC.C' �'\-'�`"`4j _ }NZ°:C / `' /�� 'P _\ 47.o7 80 I 'c, m / PROPOSED VACATION 1r r io� I Z : Cr: I I t 1 4 i of 75 FrN5P TRAM-trt1."5�on! I co N EASEMENT PER Doc • NO. 535cooZ f = r"; 15 Fr. U.714-1TY LIAJE. EA6EMEN-r PE e. DOG, 1 NC . 313244. Sw COR. of cOr•s, 8Lg.5, 1 KOc-0F5x,'5 FLAT - --- G71.6,2 N 89°3i'03" E. - - 62.25 NZ 0 8 6/ . IV N a //l ; 409.oi s ��ti •\\ p /(1/ Q A o ,vs •• v N 4'OI'C- • Z C4 ill mo l• 1•• is 0 /� .•. o w \ •••.rn - •7...„, y1 ,r Y�y '..-'..\..,,, s� ,1 I \.,77 EXHIBIT A c ' -r i r, -I- L._ r- J Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting A. INITIATION OF A REQUEST FOR SPECIAL LEGISLATION ALLOWING AN INCREASE TO THE NUMBER OF ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSES AVAILABLE TO BE ISSUED ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve or deny the initiation of a request for Special Legislation allowing an increase to the number of on -sale liquor licenses to be issued in the City of Eagan. FACTS: • At the request of the hospitality industry, this item was continued from the December 16, 1997 City Council meeting. ♦ Recent growth in the hospitality industry has created increased demand for the City's allocation of on -sale liquor licenses. The number of licenses available within a community is based in part on population. Absent Special Legislation, the State of Minnesota uses decennial census figures to establish the number of licenses available. The City previously received an authorization through Special Legislation to recognize its ongoing population growth to increase liquor licenses to the current number of 26. ♦ The City is currently approaching the adjusted limit of 26 licenses. It is unlikely that certain types of hospitality businesses or full-service hotels will continue to locate in the City if the limit is reached and no additional licenses are available. • The City has recently received the Convention & Visitors Bureau report suggesting that additional growth in the full-service hotel market can be expected. • In anticipation of this business item, staff has notified all current holders of liquor licenses within the City. ATTACHMENTS: • Letter to license holders on pageoQZ • Letter from Al Baker requesting the continuance on page gp___2. as December 9, 1997 Mr. John B. Goodman Sidney's of Eagan, Inc. 1107 Hazeltine Boulevard Suite 200 Chaska, Minnesota 55318 Dear Mr. Goodman: THOMAS EGAN Mayor PATRICIA AWADA SEA BLOMQUIST SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Administrator E. J. VAN OVERBEKE Ctty Clerk As an item of new business at its regular meeting on December 16, 1997, the Eagan City Council will be considering the initiation of a request for special legislation allowing an increase to the number of on -sale liquor licenses available to be issued in Eagan. The State Legislature controls the number of liquor licenses which may be issued in any City. The limit is based primarily on a base plus population. With Eagan's rapid growth rate, the formula has not kept pace with the demand. Eagan currently has authorization to issue 26 on -sale liquor licenses and the 23`d is on this same agenda for approval. Without special legislation there can be no increase until after the 2000 census. Given the phenomenal success of the hospitality industry and continued hotel development in the community, the City Council would like additional flexibility with license availability. It is important to note that the City is not recruiting new restaurants and is simply trying to be in position to meet the market place demand. The actual issuance of licenses will continue to be determined by the same standards and expectations upon which your license was issued. I am sending this letter to you and all other on -sale liquor license holders as a courtesy so you are aware of the City Council agenda item. Sincerely, E.J. VanOverbeke, CPA Finance Director/City Clerk cc: City Administrator Hedges i>26 MUNICIPAL CENTER 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122.1807 PHONE. (612) 681.4600 FAX• (612)681.4612 TDD(612)454.8535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer MAINTENANCE FACILITY 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE (612) 681.430C FAX (612)681.4360 TDD: (612) 454.8535 3434 Washington Drive Eagan, MN 55122 (612) 454-9000 To: Tom Hedges From: Al Baker Subject: Eagan On -Sale Liquor Licenses December 12, 1997 It is my understanding that Eagan City Council will discuss the ability of the City of Eagan to issue additional liquor licenses through the legislative process on the Council Agenda, Tuesday, December 16, 1997. Please use this letter as a request to continue this discussion until middle or late January, 1998. Many of us in the Hospitality Industry have concerns regarding this matter but are unable to attend meetings in the month of December. Thank you for your consideration. Al Baker Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting B. BUILDING MOVE PERMIT — JIM SIMONET ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a building move permit to relocate a 43' x 27' two-story house and a 24' x 28' detached garage from 3555 Highway 149 to 3432 Highway 55. FACTS: • At its meeting on December 16, 1997, the City Council continued action on this item to research the egress window requirement. • The proposed parcel is unimproved and unplatted. • The house is a two-story brick structure and according to the applicant was built in approximately 1904. • A site inspection by the Protective Inspections Division revealed that the house and garage are both structurally sound; however, the house will need some modifications to meet the Uniform Building Code standards. • Parcels on the north and south sides of the proposed site contain walkout style ramblers with accessory buildings. ISSUES: • The applicant has located replacement windows that meet the egress requirement and have minimal aesthetic affects on the exterior of the house. • The applicant should demonstrate no less than a 5 dBA sound reduction with installation of the new windows. • Peggy Carlson, a resident to the north, has asked that approval of the permit be contingent on moving this home via the field to the east of the proposed location. The applicant has no intention of changing the route, therefore, this concern should be satisfied. BACKGROUND/ATTACHMENTS: (3) Staff Report, pages c) % through 3 I . December 16, 1997 letter from Peggy Carlson, page ac ag PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: DECEMBER 30, 1997 APPLICANT: JIM SIMONET HEARING DATE: JANUARY 6, 1998 PROPERTY OWNER: JIM SIMONET PREPARED BY: DALE SCHOEPPNER REQUEST: BUILDING MOVE PERMIT LOCATION: 3432 HIGHWAY 55 (10 01200 080 02) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING: AGRICULTURAL SUMMARY OF REQUEST Mr. Simonet is requesting a building move permit to relocate a 43' x 27' two-story house and a 24' x 28' garage from 3555 Highway 149 to 3432 Highway 55. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 4, Section 4.10, gives the Protective Inspections Division authority to issue permits to move a building out of the City and authorizes the City Council to issue a permit to move a building to a location within the City. City Code, Chapter 4, Section 4.10, Subd. 13 states that a moving permit shall be denied for any one of the following: A. The applicant has not complied with any requirement of this section. B. Moving the building would endanger persons or property in the City. C. The building is in such a state of deterioration or disrepair or is otherwise so structurally unsafe that it would constitute a danger to persons or property in the City. D. The building is structurally unsafe or unfit for the purpose for which it is moved. E. The equipment for moving is unsafe and persons and property would be endangered by its use. �9 F. The building or its use would not be in compliance with zoning, building codes or other provisions of the City Code G. If the building to be moved is in substantial variance with either the established or the expected pattern of building development within the neighborhood to which the building is to be moved. Comparative age, bulk, architectural style and quality of construction of both the building to be moved and the other buildings in the neighborhood shall be considered in determining whether a building is in substantial variance. If the building to be moved is more than ten years older than the oldest building situated on lands abutting the land to which the building is to be moved, such fact shall be evidence that the building to be moved is in substantial variance. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject site is an unplatted 4.7 acre parcel (P.I.D. #10 01200 080 02) and does not have any structures on it. EVALUATION OF REQUEST Mr. Simonet is requesting that a moving permit be issued for the purposes of relocating a house and detached garage from 3555 Highway 149 to 3432 Highway 55. The proposed placement of the house and garage meet City code setback requirements. A representative of the Protective Inspections Division has conducted a site inspection of the house and garage. Subsequent to the inspection, the applicant has been informed that the Uniform Building Code requires moved buildings to be upgraded to current standards. The house will need new egress windows in the main bedrooms and one in the basement. New hand wired smoke detectors must also be installed. Both the house and garage appear to be structurally stable. Parcels to the west and east are vacant while parcels to the north and south contain walkout rambler style homes and accessory buildings. AIRPORT NOISE CONSIDERATIONS The City of Eagan considered airport noise as a factor in its Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. With the State's decision to expand the airport at its current location, the Metropolitan Council has adopted a revised Aviation Chapter which anticipates the impacts from the continued operation of the airport at it s current location. The noise policy contours in northern Eagan place the subject property within Noise Zone IV. Within this area, in -fill single family residential development would be conditional. While the proposal to move a home is different from typical development, it does place a residential use in a higher noise impact area than at its current location and the Council may treat it similarly. To be approve such development in this area, the City Council would need to make acceptable findings concerning the following: 1. Specific nature of the proposed use, including the extent of outdoor activities. 2. Relationship of the proposed use to other planning considerations, including adjacent land use activities, consistency with overall comprehensive planning and relation to other metropolitan systems. 3. Frequency of exposure of proposed uses to aircraft overflight. 4. Location of proposed use relative to aircraft flight tracks and aircraft on -ground operating and maintenance areas. 5. Location, site design and construction restrictions to be imposed by the community of the proposed use with respect to reduction of exterior to interior noise transmissions and shielding of outdoor activities. 6. Method community will use to inform future occupant of proposed building of potential noise from aircraft operations. Extent to which community restricts the building from having facilities for outdoor activities associated with the use. 8. Distance of proposed use from existing or proposed runways, parallel taxiways or engine run-up areas. With respect to the factual aspects of the findings, the property lies approximately 4.5 miles southeast of the primary runways at the airport. On an annual average, approximately half of all arrivals and departures use these runways to and from the southeast. At current traffic levels, this equals approximately 300,000 operations annually. Because of the relationship of the property to the current departure and arrival procedures and the runway centerlines, a significant portion of the departures and arrivals will track over or near the property. The property is approximately 5 miles from the engine maintenance and run up area. While the Stage III airline fleet, federally mandated by the year 2000, will create less noise per operation than the current fleet, the future net affect of such reductions is not certain. As such, regional policy requires that cities take current noise levels into account until such time as reductions in actual noise result in a reduction of the policy contours. Architectural designs and construction methods for new construction within this area would be required to meet sound attenuation standards. In particular, the building plans, materials and construction would need to be such that they would insure an interior sound level of 45 dBA as compared with the noise level at the inner boundary of the noise zone, in this case 65 DNL. Sound attenuation in existing structures may not achieve the same levels as can be achieved with new construction. Therefore, the applicant would benefit by applying at least the 5 dBA level of attenuation targeted by the Metropolitan Airports Commission's Part 150 Program. It is advisable that the applicant attempt to exceed this level to the extent that it is feasible. If the City Council determines that findings concerning the conditions above support the approval of this application for in-filldevelopment, it should be conditioned on the following: 1. The applicant shall be required to perform sound attenuation improvements to the building to achieve an inside noise level reduction of between 5 dBA and 20 dBA. ISSUES 1. The Uniform Building Code requires egress windows in all bedrooms and basements for emergency escape and fire-fighter access. They are a vital passive life -safety system built into the construction of houses. Relocated houses are required by the Uniform Building Code to be retrofitted to comply with current standards. The applicant has located replacement windows that meet the egress requirement and have very minimal effects to the exterior aesthetics. The mullion (vertical space between the windows) will be approximately 8" in width compared to the current 10". Existing openings in the bedrooms are approximately three square feet in size. Egress windows are required to be no less than 5.7 square feet. 2. A resident to the north of this property has requested that approval of the permit be contingent on moving this home via the field to the east of the proposed location. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION Mr. Simonet is requesting a permit to move a 43' x 27' two-story house and a 24' x 28' detached garage from 3555 Highway 149 to 3432 Highway 55. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve/deny a building move permit to move a house and garage from 3555 Highway 149 to 3432 Highway 55 subject to the following: 1. A building permit for the foundation and interior improvements would be applied for and issued prior to construction. 2. The house is modified to be consistent with the current building code. 3. The applicant shall be required to perform sound attenuation improvements to the building to achieve an inside noise level reduction of between 5 dBA and 20 dBA. 302 City ,n Lagan Location Map 111 ii■ 111 111 IC t°e i11W11I1t•ro „ • Sub ect Site llil rts 1 .:: kb tokil ) a. '7 boo I � .11 ILII 11 mil L ECIME Ma ..- 4715512515121C1C11113 ®mm 1 77191 4/4mv.a431 iumiimucc ill ( : : 1. .11 .1.1 , IsirruirgnArri ®MESIJ►'Aria..m I. 11":::gm um! ea MINI Aim NMI NM Q: ::Iiiiiiing vitelo 'ZVIfigilltd Loorsi- 111 3 .10111" - Jim Simonet 3432 Hwy 55 Building Move Permit City of Eagan Community Development Department L33 0 800 Feet \\ E DEC 30 '97 21:51a. PUB 612 6877849 P.2 5.9 8e8 1, sastaNau MOUND SYST111 ee4 • . acorj"jus' • " ccoot •:,41 N 1:3 eo 0 5 December 16, 1997 Dear Mayor and Council: At this time the applicant is stating that the house will be moved in via the field to the east of the proposed location. It seems to be the best and most logical way, with little to no damage occurring to the area's land or vegetation. But, I must ask that approval of the permit be contingent on this claim and a condition be added to state that if this route is not feasible that the house will need to find a different location. Justification: Trying to bring this 24' house up our 10' narrow dirt driveway would result in total destruction of a wetland and all WI) significant trees that hug our road. The costs are to high to the neighbors and native habitat's eco -system to attempt to use our driveway for this move. We believe this property has the right develop as a homesite, but hope the council realizes that if this were new construction, the area's environment and driveway would not be adversely affected. We are simply asking that the same condition be applied with this home being moved in. Regards, Peggy Carlson Resident Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting C. RECONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL — PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION (CAIN ADDITION) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve/deny a reconsideration of the two -lot Cain Addition Preliminary Subdivision request for property located at 2890 Skyline Drive in the SW 1/4 of Section 4. FACTS: • Mr. Herbst has submitted a request to reconsider the City Council's action at its December 16, 1997 meeting to deny the Cain Addition Preliminary Subdivision. • Should the Council choose to reconsider this action, the item should be scheduled to a later meeting to allow proper notice of affected properties. BACKGROUND/ATTACHMENTS: (1) Letter from Mr. Herbst requesting reconsideration, pages3 through 96. Jon Paul Herbst 2890 Skyline Dr. Eagan, Mn 55121 612-452-2862 December 26, 1997 Dear Mayor Tom Egan and Council Members, I am respectfully requesting reconsideration of preliminary subdivision (Cain Addition) based on the following: • To characterize my subdivision as consistent with the progression of development along Skyline Dr. and with lots adjacent to subject property. • To show lot size map of the overall neighborhood and in particular lots within 350 feet of proposed subdivision. • To give an accurate portrayal of an area of mixed lot sizes, varied set -backs and varied driveway lengths; an area primarily characterized by newer homes on typical 1/3 acre lot size, with only a few 2/3-1 acre lots with older homes on them remaining here. • To address concerns of Carol Hill of lot to the north of proposed subdivision, and resolve issues that were first brought to my attention at the December 16 council meeting, in particular her primary concern that a "two-story" home is not placed on the lot. • The front of Carol Hill's home at 2880 Sibley Memorial Hwy. actually faces to the west, not to the east as she has led the council to believe. Her main entrance is on the south side of her home. The back yard of proposed subdivision is adjacent to her back yard, and her garage. • To submit a home blue -print that would work well on this lot adjacent to both newer and older homes. The drive access to this home could be placed on either Skyline Dr. or Sibley Hills Dr. with the front of home facing Sibley Hills Dr. This is a property that has been owned by my family for 33 years. I have personally witnessed the changing character of this neighborhood during this time, and have formed friendly relationships with my neighbors in both the newer and older developments. Because I have a Bachelor of Science Degree in Urban Planning and have worked as an intern for the City of St. Paul Planning Dept., and for Coldwell Banker Commercial Real Estate, I believe my decision to subdivide the east half of my property is based on great insight, correct timing, and the belief that I am making an improvement to what currently exists. Presently I am self-employed as furniture designer/manufacturer and as part-time home builder in partnership with Adson Homes. I have built two homes recently in the neighborhood at 1608 Skyline Path, and 3015 Shields Dr. It has always been my intention to maintain control of the development of this property by participating in the building process. My lot is located on the north side of Skyline Dr., an area of newer and older homes. About 10 -15 years ago Skyline Dr. was connected to a section of Sibley Hills Dr., and the entire road re -named Skyline Dr. This road has become the main thoroughfare for residents in this area, because the road connects Hwy. 13 to Pilot Knob Rd., and also for traffic passing through. My home and Don Ohearn's home at 2888 Sibley Hills Dr. now border this new road. The character of development on Skyline Dr. is 1/3 acre lots on both the north and south sides of the street. Some of these 1/3 acre lots are located adjacent to my 2/3 acre lot. It makes more sense to subdivide my lot and fit in with this character than to leave the east half of my lot open. Don Ohearn has indicated to me on several occasions his interest in doing the same, but had waited the outcome of the Delosh Addition to the east of his property and is waiting the outcome of the expenses in my subdivision. Our back yards seem like vacant lots along Skyline Dr. Currently the east half of my lot appears as a large, flat, vacant corner lot at a 4 -way intersection. A slight 10 ft grade along my subdivision line seems to naturally separate this area as a separate lot. The fact that there are existing homes at the other 3 -corners of this inter- section enhances the notion there should be a home here. Two out of three of these homes are on 12,000 sq.ft. lots, and the third home, on a 46,000 .sq.ft. lot size, is also interested in subdividing. . My subdivision also mirrors the lots of adjacent block to south of Skyline Dr. The density of homes on Skyline Dr. and in Stephanie Ct. dictates the lot size here. Recent subdivision of the Delosh Addition, east of my lot along Skyline Dr., further emphasizes the 1/3 acre density here, and these new lots even appear much smaller because of steep grade that exists there. Skyline Dr. is the main corridor for the neighborhood. The positioning of my subdivision line in parrallel to the lot lines along this street is consistent. Carol Hill's lot to the north of my property cannot subdivide for access reasons and does not influence my subdivision line. I believe that subdivision of the east half of my lot would help to break a tract house look on Sibley Hills Dr. and emphasize a stronger character of new homes on Skyline Dr. It is important that consideration of both areas is given in the building process, and that. a home placed here is not overbearing in size to the older homes on Sibley Hills Dr. I believe, and have concurred with other home builders, my lot surveyor, and my architect that a one level walk- out home of 1,800 to 2,100 square feet is appropriate here. With the emphasis of view to southwest corner of home, the logical placement of the home is towards the southwest corner of the new lot, and further away from Carol Hill of 2880 Sibley Hills Dr. to the north end of my property. Carol's home is located on the west end of her property and a home on the east end of my property would be distanced from her own, and back yards would be adjoining. Her primary unobstructed view is at the front of her home which faces to the west. At the rear of her home, on the east side, are much smaller windows for bedrooms and bathroom which view her garage and Sibley Hills Dr. in back of her home. The natural barrier of fully grown Evergreens and other trees that she has enjoyed for years along my property line to my north would remain intact, as dictated by required tree preservation plan, and has I promised her I would add to this dense, fast growing privacy hedging to ensure her privacy. Carol's primary concern is that a two-story home is not placed on the lot. I also do not want a home of this height on the lot, and this is why I have never considered simply listing the lot for sale. In many respects, a home placed on the east half of my lot would do more to create privacy for her lot from traffic along Skyline Dr. and from a greater number of homes on the south side of Skyline Dr. It should be noted that there has been no other opposition to this subdivision from people in the neighborhood than that of Carol Hill, and I feel that these issues can be resolved. Other neighbors on this street have considered, or are considering subdivision, most are limited by access. It is the character of the area that the lots that are subdividable are being subdivided with a significant amount recently and in the last 10 years. It has not been the intention of the city to create this as an estate lot area, subdivisions created have been 1/3 acre size or 85 foot minimum frontage. My property is unique that it is bordered by three streets. Some consideration should be given to the fact that my property appears much larger than whats delineated due to placement of the Rustic Hills Dr. with respect to my property line on the west. The fact that my lot is primarily flat with a slight grade, gives a lot of useable yard space for both newly created lots. The 10 homes on Sibley Hills Dr. were built in two stages, which in respect are of two different characters. This street was originally a narrow gravel road used to access the back of the homes which front Sibley Memorial Hwy. in Post Addition # 1. Then with Post Addition # 2, this road was used to access the front of the homes on the east side of the street. Sibley Hills Dr. was not built as a culdesac, but as two separate tracts of homes. The front of the homes on the east side of the street face the back of the homes on the west side of the street. My subdivision helps to correct this phenomena. The area should be viewed according to passage through the major corridors of Hwy. 13 and Skyline Dr. ( refer to map Main Corridor Skyline Drive ). Throughout the area 1/3 acre lots exist next to 2/3-1 acre lots, there really is not a significant difference here. The value of an older home in this area is determined more by comparison of sales of similar homes, the condition of the home, and the overwhelming presence of airplane noise and traffic from nearby Hwy. 13. This I have found through an appraisal of my own home through Parranto and Associates of Eagan in 1992 (see attached). With the proximity of this neighborhood to the airport, the yearly increase in airplane traffic alters any benefit of having a larger lot here. The value of open land beyond normal lot size here is strongly determined by supply and demand of new homesites in the area, and the ability to subdivide that land. The real estate market here demands new homes and pays much less for smaller, older homes as found on Sibley Hills Dr., whether the home is on a larger lot or not. Because of the airport, and positioning along Hwy. 13, it is unlikely that these homes will be torn down to make way for larger, estate type homes. The location of smaller homes in Stephanie Circle reinforces this. 3? I believe you will find that the size, and physical characteristics make this an ideal lot for a home of similar size to my own and my neighbors. A home placed here would have a beautiful South-West view of the Minnesota River Valley, would not impose on my neighbors homes, and would be surrounded by fully grown trees around the perimeter of the property for privacy. The east half of my property really does appear as a vacant, empty corner lot. This subdivision is really more fitting for the area than to leave the lot open. This is what Shannon Tyree of the Planning Dept. has found in her several visits to my neighborhood, and perhaps one of the many reasons why this lot has received such unanimous approval for subdivision from the Planning Dept. and Planning Commission. I shouldn't need acreage land to subdivide like the big land owners did all around my property. The proposed sub -division does meet, and exceeds all of the city's requirements for lot size and setbacks. My new lots are bigger than most in the area. The Comprehensive Plan is used as a general guide to designate zoning districts in order to develope the city in some orderly fashion in a way the City of Eagan deems best suited. In the case of subdivision the Comprehensive Guide is used to designate areas of single unit and multi -unit residential, commercial and industrial property, and is too broad to determine acceptability of subdivision. The city therefore relies on the more stringent Requirements for Subdivision to meet accept- ability. I have meet the Requirements for Subdivision, I have not been meet with opposition from my neighborhood, I have received unanimous approval from the Planning Commision and' Planning Dept. The real impact of the presence of homes here is to the South -East, steep elevations in the land and height of homes causes a visible stacking effect and very high visability of those homes. I believe my subdivision is fitting and an improvement for my lot and the surrounding area. The unique conditions I have presented favor subdivision of my property. a Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting D. AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 11 OF THE EAGAN CITY CODE — SECTION 11.21 SHORELAND ZONING ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: ▪ To approve the adoption of an ordinance of the City of Eagan, Minnesota, amending Eagan City Code Chapter Eleven entitled "Land Use Regulations (Zoning)" by amending Section 11.21 regarding Shoreland zoning regulations; and by adopting by reference Eagan City Code Chapter 1 and Section 11.19. • To approve a resolution authorizing publication of a summary ordinance. FACTS: ▪ The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval of the proposed amendments at their regular meeting on July 22, 1997. The City Council considered this item in September 1997 and postponed action on the proposed amendments in order to have additional time to review the changes. BACKGROUND/ATTACHMENTS: ▪ Minutes of July 22, 1997 APC meeting, pages Latlueugh Memo regarding amendments dated November 14, 1997, ages 4/3 through LS! ▪ Ordinance regarding Section 11.21, pages 4 6 through y Resolution and summary ordinance, pages % through77. 41 city of eagan f MEMO To: Tom Hedges, City Administrator From: Pam Dudziak, Associate Planner Date: November 14, 1997 Re: Shoreland Ordinance Amendments INTRODUCTION Earlier this year the Advisory Planning Commission directed staff to prepare revisions to the City's Shoreland Zoning ordinance. In response, staff undertook a comprehensive review of the Shoreland Zoning regulation to review it for clarity and consistency with the MN Department of Natural Resources model ordinance, the City's zoning code, and the City's land use permit procedures. Planning staff also worked with water resources staff on several issues that clarify the authority of the City to protect water quality in regulated water bodies. Following the City Council's initial review of the proposed ordinance and at the request of the City Council the Advisory Parks Commission reviewed the proposed amendments on October 20, 1997. The APrC recommended approval of the amendments as drafted. BACKGROUND The City's Shoreland Zoning Ordinance became effective in April 1993. Although a model ordinance developed by the state DNR was used as a guide for the development of the ordinance, the ordinance that was adopted in 1993 was largely taken from a rural county. Consequently, it was not synthesized into Eagan's zoning ordinance. Specifically, it included elements and regulations not tailored to water resource and development conditions in Eagan, a metropolitan area city. Generally, the ordinance regulates the use of the shoreline as well as uses within a zone extending back 1,000 feet from the ordinary high water level (called the shoreland zone) of each of 24 lakes and two small creeks specifically identified in the ordinance. Of the 24 lakes identified in the ordinance, eight are located within Lebanon Hills Park and one within Ft. Snelling Park. All but two of the lakes identified within the ordinance are classified recreational water bodies in the City's water quality management plan. ISSUES The majority of the proposed revisions to the Shoreland Zoning ordinance are aimed at reorganizing and consolidating sections to improve the understanding of the ordinance and to L/3 Memo - November 5, 1997 Shoreland Ordinance Amendments Page 2 eliminate duplication both within the ordinance itself and between it and the rest of the Zoning Ordinance. As a result, entire sections of the existing ordinance are deleted, but the information was reorganized into a new format. Consequently, at first reading, the proposed revisions may appear to be more substantial than they actually are. The following discussion explains the major organizational and substantive changes in the proposed ordinance. A. One section of the ordinance that is proposed to be deleted and not replaced is the land use zoning districts and table of uses (page 11 of the proposed ordinance, Subdivision 7-B). This table duplicates the City's existing zoning ordinance by identifying permitted, conditional and prohibited uses for each classification of protected waters. Eliminating the table will reduce confusion and conflicts in applying the ordinance. The last column, Shoreland Overlay District, in the table of Lakes in Subdivision 7-A (beginning on page 9 of the proposed ordinance) is also proposed to be deleted for the same reasons B. Subdivision 7 was substantively changed in proposed new subpart B "Land use and shoreland zoning regulations" (page 14 of the proposed ordinance), which establishes the shoreland area as an overlay zoning district. As an overlay zoning district, the regulations of the shoreland ordinance are applied jointly with other land use zoning regulations, and a provision was included that the most restrictive regulations prevail. This modification reflects how the ordinance has been and is currently applied. C. The tables identifying dimensional standards for shoreland area development were reorganized and consolidated into the four tables on pages 16, and 21-23 of the proposed ordinance. In this reorganized form, there were substantive changes to three main elements: • First, the minimum lot size for lots within the shoreland zone that are served by a septic tank and drainfield was reduced from ten acres down to 80,000 square feet or 40,000 square feet, depending on the classification of the protected water body. These proposed minimum lot sizes reflect the DNR's model ordinance requirements for suburban settings. In the past year, the City granted lot size variances to the ten -acre minimum on two occasions and those variances prompted this review and revision of the shoreland ordinance. • Second, revisions have been made to make clear that the minimum lot width requirements must be met at both the shoreline as well as the building setback line. The existing ordinance does not clearly make this distinction and thus, could be interpreted to allow a more dense shoreline ownership pattern. • Third, the ordinance was revised to clearly prohibit commercial and industrial, as well as multi -family residential uses within the shoreland zones of natural environment lakes (the most restrictive classification in the ordinance) and within unsewered shoreland areas of other protected lakes. As with the existing ordinance, only single-family residential uses would be allowed in these areas, however, the existing ordinance specifically identified only multiple -family residential uses as prohibited. The eight water bodies that comprise the y Memo - November 5, 1997 Shoreland Ordinance Amendments Page 3 natural environment classification lie within either Lebanon Hills Park or Fort Snelling State Park, but in some cases, their shoreland zones can extend outside the park boundaries. D. The proposed revisions make the treatment of accessory structures in shoreland areas consistent with other areas of the City (Subdivision 9-C, page 25-26 of the proposed ordinance). The existing ordinance has special provisions for "water -oriented" accessory structures which allow reduced setbacks from the shoreline and do not allow certain uses of an accessory structure (i.e. boathouse, pump house, etc.). Some specific restrictions remain in the proposed ordinance regarding habitation, size and height of the accessory structure. Accessory structures will continue to be subject to both the accessory structure requirements elsewhere in the zoning code and those additional standards in the shoreland ordinance. E. Storm water treatment requirements for development within the shoreland zone have been specified and made consistent with the requirements in Eagan's water quality management plan (Subdivision 9-L, page 32 of the proposed ordinance). In particular, the revisions identify National Urban Runoff Program standards as the basis for sizing and designing treatment ponds for development within shoreland zones and require adequate mitigation measures to meet non - degradation standards for downstream recreational water bodies. CONCLUSION The proposed amendments were undertaken at the direction of the APC are aimed more at reorganizing and clarifying existing provisions than amending the content of the ordinance, but some content changes, summarized as follows, are included. If you have any questions, please let me know. ■ First, the ten -acre minimum lot size for unsewered single-family lots was reduced and the other dimensional requirements were clarified. • Second, shoreland zoning was established as an overlay zoning district. • Third, existing information was reorganized and consolidated in order to improve understanding, eliminate duplication, and to reduce inconsistencies between the shoreland ordinance and the city's other zoning ordinances. • Finally, the requirements for water treatment were modified for consistency with those in Eagan's water quality management plan. qs ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER ELEVEN ENTITLED "LANDUSE REGULATIONS (ZONING)" BY AMENDING SECTION 11.21 REGARDING SHORELAND ZONING REGULATIONS; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99. The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter 11 is hereby amended by changing Section 11.21 to read as follows: Sec. 11.21. Shoreland zoning. Subd. 1. Purpose and intent. The unregulated use of shorelands within the city contributes to the pollution of public waters and impairment of the local tax base, thereby threatening the public health, safety and general welfare. Therefore, it is in the best interests of public health, safety and welfare to regulate the use and development of shorelands of public waters to preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters, conserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands, and provide for effective and efficient use of waters and related land resources. Subd. 2. Scope. The provisions of this section shall apply to conduct, including, but not limited to, the use of any shoreland of public waters; the size and shape of shoreland lots; the use, size, type and location of structures on shoreland lots; the installation and maintenance of water supply and waste treatment systems; the grading and filling of any shoreland area; the cutting of shoreland vegetation; and the subdivision of land which has shoreland area. Subd 3. Enforcement. The city shall be responsible for the administration and enforcement of this section. It is unlawful for any person to violate the provisions of this section, including violation of conditions or restrictions of building permits, shoreland alteration permits, variances or conditional use permits. Subd 4. Abrogation and greater restrictions. This section shall not repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions, except to the extent the provisions of this section are more restrictive. Subd. 5. Definitions. For purposes of this section only, the following terms shall have the meaning stated: 1. Bluff means a topographic feature, such as a hill, cliff, or embankment, having all of the following characteristics. An area with an average slope of less than 18 percent over a horizontal distance for 5§9 50 feet or more shall not be considered part of the bluff. A. Part or all of the feature is located in a shoreland area; B. The slope rises at least 25 feet above the ordinary high water level of the water body;_ C. The grade of the slope from the toe of the bluff to a point 25 feet or more above the ordinary high water level averages 30 percent or greater; and D. The slope must drain toward the water body. 2. Bluff impact zone means a bluff and the land located within 20 feet from the top of a bluff. 3. Building line means a line parallel to a lot line or the ordinary high water level at the minimum required setback beyond which a structure may not extend. 4. Clearcutting means the removal of an entire stand of trees. 5. Commercial planned development means a planned development of various commercial uses. 6. Commercial use means the principal use of land or buildings for the sale, lease, rental or trade of products, goods, and services. 7. DNR means the commissioner of the department of natural resources. 8. Deck means a horizontal, unenclosed platform, with or without attached railings, seats, trellises, or other features, attached or functionally related to a principal use or dwelling site and at any point extending more than three feet above ground. 2 9. Duplex means a dwelling structure on a single lot, having two dwelling units, attached by common walls and each unit equipped with separate sleeping, cooking, eating, living, and sanitation facilities. 10. Dwelling site means a designated location for residential use by one or more persons using temporary or movable shelter, including camping and recreational vehicle sites. 11. Dwelling unit means any structure or portion of a structure, or other shelter designed as short-term or long-term living quarters for one or more persons. 12. Extractive use means the use of land for the removal of surface or subsurface sand, gravel, rock, industrial minerals, a nonmetallic mineral, or peat not regulated by Minn. Stat. §§ 93.44--93.51 and amendments thereto. 13. Forest land conversion means the clearcutting of forested lands to prepare for a new land use other than re-establishment of a subsequent forest stand. 11. Building height means the vertical distance between the highest height o f the h ghest gable of a pitched or hipped ree4 414. Industrial use means the use of land or buildings for the production, manufacture, warehousing, storage, or transfer of goods, products, commodities, or other wholesale items. 4-645. Intensive vegetation clearing means the complete removal of trees, grasses or shrubs in a contiguous patch, strip, row, or block. 4 16. Ordinary high water level (OHWL) means an elevation delineating the highest water level which has been maintained for a sufficient period of time to leave evidence upon the landscape, commonly that point where the natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic to predominantly terrestrial. For watercourses, the ordinary high water level is the elevation of the top of the bank of the channel. -117. Planned development means a development characterized by a unified site design for a number of dwelling units or dwelling sites on a parcel, whether for sale, rent or lease, whereby these units or sites provide areas of common 3 space, density, increase mix of structure types and land uses. Planned developments may include, but are not limited to, condominiums, timeshare condominiums, cooperatives, full fee ownership, commercial enterprises, or any combination of these, or cluster subdivisions of dwelling units, residential condominiums, townhouses or apartment buildings, and accessory land uses to the principal uses. 4-9..18. Public waters has the meaning given it in Minnesota Water Law (Minn. Stat. § 103G.005, subd. 15). 20.19. Residential planned development means a use where the nature of residency is nontransient and the major or primary focus of the development is not service oriented. 24,20. Riparian lot means a lot which borders on a lake, river or stream. 22.21. Semipublic use means the use of land by a private, nonprofit organization to provide a public service that is ordinarily open to some persons outside the regular constituency of the organization. 23.22. Sensitive resource management means the preservation and management of areas unsuitable for development in their natural state due to constraints such as shallow soils over groundwater or bedrock, highly erosive or expansive soils, steep slopes, susceptibility to flooding or occurrence of flora and fauna in need of special protection. 24:23. Setback means the minimum horizontal distance between a structure, sewage treatment system, or other feature and an ordinary high water level, sewage treatment system, top of a bluff, road, highway, property line, or other facility. 25.24. Sewage treatment system means a septic tank and soil absorption system or other individual or cluster -type sewage treatment system as described and regulated in subdivision 9 of this section. 26,25. Sewer system means the pipelines or conduits, pumping stations, and force main and all other constructions, devices, appliances, facilities or appurtenances used for conducting sewage or industrial waste or other wastes to a point of ultimate disposal. 2-7 26. Shore impact zone means land located between the ordinary high water 4 level of a public water and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50 percent of the structure setback. 2-8,27. Shoreland, Shoreland area, shoreland district and shoreland overlay district means land located within the following distances from public waters: 1,000 feet from the ordinary high water level of any lake, pond, or flowage; and 300 feet from rivers and streams, or the landward extent of a floodplain designated by ordinance on a river or stream, whichever is greater. 2_8. Significant historic site means any archaeological site, standing structure, or other property that meets the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places or is listed in the state register of historic sites, or is an unplatted cemetery within the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 307.08. A historic site meets these criteria if it is presently listed on either register or if it is determined to meet the qualifications for listing after review by the state archaeologist or the director of the Minnesota Historical Society. All unplatted cemeteries are automatically considered to be significant historic sites. 30.29. Steep slopes means land where agricultural activity or development is either not recommended or described as poorly suited due to slope steepness and the site's soil characteristics, as mapped and described in available county soil surveys or other technical reports, unless appropriate design and construction techniques and farming practices are used in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance. Where specific information is not available, steep slopes are lands having average slopes over 12 percent, as measured over horizontal distances of 50 feet or more, that are not bluffs. 3-1,30. Structure means any building or appurtenance, except aerial or underground utility pipes or lines, including, but not limited to, decks, sewer, electric, telephone, telegraph, gas, towers, poles and other supporting facilities. 3-21-31. Subdivision chapter 13. means as defined in City Code 3-3-32. Surface -water -oriented commercial use means the use of land for commercial purposes, where access to and use of a surface water feature is an integral part of the normal conductance of business. Marinas, resorts, and restaurants with transient docking facilities are examples of such use. 5 34-33. Toe of the bluffmeans the lower point of a 50 -foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. ;5734. Top of the bluffmeans the higher point of a 50 -foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. 3-6735. Undue hardship means the property in question cannot be put to reasonable use under the conditions allowed by the official controls; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a undue hardship if a reasonable use for the property exists under terms of the official controls. 3-7-36. Variance has the meaning given it in this chapter. 38. Wads d ac-ce-sse s.tr-uctuPe e&r frcih -meai+s a small, abovegr"und 39.37. Wetland means a surface water feature classified as a wetland in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Circular No. 39 (1971). Subd. 6. Administration. A. Permits required. The provisions of chapter 4 of the City Code regarding the issuance of building permits shall apply to this section. 1. No buildings, building additions, including fences higher than six feet, decks, signs or sewage treatment systems shall be constructed, installed or altered, and no grading or filling activities not exempted by subdivision 12(I) of this section shall be permitted without first obtaining a permit from the city. Application for a permit shall be filed with the city clerk on the form provided by the city. The application shall include the necessary information so that the city can determine the site's suitability for the intended use and that a conforming sewage treatment system will be provided should any building permits or conditional use permits be issued. 6 si permited, issued hereunder shall state that an'iden 9,1 e existing 2. Any subdivision sewage treatment system, as defined by shallprovisions be this reconstructed or replaced in accordance with the section. generaprovisions of this section shall be complied with before 3. The g the issuance of the permit. compliance by the city shall be required for B. Zoning compliance. Zoning a each activity requiring a pest as specified in subparagraph A, above. This will specify that the use of land conforms to the req ns this ordinance. Any use, activity, or construction not authorized bpermitt shall be unlawful. C. Variances. 1. No variance may be granted except in accordance with Minn. Stat. ch. 462 and the provisions of this chapter. A variance shall not circumvent the general purposes and intent of this section. No is prohibited a hht variance may be granted that would allow any use tocated. Conditions may in the zoning district in which the subject property fvariancea to ensue be imposed in the granting compliance with this chapter, and to protect adjacent properties and thepublic interest. In considering a variance request, the city council owner has reasonable use of will also consider whether the property is used the land without the variance, whetherr the iaroperty e being requested seasonally or year-round, whether th solely on the basis of economic considerations, epropnd the characteristics of development on a p The city shall hear and decide requests for variances, eland, including scl ds, in 2'sewage treatment systems in variances for accordance with the zoning provisions governing variances. When a variance is approved after the Department of Natural Resource, the DNR has formally recommended denial uired therein shall also notification of the approved variancerequired include the summary of the public record/testimony and the findings of facts and conclusions which supported the issuance of the variance. 3. For existing developments, the application for variance shall clearly demonstrate whether a conforming sewage treatment system is present for the intended use of the property. All variances granted shall require reconstruction of a nonconforming sewage treatment system. D. Notifications to the department of natural resources. 12. Copies of all notices of any public hearings to consider variances, amendments, planned development or conditional uses under shoreland management controls shall be sent to the DNR or the DNR's designated representative and postmarked at least ten days prior to the hearing. Notices of hearings to consider proposed preliminary plats shall include copies thereof. 23. A copy of approved amendments and subdivisions/plats, and final decisions granting variances, planned developments, or conditional uses under shoreland management controls must be sent to the DNR or the DNR's designated representative and postmarked within ten days of final action. Subd. 7. Shoreland classification A. Shoreland classification system. The public waters of the city have been classified in this subdivision consistent with criteria found in Minnesota Rules, part 6120.3300, and the Protected Waters Inventory Map for Dakota County, Minnesota and the shoreland area for the water bodies listed below shall be as defined in this section and as shown on the official zoning map of the City: the city. 8 S3 DNR ID# Holland Gerhardt O'Brien Recreation Development Lakes (RD) Blackhawk 9 General Development Lakes (GD) DNR ID # Land Section (T27N-R23 W) S#ereland Overlay District 1. Unnamed 19-54 1 Gommeteial 2. Lemay's 19-55 10 Commercial/ Residential 3. O'Leary 19-56 15 Commercial/ Real 4. Fish 19-57 15, 16 Residential 5. Bald 19-61 23NE Residential al 6. Unnamed 19-62 25 Residential denstial 7. Unnamed 19-64 36 Residential 8. Quigley 19-66 27 Residential 9. Thomas 19-67 27, 28 Commercial/ Residential 10. Unnamed (Pitt Lake) 19-68 29SW Gemineteial 11. Unnamed 19-70 33 Residential 12. Unnamed 19-77 36 Commercial/ Residential 10 ss 2. Urban rivers: River Shoreland Overlay District Minnesota River Public Facilities 4:3. Tributaries: (a) Kennellys Creek Section 18 (b) Harnack Creek Section 18 Public f ci lit e s /1 gt, t mal B. Land use zoning districts. provide for: 11 (d) The management of areas for commercial or industrial uses (e) The preservation and enhancement of the quality of water for public accesses. ?. Land use districts for lakes and rivers. The permitted, conditional PERMITTED USES Zoning District/Use Natufal €nom ental Lakes Recreatio n Develepm ent Lakes General Dem ent bakes Urban -s Tributarie s Residential District Uses Forest P P P P P management Sensitive P P P P P resources management Agricultural: P P P P P crop &6 -paste Agricultural; feedlots N N N N N Single-Fesidential P, P P N N SemipubliaLpublis use G G P P P Extractive G G G G N use 12 P — Permitted C — Conditional use N Prohibited 13 sa� Miritiple residential E G lz N N Surface N N G N N water oriented sial Planned developments 12 g g N N GemmeFeiatz Uses Any use in As in district regulated the residential Commercial N N G N N Commercial planned development N N 42 N N Residential planned development N N l? N N District Uses Any use in As in the district residential district regulated residential Commercial/ industFial N N C N N rial planned development N N P N N P — Permitted C — Conditional use N Prohibited 13 sa� 612 432 3780 SENT BY: 9-12-97 : 11:05 : B. Land use zoning districts. 3. SEVERS0N SHELDON- 681 469.1:# 2/ 2 B. Land use and shoreland zoning regulations. 1. (a) The shoreland of the water bodies classified in this subdivision shall be an overlay districts . .: - - _ . which shall be applied and superimposed upon all existing land use zoning districts, or as amended by the City, which lie within the shoreland. The regulations and requirements of this Section shall be in addition to those established for the land use zoning district which iointly apply, provided the more restrictive regulation for use, setback, height, site coverage, density and any other applicable regulation shall apply. 2. (4) District boundaries for the shoreland overlay districts shall be as shown on the official zoning map of the city. 3. (e) Land use zoning districts in the shoreland area shall be in conformance with the criteria specified in Minnesota Rules, part 6120.3200, subpart 3. 4. (e) Conditional use permits shall be processed by the city as provided by the provisions of this chapter. 5. (4) Nonconforming uses. Any approved use efwithin a shoreland area district in existence prior to the effective date of this section as amended which was permitted by the previous ordinance requirements but which does not meet the requirements of this section, as amended, shall be declared to be a nonconforming use. Nonconforming uses, including substandard sanitary facilities, shall be allowed to continue. However, any structural alteration or addition to a nonconforming use which will increase the present use's 14 dimensions shall not be permitted. Any improvement shall require any substandard sanitary facilities to be upgraded in accordance with the provisions of this section. Subd. 8. Dimensional requirements. The following minimum requirements shall apply to all shorelands of the public waters within the city, except where any requirement of the land use zoning district, as shown on the official zoning map, is more restrictive than the requirement set forth herein, the land use zoning district requirement shall apply. A. Unsewered areas. (Single Family Detached Development only.) Unsewered Areas* NatuFal Erwirenment Waters Recreational Development Waters General Development Waters Lot (acres) 40 40 4-0 area bet -width -EA d-.. dth-a d building line (ft.) 200 150 4-00 150 .1-00 --75 water mark (ft.) Structure - setback from -reads -arid highway—(40 Structure height lifflitatiefiS ! - .. .. ... . Maximum lot area sever impery ou ,rinse (%) -5 -25 5 Sewer system 150 -5.0 setback -from high •rater ordinary (ft.) mark 15 6d A. Unsewered Areas. (1) Single detached dwelling uses which are not served by municipal sanitary sewer services within a shoreland overlay district shall comply with the following dimensional requirements: Single Detached Dwelling Uses Natural Recreational General Environment Development Development Waters Waters Waters Lot Area (s.f.) 80,000 40,000 _ 40,000 Riparian and Non -riparian Lot Width (ft.)1 200 100 150 Riparian Non -riparian 200 100 100 Structure and Sewer System 150 100 75 Setback from OHWL (ft.)2 Structure setback from Determined by the zoning district provisions of this roads and highways Cha.ter. Maximum Structure Height Determined by the zoning district provisions of this Cha .ter. Maximum Impervious 25% 25% 25% Surface Coverage (%) Lot Width must be met at both the building setback line and at the OHWL. 2 Structure setbacks apply to principal and accessory structures. (2) Attached (multiple) dwelling uses and commercial and industrial uses shall be prohibited in areas not served by municipal sanitary sewer services. 16 6/ 4 Lot ft.): area (sq. Rip:vim-leis 407800 Four N X0,000 2- Rir4st-widtb-at building line (ft.) 125 3, St3:uetuFe-setbaek-fFem 00 4-88 C. Sewer -0 s in -W/446 tion de444929ifkarli 14164ePS. A14 proyi onn f r 17 e- lig height (stories) Four above ground C.U.P. with required for height 35 ft. over 13 ilding ,etbacic for oFrwm 75 e, Minimum-Eiparian lot frontage 75 (ft.) d^ Maximum impeiwieus-suFfese 25 nfea4 e- lot frontage 100 (ft.) 17 18 63 b-building setbacki from OHWnM —74 (ft.) e: Average lot 20,000 areas for riparian lots (sq. f0 d- Average lot for 157000 area nenfipefien-lets-(-sg, PO e- M impervious suffase 25 area Maximum—building height (ft.) 35 3,- Multiple dwelling PUD residential (by only): i}ground height (stories` C.U.P. with a required for heights over 35 ft. 1} setback-frem OHWM (ft.) 75 e- Minimum-Nvater tentage per development (ft.) 200 d- Maximum 25 e- Average lot Detey PUD area per unit-for- (sq. ft.) Average lot Determined by PUD area per 18 63 lots (sq. ft.) * See provisions of subdivision 9. 19 6y a, Ma*itytuni-building-height C.U.P. required for heights over ,, - 50 .. .. .. .. OHWM (ft.) s, Minimum water frontage 100 (ft.) d- - - - 25 . .. .. e- �... - 75 .. b- , , ' - - 50 ... .. .. .. _ .. _ .. OHNA'M (ft.) • - 15,000 _ .. ...- .. (sq. ft.) d-: • - - - 2,000 . .. . ..... .. lots (sq. ft.) " - 25 • - - • •• - (9,4) 19 6y * See provisions of subdivision 9. 20 Multiple dwelling PUD (by only): it, Maxicatim-buildifitheight (-steries) Four ove With ground C.U.P. required for heights 35 over ft: h- 50 .:. ... OHWM .._ .. (ft.) e„... 100 .. .. development (ft.) El,,, : - 25 .. .. .-. a e: Average lot area per unit: (sq. ft.) Determined by PUD Other lots (sq. Determined by PUD frontage 200 (ft.) * See provisions of subdivision 9. 20 B. Sewered areas. (1) Single detached dwelling uses which are served by municipal sanitary sewer services within a shoreland overlay district shall comply with the following dimensional requirements: Single Detached Dwelling Uses Natural Recreational General Environment Development Development Waters Waters Waters Average Lot Area (s.f.) 40,000 20,000 15,000 Riparian Non -riparian 20,000 15,000 12,000 Minimum Lot Width ft. 1 125 100 75 Structure setback from OHWL 100 75 — 50 (ft.) 2 Structure setback from Determined by the zoning district provisions of roads and hi • hwa s ft. 2 this Cha s ter. Maximum structure height (ft.) Determined by 35 35 the zoning district provisions of this Cha • ter. Maximum Impervious 25% 25% 25% Surface Coverage (%) 3 1 Lot Width must be met at both the building setback line and OHWL. 2 Structure setbacks apply to both principal and accessory structures. 3 May be increased with conditional use permit;_ see provisions of Subd. 9(L) of this section. 21 (2) Attached (multiple) dwelling uses pursuant to a planned development which are served by municipal sanitary sewer services shall comply with the dimensional requirements: Attached (Multiple) Dwelling Natural Recreational General Uses by Planned Development Environment Development Development Only Waters2 Waters Waters Avera • e Lot Area a er Unit --- Determined by PD Minimum Lot Width per --- 200 200 development (ft.)' Structure setback from OHWL --- 75 50 (ft.)4 Structure setback from - Determined by the zoning roads and hi. hwa s ft. 4 s rovisions of this Chaster. Maximum Structure Height (ft.)_ Four stories above ground; Over 35 feet must meet Provisions for CUP in Sec. 11.4, Subd. 4 of this Cha • ter. Maximum Impervious_ 25% 25% Surface Coverage (%)3 Lot Width must be met at both the building setback line and OHWL 2 Attached (multiple) dwelling uses are prohibited within the shoreland of Natural Environment waters. 3 May be increased with conditional use permit; see provisions of Subd. 9(L) of this section. 4 Structure setbacks apply to both principal and accessory structures. (3) Attached (multiple) dwelling uses not pursuant to a planned development shall be prohibited. 22 14) Commercial and industrial uses which are served by municipal sanitary sewer services shall comply with the dimensional requirements: Commercial and Industrial Uses Natural Recreational General Environment Development Development Waters2 Waters Waters Average Lot Area --- 40,000 40,000 Riparian Nonriparian 40,000 20,000 Minimum Lot Width' ft. --- 75 100 Structure setback from OHWL --- 75 50 (ft.)4 Structure setback from_ Determined by the zoning roads and hi. hwa s ft. 4 I rovisions of this Chaster. Maximum Structure Height_ Four stories above ground; Over 35 feet must meet provisions for CUP in Sec. 11.4, Subd. 4 of this Chapter Maximum Impervious_ 25% 25% Surface Coverage (%)3 Lot Width must be met at both the building setback line and OHWL 2 Commercial and Industrial uses are prohibited within the shoreland of Natural Environment waters. 3 May be increased with conditional use permit; see provisions of Subd. 9(L) of this section. Structure setbacks apply to both principal and accessory structures. (5) Commercial and Industrial uses and attached f multiple) residential dwelling uses are prohibited within the shoreland of Natural Environment waters. E -.-C. Urban rivers and tributaries. No development shall be permitted along urban rivers and tributaries. FD.. Lot area and width requirements. The provisions of this subdivision with respect to the minimum lot area in square feet and minimum lot width requirements in lineal feet shall apply to residential lots created after the date of enactment of this section, as amended. Only land above the ordinary high water level of public waters can be used to meet lot area and lot width requirements. These minimum requirements shall be met at both the ordinary high water level and at the building line. 23 6� Subd. 9. General provisions. A. Lots for controlled accesses. Lots used for controlled accesses to public waters or as recreation areas by owners of nonriparian lots within subdivisions shall meet or exceed the following standards: 1. Lots shall meet the minimum width and area requirements for residential lots and be suitable for the intended uses; 2. In the event docking, mooring, or over -water storage of more than six watercraft is present on a controlled access lot, the width of the lot (keeping the same lot depth) shall be increased by 25 percent in lot frontage for each watercraft beyond six; 3. Lots shall be jointly or commonly owned by all purchasers of lots in the subdivision or by all purchasers of nonriparian lots in the subdivision who are provided riparian access rights on the access lot in a manner acceptable to the city and the DNR; and 4. Land covenants or other equally effective legal instruments shall be executed and provide the following restrictions: (a) Lot owners have authority to use the access lot and what activities are allowed. The activities may include watercraft launching, loading, storage, beaching, mooring, or docking. They may also include other outdoor recreational activities that do not significantly conflict with general public use of the public water or the enjoyment or normal property rights of adjacent property owners. Examples of the nonsignificant conflict activities include swimming, sunbathing, or picnicking. (b) The total number of vehicles allowed to be parked on the lot. (c) The total number of watercraft allowed to be continuously moored, docked, or stored over water. (d) Centralization of all common facilities and activities in the most suitable locations on the lot to minimize topographic and vegetation alterations. 24 69 (e) All parking areas, storage buildings, and other facilities to be screened by vegetation or topography as much as practical from view from the public water. B. Placement and design of structures. When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. Where structures exist on the adjoining lots of a proposed building site, structure setbacks required for a new proposed building or an addition to an existing building may be altered without a variance to conform to the average setbacks on the adjoining lots from the ordinary high water level, provided the proposed building site is not located in a shore impact zone or bluff impact zone. C. Floodplain regulations. 1. Structures shall be located in accordance with the floodplain regulations of the City Code. Water oriented Accessory structures, where allowed, may have the lowest floor placed lower than the elevation determined by the procedures in floodplain regulations if the structure is constructed of flood -resistant materials to the flood elevation, electrical and mechanical equipment is placed above the flood elevation and, if long duration flooding is anticipated, the structure is built to withstand ice action, wind -driven waves and debris. D. Watcr oricntcd Accessory structures. Accessory structures in shoreland districts shall satisfy minimum structure setbacks required in this Section and comply with the following: 1. The accessory structure shall neither not exceed ten feet in height, exclusive of safety rails 2. The accessory structure shall not exceed 150 square feet in area; 25 3. Detached decks shall not exceed eight feet above grade at any point; and 3. The accessory structure setback from the ordinary high water level shall be not less than ten feet; 3-4. The accessory structure shall not be neither be aeci ned or used for human habitation nor shall it contain water supply or sewage treatment facilities. E. Stairways, lifts, landings and docks. Stairways and lifts are the preferred alternative to major topographic alterations for achieving access up and down bluffs and steep slopes to shore areas. Stairways and lifts shall meet the following design requirements: 1. The stairways and lifts shall not exceed four feet in width, except stairways used as in public open space recreational properties and Planned Developments; The stairway and lift landings on residential lots shall not exceed 32 square feet in area, except such landings used en in public open space recreational properties and Planned Developments; 3. Canopies or roofs shall not be permitted on stairways, lifts or landings; 4. Stairways, lifts, and landings may be either constructed above the ground on posts or pilings or placed into the ground, provided they are designed and built in a manner that ensures control of soil erosion; 5. Stairways, lifts, and landings shall be located on a portion of the lot that most reduces the visibility of these stairways, lifts and landings visibility from the public tise water. 6. Structures for mobility impaired persons including ramps, lifts, or mobility paths are permitted for achieving access to shore areas, provided that the dimensional and performance standards of subitems (1) to (5) above are complied with in addition to the requirements of Minnesota Rules, part 1340; and 26 �r 7 Docks shall not exceed five feet in width unless a shoreland building permit is obtained therefor. F. Significant historic sites. No structure shall be placed on a significant historic site in a manner that affects the historical value of the site unless adequate information about the site, as determined by the Minnesota Historical Society, has been removed and documented in a public repository. G. Steep slopes. The city shall evaluate possible soil erosion impacts and development visibility from public waters before issuing a permit for construction of sewage treatment systems, roads, driveways, structures, or other improvements on steep slopes. When determined necessary, conditions shall be attached to issued permits to prevent soil erosion and to preserve existing vegetation screening of structures, vehicles, and other facilities as viewed from the surface of public waters. H. Height of structures. All structures in all shoreland districts shall not exceed 35 feet in height, unless a conditional use permit is obtained therefor in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. Any application for a conditional use permit hereunder shall be subject to notice and comment by the DNR before the permit is issued by the city. Shoreland alterations. To prevent soil erosion into public waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve historic values, prevent bank slumping, and protect fish and wildlife habitat, shoreland alterations are subject to the following conditions: 1. Vegetation alterations. (a) Any vegetation alteration necessary for the construction of structures, sewage treatment systems, roads and parking areas regulated by this section are exempt from the regulations in this provision. (b) Except for agricultural and forest management uses: (1) Clearcutting and intensive vegetation clearing within the shore impact zones and on steep slopes shall be prohibited. No intensive vegetation clearing for forest land conversion to another use outside of these areas shall be conducted without first obtaining a conditional 27 use permit. No such permit shall be issued unless a soil erosion control and sedimentation plan is approved by the soil and water conservation district in which the property is located. (2) In shore impact zones and on steep slopes, limited clearing or cutting, pruning, and trimming of trees and shrubs may be conducted to provide a view from the principal dwelling site to the public water and to make installation or construction of stairways, lifts, picnic areas, access paths, beach and watercraft areas and water -oriented accessory structures possible, provided that: (3) (aa) The screening for structures, vehicles, or other facilities as viewed from the water is not substantially reduced; (bb) Along rivers, existing shading of water surfaces is preserved; and (cc) In the shore impact zone, live trees larger than six inches in diameter shall not be cut, except to provide for water -oriented accessory structures or to provide a water -viewing corridor not to exceed 20 percent of the shoreline width of the lot. The above provisions are not applicable to the removal of trees, limbs, or branches that are dead, diseased, or pose safety hazards. 2. Topographic alterations/grading and filling. (a) Grading, filling and excavations for the construction of structures, sewage treatment systems, and driveways under a validly issued building permit do not require the issuance of a separate grading and filling permit but shall be subject to the provisions of this subdivision. (b) Public roads and parking areas are regulated by this subdivision. 28 (c) Notwithstanding any provisions in this section to the contrary, a permit shall be required for: (1) The movement of more than ten cubic yards of material on steep slopes and within shore or bluff impact zones. (2) The movement of more than 50 cubic yards of material outside of steep slopes and shore and bluff impact zones. ' (d) The following considerations and conditions shall be adhered to during the issuance of construction permits, grading and filling permits, conditional use permits, variances and subdivision approvals: (1) Any filling that occurs in any type 3, 4, or 5 wetland over 2.5 acres in area shall require a permit from the DNR; (2) Alterations shall be conducted in a manner in order that the smallest amount of bare ground is exposed for the shortest time possible; (3) Mulch or similar material shall be used for temporary bare soil coverage, and a permanent vegetation cover shall be established as soon as weather conditions allow; (4) Soil erosion control measures shall be used; (5) Altered areas shall be stabilized to acceptable erosion control standards consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation districts and the United States Soil Conservation Service; (6) No fill or excavated material shall be placed in a manner that creates an unstable slope or fmished slopes of 30 percent or greater; 29 (7) No fill or excavated material shall be placed on steep slopes without the city engineer's review for continued slope stability; (8) No fill or excavated material shall be placed in bluff impact zones; (9) Any alterations below the ordinary high water level of public waters shall be in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Water Law (Minn. Stat. ch. 103G). (10) No alterations of topography shall be allowed, except if they are an accessory to permitted or conditional uses and do not adversely affect adjacent or nearby properties; (11) No natural rock riprap shall be placed, including associated grading of the shoreline and placement of a filter blanket, unless the finished slope is not greater than 3:1 (may be increased by DNR permit), the landward extent of the riprap is within ten feet of the ordinary high water level, and the height of the riprap above the ordinary high water level does not exceed three feet; and (12) The provisions of City Code chapter 4 shall apply to excavations and fills under this section. (e) Connection to public waters. No excavation shall be conducted where the intended purpose is connection to public water, including boat slips, canals, lagoons, and harbors, without first obtaining a permit from the DNR. J. Wetland protection regulations. 1. Grading or filling in any type 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 wetland shall be evaluated by the city to determine how extensively the proposed activity would affect the following functional qualities of the wetland: 30 (a) Sediment and pollutant trapping and retention; (b) Storage of surface runoff to prevent or reduce flood damage; (c) Fish and wildlife habitat; (d) Recreational use; (e) Shoreline or bank stabilization; and (f) Noteworthiness, including special qualities such as historic significance, critical habitat for endangered plants and animals, or other. 2. An evaluation shall also be made to determine whether the wetland alteration being proposed requires permits, reviews, or approvals by other local, state, or federal agencies such as a watershed district, the state department of natural resources, or the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The person(s) proposing the wetland alteration shall be responsible for this evaluation and compliance with these agency regulations and requirements. 3. Development, grading and filling shall comply with the provisions of the Minnesota Water Law (Minn. Stat. chs. 103A --103G). 4. The city evaluation shall be utilized in setting forth any conditions or mitigation measures relating to wetland protection. K. Placement and design of roads, driveways, and parking area. 1. Public and private roads and parking areas shall be designed to take advantage of natural vegetation and topography to achieve maximum screening from view from public waters. Documentation shall be provided to the city that all roads and parking areas are designed and constructed to minimize and control erosion to public waters consistent with the field office technical guides of the local Soil and Water Conservation District, or other applicable technical materials. 2. Roads, driveways and parking areas shall meet minimum required setbacks and shall not be placed within bluff and shore impact zones, when other reasonable and feasible placement alternatives exist. If no alternatives exist, they may be placed within these areas, provided 31 /2 they are constructed in a manner to minimize adverse impacts as determined by the city. 3. Public and private watercraft access ramps, approach roads, and access -related parking areas may be placed within shore impact zones provided the vegetative screening and erosion control conditions of this subparagraph are met. For private facilities, the grading and filling provisions of this subdivision shall be met. L. Stormwater management. All developments shall meet the following requirements: 1. When possible, existing natural drainageways, wetlands, and vegetated soil surfaces must be used to convey, store, filter, and retain stormwater runoff before discharge to public waters. 2. Development must be planned and conducted in a manner that will minimize the extent of disturbed areas, runoff velocities and erosion potential that will reduce and delay runoff volumes. Disturbed areas must be stabilized and protected as soon as possible and facilities or methods must be used to retain sediment on the site. 3. When development density, topographic features, and soil and vegetation conditions are not sufficient to adequately handle stormwater runoff using natural features and vegetation, various types of constructed facilities, including diversions, settling basins, skimming devices, dikes, waterways, and ponds, shall be utilized. Stormwater management measures using surface drainage, vegetation, and infiltration shall be used rather than buried pipes and manmade materials and facilities when practical and reasonably possible. Settling basins to intercept and treat urban runoff shall, at a minimum, be sized to meet Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) criteria. •- •- 4. Impervious surface coverage of lots must not exceed 25 percent of the lot. This may be increased provided the city has approved and implemented a community -wide storm water management plan affecting the subject site, granted a conditional use permit permitting an increase in impervious coverage, and required the necessary water quality mitigation features to meet non - degradation standards for phosphorous for the nearest 32 '2 9 downstream recreational water body identified in the Eagan water quality management plan. ^ conditional use permit 5. When constructed facilities are used for stormwater management, a document from a duly qualified individual shall be filed with the city. The document shall state that the constructed facilities are designed and installed consistent with the field office technical guide of the local soil and water conservation district. 6. New constructed stormwater outfalls to public waters must provide for filtering or settling of suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before discharge. M. Special provisions for public/semipublic, agricultural, forestry and extractive uses. 1. Any surface -water -oriented uses and public or semipublic uses when permitted by Code which have need for access to and use of public waters may be located on parcels or lots with public waters frontage. Uses with water -oriented needs located on parcels or lots with public waters frontage shall comply with the following standards: (a) Topographic and vegetative screening of parking areas and structures shall be constructed and maintained; (b) No advertising signs or supporting facilities for signs shall be placed in or upon public waters. The city may install and maintain signs conveying information or safety messages; (c) No outside lighting shall be located within the shore impact zone or over public waters unless it is used primarily to illuminate potential safety hazards and is shielded or otherwise directed to prevent direct illumination out across public waters. This does not preclude use of navigational lights; and (d) Commercial uses such as boat rides, on -board vendors or similar uses shall be prohibited. 33 ,g) (e) Any uses that require short-term watercraft mooring for patrons shall be centralized and constructed in a manner to avoid obstructions to navigation and the least size reasonably necessary to meet the need; except uses without water - oriented needs unless such uses are set back double the normal ordinary high water level setback or substantially screened from view from the water by vegetation or topography. 2. Agriculture use standards. (a) In all lake and river shoreland areas, general cultivation farming, grazing, nurseries, horticulture, truck farming, sod farming, and wild crop harvesting are permitted uses if steep slopes and shore and bluff impact zones are maintained in permanent vegetation or managed under an approved conservation plan (resource management systems) consistent with the field office technical guides of the local soil and water conservation districts of the United States Soil Conservation Service (as provided by a qualified individual or agency). The shore impact zone for parcels with permitted agricultural land uses is equal to a line parallel to and 50 feet from the ordinary high water level. (b) Animal feedlot and grazing operation shall be prohibited. 3. Forest management standards. The harvesting of timber and associated reforestation shall be conducted consistent with the provisions of the Minnesota Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment - Forestry and the provisions of Water Quality in Forest Management Best Management Practices in Minnesota. 4. Extractive use standards. (a) Site development and restoration plan. No extractive uses shall be conducted without first obtaining approval by the city. An extractive use site development and restoration plan shall be approved and followed over the course of operation of the site. The plan shall address dust, noise, possible pollutant discharges, hours and duration of operation, and anticipated vegetation and topographic alterations and identify actions to be taken to mitigate adverse environmental impact, 34 and erosion, and to rehabilitate the site after extractive activities end. (b) Setbacks for processing machinery. Processing machinery shall be located consistent with setback standards for structures from ordinary high water levels of public waters and from bluffs. 5. Mining of metallic minerals and peat standards. Mining of metallic minerals and peat may be a permitted use in accordance with the provisions of Minn. Stat. §§ 93.44--93.51. N. Conditional uses. The provisions of this chapter regarding conditional use permits shall apply to all conditional uses with shoreland area, in addition to the following: 1. Site evaluation required. Prior to the issuance of any permit hereunder, an evaluation of the water body and the topographic, vegetation, and soil conditions on the site shall be made to ensure: (a) The prevention of soil erosion or other possible pollution of public waters, both during and after construction; (b) The least visibility of structures and other facilities as viewed from public waters; (c) The site is adequate for water supply and on-site sewage treatment and public utilities are utilized when available; and (d) The types, uses, and number of watercraft that the project will generate are compatible in relation to the suitability of public waters to safely accommodate these watercraft. 2. Conditions of conditional use permits. The city council, upon consideration of the findings of the evaluation conducted pursuant to item 1, above, and the intent and purposes of this section, may issue a conditional use permit hereunder subject to, but not limited to, the following conditions: (a) Increased setbacks from the ordinary high water level; 35 36) (b) Limitations on the natural vegetation to be removed or the requirement that additional vegetation be planted; and (c) Special provisions for the location, design, and use of structures, sewage treatment systems, watercraft launching and docking areas, and vehicle parking areas. 0. Water supply and sewage treatment. 1. Water supply. Any public or private supply of water for residential purposes shall meet or exceed the state department of health, county and the state pollution control agency standards for water quality. 2. Sewage treatment. (a) All private sewage treatment systems shall meet or exceed the state pollution control agency' s standards for individual sewage treatment systems contained in the document titled, "Individual Sewage Treatment Systems Standards, Chapter 7080," a copy of which is hereby adopted by the city by reference and incorporated as a part of the City Code. (b) All sewage shall be connected to public systems when available. (c) All on-site sewage treatment systems shall comply with the setback requirements provided in subdivision 11 of this section. (d) An evaluation to determine all proposed sites suitable for individual sewage treatment systems shall be made upon consideration of the following: (1) Depth to the highest known or calculated ground water table or bedrock; (2) Soil conditions, properties, and permeability; (3) Slope; and (4) The existence of lowlands, local surface depressions, and rock outcrops. 36 8/ (5) It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to provide sufficient information, through either public documents or field investigations, in order for the foregoing considerations to be addressed. (e) Nonconforming sewage treatment systems shall be regulated and upgraded in accordance with the following requirements: (f) (1) A sewage treatment system not meeting the requirements of this subdivision must be upgraded, at a minimum, at any time a permit or variance of any type is required for any improvement on or use of the property. For the purposes of this provision, a sewage treatment system shall not be considered nonconforming if the only deficiency is the sewage treatment system's improper setback from the ordinary high water level. (2) The city will require upgrading or replacement of any nonconforming system identified by this program within five years. Any sewer system installed according to applicable local shoreland management standards adopted under Minn. Stat. §§ 103F.201, 103F.205, 103F.211, 103F.215 and 103E221 and amendments thereto, in effect at the time of installation, may be considered as conforming unless they are determined to be failing, except that systems using cesspools, leaching pits, seepage pits, or other deep disposal methods or systems with less soil treatment area separation above groundwater than required by the state pollution control agency's chapter 7080 for design of on-site sewage treatment systems shall be considered nonconforming. All on-site sewage treatment systems shall comply with regulations in the City Code. P. Subdivision provisions. 1. Land suitability. No preliminary plat shall be approved unless each lot, created through subdivision, including planned unit 37 developments, is suitable in its natural state for the proposed use with minimal alteration. In determining whether a lot is suitable by the city, the city shall consider the following: (a) Susceptibility to flooding; (b) Existence of wetlands; (c) Soil and rock formations with severe limitations for development; (d) Severe erosion potential; (e) Steep topography; (f) Inadequate water supply or sewage treatment capabilities; (g) Nearshore aquatic conditions unsuitable for water-based recreation; (h) Important fish and wildlife habitat; (i) Presence of significant historic sites; and (j) Any other feature of the natural land likely to be harmful to the health, or welfare of the city. 2. Consistency with other controls. Subdivisions must conform to all City Code regulations. A preliminary plat shall not be approved when a later variance from one or more standards in official controls would be needed to use the lots for their intended purpose, when areas are not served by publicly owned sewer and water systems, a domestic water supply is not available or a sewage treatment system consistent with City Code is not provided for every lot. Each lot shall meet the minimum lot size and dimensional requirements, contiguous lawn area requirements that are free of limiting factors sufficient for the construction of two standard soil treatment systems where private sewage systems are permitted. Preliminary plat lots that would require use of holding tanks shall not be approved. Subd. 10. Planned development (cluster developments). 38 23 Types of planned developments permitted. No planned developments (PDs) shall be permitted, except for new projects on undeveloped land, redevelopment of previously built sites, or conversions of existing buildings and land in exclusively planned development and zoning districts as classified in subdivision 7 of this section and on the official zoning map of the city. B. Conditional use Requirements. Planned developments shall constitute a C. Application for planned development. Planned development uses shall comply with the regulations applicable in the planned development zoning district as provided in this chapter. 2. Any application for a . - . planned development use in a shoreland zone shall provide the following information in addition to the information required under Minnesota Statutes and section 11.40 of this chapter: (a) Surface water features; (b) Existing and proposed vegetative detail; (c) Deed restrictions, covenants, or owners' association bylaws; (d) Details of water -oriented uses; (e) Long-term plans for preservation and maintenance of open space; (f) Two -foot integral contours; (g) Other information deemed necessary by the city council. D. Public utilities. Public utilities, including municipal sanitary sewer and water, shall be utilized for all planned development and planned development uses (PD) in the city. 39 8S� E. Site evaluation. Prior to the issuance of any permit under this subdivision, an evaluation of the site's suitable area, density, maintenance and design, open area, erosion, stormwater management plan, facilities, centralization, design plan and conversion shall be made in accordance with the following standards and procedures: 1. Site suitable area. A site's suitable area shall be evaluated using the following procedures and standards: (a) Shoreland tier dimensions. The project parcel shall be divided into tiers by locating one or more lines approximately parallel to a line that identifies the ordinary high water level at the following intervals, proceeding landward: Type of Lake Sewered (feet) General development lakes, first tier (riparian) 200 General development lakes, second and additional tiers 200 Recreational development lakes 267 Natural environment lakes 320 (b) Suitable area calculation. The suitable area within each tier is calculated by excluding from the tier area all wetlands, bluffs, or land below the ordinary high water level of public waters. This suitable area and the proposed project are then subjected to either the residential or commercial planned unit development density evaluation steps to arrive at an allowable number of dwelling units or sites. F. Residential and commercial planned development use. The procedures for determining the base density of a Planned Development and density increase multipliers are as follows: 40 1. Residential Planned Development base density evaluation. The suitable area within each tier is divided by the minimum single residential lot size standard for lakes to determine the maximum permitted density. Proposed locations and number of dwelling units or sites for residential planned developments are then compared with the tier, density, and suitability analyses herein and the design criteria in subparagraph H, below. 2. Commercial Planned Development base density evaluation. (a) Determine the average inside living area size of dwelling units or sites within each tier, including both existing and proposed units and sites. Computation of inside living area sizes shall not include decks, patios, stoops, steps, garages, or porches and basements, unless they are habitable space. (b) Select the appropriate floor area ratio from the following table: COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FLOOR AREA RATIOS PUBLIC WATERS CLASSES Average Unit Floor Area (sq. ft.) General Development Lakes Recreational Development Lakes Natural Environmental Lakes 200 0.056 0.028 0.014 300 0.065 0.032 0.016 400 0,056 0.028 0.014 500 0.065 0.032 0.016 600 0.072 0.038 0.019 700 0.082 0.042 0.021 800 0.091 0.046 0.023 900 0.099 0.050 0.025 1,000 0.108 0.054 0.027 1,100 0.116 0.058 0.029 1,200 0.125 0.064 0.032 1,300 0.133 0.068 0.034 1,400 0.142 0.072 0.036 1,500 and above 0.150 0.075 0.038 42 (c) Multiply the suitable area within each tier by the floor area ratio to yield total floor area for each tier allowed to be used for dwelling units or sites. (d) Divide the total floor area by tier, computed in item 2 above, by the average inside living area size determined in item 1 above, to determine a base number of dwelling units and sites for each tier. (e) Allowable densities may be transferred from any tier to any other tier further from the water body, but shall not be transferred to any other tier closer. 3. Proposed locations and number of dwelling units or sites for the commercial planned development are then compared with the tier, density and suitability analyses herein and the design criteria as provided in this division. G. Density increase multipliers. 1. Increases to the dwelling unit or dwelling site base densities previously determined are allowable if the dimensional standards in this section are met or exceeded and the design criteria in subparagraph H below are satisfied. The allowable density increases in item 2, below, will only be allowed if structure setbacks from the ordinary high water level are increased to at least 50 percent greater than the minimum setback, or the impact on the water body is reduced an equivalent amount through vegetative management, topography, or additional means acceptable to the city and the setback is at least 25 percent greater than the minimum setback. 2. Allowable dwelling unit or dwelling site density increases for residential or commercial planned unit developments: 43 Feit2 Density Evaluation Tiers Maximum Density Increase Within Each Tier (Percent) First 50 Second 100 Third 200 Fourth 200 Fifth 200 H. Maintenance and design criteria. 1. Before final approval of a planned development, adequate provisions shall be developed for preservation and maintenance in perpetuity of open spaces and for the continued existence and functioning of the development. 2. Open space preservation. Deed restrictions, covenants, permanent easements, public dedication and acceptance, or other equally effective and permanent means shall be provided to ensure long-term preservation and maintenance of open space. The instruments shall include all of the following protection: (a) Commercial uses prohibited (for residential PDs). (b) Vegetation and topographic alterations shall be prohibited except by routine maintenance. (c) Construction of additional buildings or storage of vehicles and other materials shall be prohibited. (d) Uncontrolled beaching of watercraft shall be prohibited. 44 �9 3. Development organization and functioning. Unless an equally effective alternative community framework is established, when applicable, all residential planned developments shall use an owners' association with the following features: (a) Membership shall be mandatory for each dwelling unit or site purchases and any successive purchasers; (b) Each member shall pay a pro rata share of the association's expenses, and unpaid assessments shall become liens on units or sites; (c) Assessments shall be adjustable to accommodate changing conditions; and (d) The association shall be responsible for insurance, taxes, and maintenance of all commonly owned property and facilities. I. Open space standards. Planned developments shall contain open space meeting all of the following standards: 1. At least 50 percent of the total project area shall be preserved as open space; 2. Dwelling units or sites, road rights-of-way, or land covered by road surfaces, parking areas, or structures, except water -oriented accessory structures or facilities, are developed areas and shall not be included in the computation of minimum open space; 3. Open space shall include areas with physical characteristics unsuitable for development in their natural state, and areas containing significant historic sites or unplatted cemeteries; 4. Open space may include outdoor recreational facilities for use by owners of dwelling units or sites, by guests staying in commercial dwelling units or sites, and by the general public; 5. Open space shall not include commercial facilities or uses, but may contain water -oriented accessory structures or facilities; 45 90 6. The appearance of open space areas, including topography, vegetation, and allowable uses, shall be preserved by use of restrictive deed covenants, permanent easements, public dedication and acceptance, or other equally effective and permanent means; and 7. The shore impact zone, based on normal structure setbacks, shall be included as open space. For residential PDs, at least 50 percent of the shore impact zone area of existing developments or at least 70 percent of the shore impact zone area of new developments shall be preserved in its natural state. For commercial planned developments, at least 50 percent of the shore impact zone must be preserved in its natural state. J. Erosion control and stormwater management. Erosion control and stormwater management plans shall be developed and the PD shall: 1. Be designed and the construction managed to minimize the likelihood of serious erosion occurring either during or after construction. This shall be accomplished by limiting the amount and length of time of bare ground exposure. Temporary ground covers, sediment entrapment facilities, vegetated buffer strips, or other appropriate techniques shall be used to minimize erosion impacts on surface water features. Erosion control plans approved by the soil and water conservation district may be required if project size and site physical characteristics warrant; and 2. Be designed and constructed to effectively manage reasonably expected quantities and qualities of stormwater runoff. Impervious surface coverage within any tier shall not exceed 25 percent of the tier area, except that for commercial PDs increased impervious surface coverage may be allowed in the first tier of general development lakes with an approved stormwater management plan and consistency with this section. K. Centralization and design of facilities. Centralization and design of facilities and structures shall be done in accordance with the following standards: 1. Planned developments shall be connected to publicly owned (municipal) water supply and sewer systems if available; 46 9 i 2. Dwelling units or sites shall be clustered into one or more groups and located on suitable areas of the development. They shall be designed and located to meet or exceed the following dimensional standards for the relevant shoreland classification: setback from the ordinary high water level, elevation above the surface water features, and maximum height. Setbacks from the ordinary high water level shall be increased in accordance with this subparagraph for developments with density increases; 3. Shore recreation facilities, including but not limited to swimming areas, docks, and watercraft mooring areas and launching ramps, shall be centralized and located in suitable areas. Evaluation of suitability shall include consideration of land slope, water depth, vegetation, soils, depth to groundwater and bedrock, or relevant factors. The number of spaces provided for continuous beaching, mooring, or docking of watercraft shall not exceed one for each allowable dwelling unit or site in the first tier. Launching ramp facilities, including a small dock for loading and unloading equipment, may be provided for use by occupants of dwelling units or sites located in other tiers; 4. Structures, parking areas, and other facilities shall be treated to reduce visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shorelands by vegetation, topography, increased setbacks, color, or other means acceptable to the city, assuming summer, leaf -on conditions. Vegetative and topographic screening shall be preserved, if existing, or may be required to be provided; 5. Accessory structures and facilities, except water -oriented accessory structures, shall meet the required principal structure setback and shall be centralized; and 6. Water -oriented accessory structures and facilities may be allowed if they meet or exceed design standards provided in this subdivision and are centralized. L. Conversions. The city shall not permit existing land uses and facilities to be converted to residential planned developments. M. Existing unit conditions. Existing dwelling unit or dwelling site densities that exceed standards in this subdivision may be allowed to continue but shall not be allowed to be increased. 47 9� Subd. 11. Nonconformities. Nonconformities, as of the effective date of this section, may continue, but shall be administered according to applicable state statutes and other regulations of the city for future alterations and additions, repair or replacement after damage, discontinuance of use, and intensification of use, except that the following standards shall also apply in shoreland areas: A. Construction on nonconforming lots of record. 1. Lots of record in the office of the county recorder on the effective date of local shoreland controls that do not meet the requirements of subdivision 8 of this section may be allowed as building sites without variances from dimensional requirements, provided the use is permitted in the zoning district, the lot has been in separate ownership from abutting lands at all times since it became nonconforming, the lot was in compliance with official shoreland controls in effect at the time it was created, and the lot meets all sewage treatment and setback requirements of this section are met. 2. A variance from setback requirements must be obtained before any use, sewage treatment system, or building permit is issued for a lot. In evaluating the variance, the board of adjustment shall consider sewage treatment and water supply capabilities or constraints of the lot and shall deny the variance if adequate facilities cannot be provided. 3. If, in a group of two or more contiguous lots under the same ownership, any individual lot does not meet the shoreland dimensional requirements of this section, then the lot shall not be considered as a separate parcel of land for the purposes of sale or development. The lot must be combined with the one or more contiguous lots so they equal one or more parcels of land, each meeting the shoreland dimensional requirements of this section as reasonably possible. B. Additions/expansions to nonconforming structures. 1. Any additions, enlargements or expansion to the outside dimensions of an existing nonconforming structure shall meet the setback, height, and other dimensional requirements of this section. Any deviation from these requirements shall be authorized by a variance as provided in this section. 48 9� 2. Deck additions may be allowed without a variance to a structure not meeting the required setback from the ordinary high water level if all of the following requirements are met: (a) The structure existed on the date the structure setbacks were established; (b) A thorough evaluation of the property and structure reveals no reasonable location for a deck which would meet or exceed the existing ordinary high water level setback of the structure; (c) The deck encroachment toward the ordinary high water level does not exceed 15 percent of the existing setback of the structure from the ordinary high water level or does not encroach closer than 30 feet, whichever is more restrictive; and (d) The deck is constructed primarily of wood, and is not roofed or screened. C. Nonconforming sewage treatment systems shall conform to the sewage treatment system regulations as provided in this section. D. Public utility connections. Any new commercial or residential development permitted in any shoreland district where available shall be connected to the public utilities. Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including 'Penalty for Violation' and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication according to law. 49 ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: E. J. VanOverbeke By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Clerk Its: Mayor Date Ordinance Adopted: Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: Date of Advisory Planning Commission Hearing: RESOLUTION NO. 98 - CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF A SUMMARY ORDINANCE WHEREAS the City Council has reviewed the attached summary ordinance as required by Minnesota State Statutes Section 412.121, Subd. 4; and review. WHEREAS the City Clerk has on file a complete copy of the text for public THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Eagan City Council does approve the attached summary of ordinance for publication. This resolution passed this 6th day of January , 1998, by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Minnesota. Attest: For: By: Thomas A. Egan, Mayor E. J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk Against: 9‘, The following is the official summary of Ordinance No. as approved by the City Council of Eagan on January 6, 1998. ORDINANCE NO. SECOND SERIES SHORELAND ZONING ORDINANCE An ordinance of the City of Eagan, Minnesota, amending Eagan City Code Chapter 11 entitled "Land Use Regulations (Zoning)" by amending Section 11.21 regarding Shoreland zoning regulations by modifying certain definitions; by modifying notice requirements for public hearings; by reorganizing the water bodies classification table; by clarifying the shoreland overlay district regulation application; by modifying the lot dimensional requirements and reorganizing tables; by modifying accessory structure regulations; by modifying planned development related regulations; and other miscellaneous modifications to the Section. A copy of Ordinance No. is available for inspection by any person during normal business hours at the office of the City Clerk at the Eagan Municipal Center, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN 55122. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. 97 Agenda Information Item January 6, 1997 Eagan City Council Meeting NEW BUSINESS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - COMMUNICATIONS TOWER - JOHN YOUNG ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: • To approve or deny a Conditional Use Permit to allow a 150' tall communication tower monopole; a Variance to the one-half mile radius for Preferred Co -Location sites; and a Variance of 10' to the required 20' sideyard setback and a Variance to the required 40' from the 50' required rear yard setback to be located on Lot 3, Block 2, Hally's Addition east of Biscayne Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 36. FACTS: • The Advisory Planning Commission (APC) recommended denial (6-1) of this item at its November 25, 1997 meeting. No one from the public spoke at the public hearing. • The APC recommended denial of this Conditional Use Permit because the applicant has not provided documentation that shows the Sprint Tower cannot accommodate an additional provider or that the proposed 150' tall tower can accommodate three providers. Without this information the APC stated that this application is premature. ISSUES: • The City has been asked to make a determination on this variance request prior to any specific hardship being identified or proved. The applicant has not provided any engineering data supporting his request for a 150' tower. Information provided may identify that the tower can only be 100' tall. • The proposed tower is located within the half mile radius of an existing tower (Sprint tower at the Rosemount VFW) Sprint installed this antenna in 1996 and is now by definition a Preferred Co -Location site. The applicant has not provided any information (by a licensed radio frequency engineer) suggesting that the Sprint tower could not accommodate a co -location antenna. • The applicant is asking that as a part of the Conditional Use Permit, a condition be placed on the approved permit allowing the construction of the tower only after a qualified radio frequency engineer has determined that it cannot meet the City Code conditions and that it would not have to go back to the City Council. • If the Council were to approve Mr. Young's proposal, it would require an amendment to the ordinance. By Code, only the City Council may make that finding. Agenda Information Item - John Young CUP January 6, 1998 Page 2 • Any information submitted would have to be reviewed by the City's communications consultant. This is the type of cost intended to be covered by the applicant's escrow deposit, which will most likely have been returned to the applicant before a user of the site can prepare and submit any technical data. • The applicant is also requesting a 40' variance from the required 50' rear (east) setback and a 10' variance to the required 20' side (north) setback. The applicant has not established a physical hardship related to the variances. BACKGROUND: APC minutes - pages /06 - /41 • Planning report - pages /oa - Letter from John Young - pages 99 Page 2 December 18, 1997 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & VARIANCES JOHN YOUNG Commission Chair Heyl opened the first public hearing of the evening regarding a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a 150' tall communication tower monopole; a Variance of 10' to the required 20' sideyard setback; a Variance of 40' to the 50' rear yard setback; and a Variance to the one-half mile radius for Preferred Co -Location sites, located on Lot 3, Block 2, Hally's Addition, east of Biscayne Avenue in the SE1/4 of Section 36. Planner Tyree introduced this item. Ms. Tyree highlighted the information presented in City staffs planning report dated December 10, 1997. Ms. Tyree noted the background and history, the surrounding uses and the existing conditions of the subject property. Ms. Tyree also noted the variances being requested and the purpose of co - location of antenna equipment as set forth in the recently adopted amendment to the City Code dealing with communication towers. Ms. Tyree further noted that while the applicant is requesting a 150 foot tower, engineering data may prove that any antenna located upon the tower may conflict with a second user and in which case, the applicant would only be permitted a 100 foot tower under the City Code. The applicant John Young addressed the Commission and indicated that he would agree to cover any consultant costs as a condition to the issuance of the conditional use permit. Additionally, Mr. Young indicated that his tower located on Diffley Road is the only successful private co -location of antennas within the City of Eagan. Mr. Young addressed the increased need for antennas and the corridors that the industry uses to supply cellular service. Commission Chair Heyl asked the applicant to address the hardship which would justify the granting of a variance. Mr. Young indicated that a hardship would be difficult to show but stated the lot size was not big enough to accommodate the tower at its full height. Mr. Young explained that the surrounding public facilities property and industrial area has provided the necessary buffer. He expressed his opinion that the half -mile radius under the ordinance was to encourage co -location but not to be used as a measure of distance for separation purposes. Commission Chair Heyl expressed her concern that the determination of whether any potential user could co -locate on the Sprint tower located within a half mile of Mr. Young's property should be determined first. Member Bakken thought that the pocket of /co Page 3 December 18, 1997 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION industrial properties along Biscayne Avenue justifies the waiver of the half -mile spacing and that inevitably the capacity of the existing towers within the City has to be increased. Commission Chair Heyl stated that approving a tower without addressing the co -location requirement might encourage someone to go on the applicant's tower rather than Sprints. Member Burdorf agreed that approval of a tower would be to speculative at this point. He expressed his concern that without dealing with the co -location provision of the recently adopted ordinance, the ordinance would not have an opportunity to achieve the desired result. Member Segal asked if a conditional use permit expires if it is not used. City Attorney Dougherty stated "yes", that a permit must be placed and used within one year from its issuance or it is null and void. Member Bakken stated that a private owner is more likely to encourage co - location at its site than would an existing provider. In response to an inquiry from Member Segal, the applicant indicated that a communication provider generally would build the tower structure. Member Segal moved, Member Burdorf seconded, a motion to recommend denial of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a 150' tall communication tower monopole; a Variance of 10' to the required 20' sideyard setback; a Variance of 40' to the 50' rear yard setback; and a Variance to the one-half mile radius for Preferred Co -Location sites, located on Lot 3, Block 2, Hally's Addition, east of Biscayne Avenue in the SE1/4 of Section 36. Member Segal stated that the applicant had not met the burden of establishing any hardship and had failed to meet the existing setbacks under the City Code. He further stated that approval would be premature since the City would not have an opportunity to review any plans and there was no evidence that co -location could not occur on the Sprint tower. Member Miller expressed his concern that the City could wind up with two towers with only two users and no co -location. In response to a question by Member Bakken as to what the applicant could do to obtain approval from the Commission, Commission Chair Heyl stated that the hardship issue had to be answered. All voted in favor, except Member Bakken opposed. o/ PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: December 10, 1997 CASE: 36 -CU -36-11-97 APPLICANT: John Young HEARING DATE: Dec. 18, 1997 PROPERTY OWNER: John Young PREPARED BY: Shannon Tyree REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit - Communications Tower LOCATION: Lot 3, Block 2, Hally's Addition - 4870 Biscayne Ave. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: IND - Industrial ZONING: I-1 Limited Industrial SUMMARY OF REQUESTS John Young is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) allow a 150' tall communication tower monopole; a Variance of 10' to the required 20' sideyard setback; a Variance of 40' to the 50' rear yard setback; and a Variance to the one-half mile radius for Preferred Co -Location sites. Located on Lot 3, Block 2, Hally's Addition, east of Biscayne Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 36. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Conditional Use Permit City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subd. 4, C states: The Planning Commission shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall issue such conditional use permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: A. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. B. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and City Code provisions. C. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. D. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools. Planning Report - John Young - C.U.P. December 18, 1997 Page 2 E. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be hazardous or detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. F. Will have vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public streets. G. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Variance City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subd. 3, B states: "In considering all requests for a variance, or any subsequent appeal, the City staff, the Advisory Planning Commission and the Council shall make a finding of fact that the proposed action will not:" A. Impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property. B. Unreasonably increase the congestion in the public street. C. Increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. D. Unreasonably diminish or impact established property value within the neighborhood. E. Disrupt the traditional practices or social cohesiveness of the community. F. Or in any other way be contrary to the intent of this Chapter or other applicable City Code provisions. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is located in Hally's Addition, zoned for Limited Industrial. The applicant has an existing warehouse building located on site. Recently the parking lot was curbed and paved and there is no outdoor storage on site. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - HTS Fabrication; zoned I-1; guided IND. South - Trail Auto & Laurent Enterprises; zoned I-1; guided IND. East - Red Pine Elementary School; zoned P; guided P. West - Magnum Towing; zoned I-1; guided IND. /03 Planning Report - John Young - C.U.P. December 18, 1997 Page 3 EVALUATION OF REQUEST John Young is proposing a 150' tall multi-user communications tower monopole and associated equipment encasement/ buiilding in order to provide communications services to the surrounding area. The applicant has stated that this location is within a corridor for wireless communications companies for their signals to connect the Twin Cities to Rochester. At this time there is no specific communication company proposed to locate on this tower. VARIANCES The applicant is seeking approval of a variance to allow a structure to be located 10 feet from the rear (east) property line and 10 feet from the side (north) property line. The tower is proposed to be located 13.5 feet from the rear (east) property line. The equipment casings are proposed at 10' from the rear property line The required setbacks for any structure for an Industrial property abutting a PF guided property is 50'. The required sideyard setback (north and south boundary) is 20'. The request is for a 40' variance setback from the rear (east) property line, and a 10' variance from the sideyard setback (north). The applicant has not stated a physical hardship for the location, but in a letter addressed to the City Council the applicant states that the proposed location is "primarily due to locating the pole in the back of the lot which is well screened." In addition to the setback variances, the applicant is requesting a variance to the one-half mile radius for Preferred Co -Location requirement. There is an existing tower located along Highway #3 on the north portion of the Rosemount VFW lot (see exhibit). Sprint Cellular, installed this 100' tower in 1996. By definition (City Code 11.10, Subd. 30 Sec. 11.03) the Sprint site is now a "Preferred Co -Location Site", capable of adding an antenna array at 80'. A preferred location site is "an existing tower, structure, or building which may accommodate planned equipment for a proposed new tower within a one-half (1/2) mile radius of the proposed tower location." ISSUES The applicant's property is located within this one-half mile radius and he is proposing a variance to this one-half mile radius. One of the nine standards listed in the ordinance states that "No tower shall be permitted unless the City Council finds that the equipment planned for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated at any preferred co -location site. The City Council may find that a preferred location site cannot accommodate the planned equipment for the following reasons:" (i) The planned equipment would exceed the structural capacity of the preferred co -location site, and the preferred co -location site cannot be reinforced, modified, or replaced to accommodate the planned equipment or its equivalent at a reasonable cost, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer. /041 Planning Report - John Young - C.U.P. December 18, 1997 Page 4 (ii) The planned equipment would interfere significantly with the usability of existing or approved equipment at the preferred co -location site, and the interference cannot be prevented at a reasonable cost, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer. (iii) A preferred co -location site cannot accommodate the planned equipment at a height necessary to function reasonably, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer; or (iv) The applicant, after good -faith effort, is unable to lease, purchase or otherwise obtain space for the planned equipment at a preferred co -location site. There is no communications company associated with this tower. However, the applicant is proposing that a future communications provider interested in the site be required to submit information demonstrating that none of the above mentioned conditions can be met. The applicant is asking that as a part of the Conditional Use Permit, a condition could be placed on the approved permit allowing the construction of the tower only after a qualified radio frequency engineer has determined that it cannot meet the conditions mentioned above and that it would not have to go back for City Council approval. If the City Council were to adopt Mr. Young's proposal, it would require an amendment to the ordinance. Staff has concerns with this scenario because the City is being asked to make a determination on this variance request prior to the specific hardship being identified or proved. The applicant has not provided any engineering data supporting his request for a 150' tower. Information provided by a communications company may identify that only one communications tower user could use the tower. If that were the case, than the tower could only be 100' in height. Also, future data provided by a qualified radio frequency engineer would have to be reviewed and approved by the City's communication consultant. This is the type of cost intended to be covered by the applicant's escrow deposit which will most likely have been returned to the applicant before a future user of the site can prepare and submit any technical date. Site Plan - The applicant is proposing the monopole tower and equipment encasement to be located in the northeast corner of the lot. A 15' x 34' (510 s.f.) has been identified on the site plan at the area to locate the equipment encasements. The applicant has shown 3 antenna arrays on the 150' tower. The tower location within the 510 s.f area may not allow the 10' (width) x 10' (length) maximum equipment encasements. Staff is suggesting moving the proposed tower to the very southern end of the 510 s.f. area, to allow the maximum flexibility when locating the equipment encasements or any proposed equipment building. The base of the proposed tower is 7' in diameter. Landscaping - Due to HTS Fabrication's and Mr. Young's parking lots being paved over the property lines there is not the typical 5' setback on either side to accommodate landscaping. The 12' - 14' pine trees located on the school property serve as an excellent screen from the east. The tallest the equipment casings can be is 5' in height. The existing pines will provide more than adequate screening. /oS Planning Report - John Young - C.U.P. December 18, 1997 Page 5 Access - Access to the site is from Biscayne Avenue. The tower and its associated equipment could easily be reached by communication providers from the existing drive aisle located on the south side of the site. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION The applicant is requesting approval to install a 150' tall monopole tower for the use of a wireless communications and is proposing to carry up to three communication antenna arrays. The proposed tower is located within a one-half mile radius of an existing Preferred Co -Location tower (located at the Rosemount VFW). The applicant is interested in providing the information necessary for substantiating the hardship to not co -locate on the Sprint tower when a communication provider approaches the applicant to lease space on the tower. Without having engineering data informing the City as to how many company's may be located on the pole, it is difficult to determine if the 150' is necessary. The data may prove that because of frequency conflicts only one user may be located on the tower. If that were the case, by Code, the tower could only be 100' in height. The applicant is also requesting that once that information is provided and reviewed by the City's radio frequency engineer that the item would not have to back to the Council for a determination but rather be approved administratively. This will require the Council to amend the Communication Tower Ordinance to provide for administrative approval. The City Code states that the "City Council may find that a preferred location site connot accommodate the planned equipment..." If it is recommended that the Variance for the preferred co -location site be approved the applicant is requesting that a condition be added for staff to make the findings. The final issue related to the preferred co -location variance is how will the City recover consultant costs incurred for review of radio frequency information to be supplied at an unknown time in the future? ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED • To recommend approval or denial of the proposed Conditional Use Permit allowing a 150' communication tower monopole on Lot 3, Block 2, Hally's Addition. If approved, the Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. The Conditional Use permit shall be recorded at Dakota County within 60 days of City Council approval. 2. The Conditional Use Permit provides for a 150' tall multi-user communication monopole with three groups of antenna. No equipment or antenna may exceed 150' in height according to City Code. /06 Planning Report - John Young - C.U.P. December 18, 1997 Page 6 3. A building permit shall be obtained for the erection of the monopole. • To recommend approval or denial of the proposed 10' Variance to the required 20' sideyard (north side) setback. • To recommend approval or denial of the proposed 40' Variance to the required 50' rear yard (east side) setback. • To recommend approval or denial of the proposed Variance to the required one-half mile radius for Preferred Co -Location tower sites. If approved, the variance shall be subject to the following condition: 1. The applicant shall provide the City documentation, from a registered structural engineer, confirming the structural integrity of the proposed monopole. This documentation shall be submitted with the building permit application. FINANCIAL OBLIGATION — 36 -CU -36-11-97 Lot 3, Block 2, Halley's Addition There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $0 on the parcel for which the conditional use is requested. At this time, there are pending assessments on the parcel for which the conditional use permit is requested. The pendings are related to Project 673R and Project 687R. Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are noted. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and availability of the City's utility. The collection of this financial obligation is not a condition for the approval of the conditional use permit. The financial obligation will be collected at the time of the connection to the City's utility system or a future public improvement project. Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount Storm Sewer Trunk C/I .121/sq ft 35,415 sq ft $4,648 Total $4,648 /07 CiIy of Pagan Location Map Ili, .„. ..., ,*tt;i ,.111111 ■t■■tINN "'" rill la inmerVialWit4111 �.� /1111. ■�■■ ■ ■VIIII/111 p°111:11111' AL. Ai. .r. 0 4Ibiat NVIIIIIMFAIA .111,04, 1011411: MeLl 11.0 tiOAI CRAM. A,N. NO, 32 (CLIFF ROADI ■n� c AHC. C.3J1.N. NO. 32 m ♦ 1a � II•Y111.K- • • ■■■■W IIIA • ` TOW 7 1)r ►iat 11�1r or=qv/ iO1� lCAROtor III,• PAM 110. 1111 AEI AIMS • • • • i ri • 41. sit r wirj 1■ Subject Site John Young 4870 Biscayne Avenue Conditional Use Permit Case No. 36 -CU -36-11-97 City of Eagan Community Development Department /M /1 &X Feet Zoning Map Current Zoning 1-1 Limited Industrial John Young Case No. 36 -CU -36-11-97 City of Eagan Community D.valopm.nt D.partm.nt E ///Z 1000 0 1000 Feet 4111:4 - Comprehensive Plan Map Guide Plan Designation IND Industrial John Young Case No. 36 -CU -36-11-97 City of Eagan Community Development Department 1000 0 1000 Feet I I w 1-12 . M w I , f,• = 43, I 1 1Y1 yw,- _ . TT UJ ('4 ._. ` •.i li; Z�. a i�— • 6 1e elis e i o■ //3 7. aria .01 .... Vat 0, tac..+t -- • 1 J- BISCAYNE 0.0.241 _ i T :- . .. •56.09 --ii I Kill F :I F F ;!I a ii f tI =11tat_} .i• IIIIa1 g \g. ,, r• \ 6�I=i I g x •ll t=' 'Z '� a'\ 7:7.. 1. ig;.I. I, as ff •. 11.ill1;,! 27 Ta \1\, \ I \\ I ii' S'I \ t 1'4N ' . 1I, •1 \ 6: 1I, 1 AVENUE i _1r T A Fs. E`; ! as 1 s i O ¢aMCAim ..' .y -..Nil -if i tZ-. s I iI i ? 'I'`.i . ' ,t 1 1? a s I+ = T f i r • • i • i SPOT SILTATION AT DOTTON 0► ■AIA. CONS ON NAIL 5 // s oroz•lr w e 5 k 5 5 te N Qw $ �� - o;•4 =: eF= O. nin :09 ! p :^ •• 4-z Y SET pix FOR JOHN YOUNG .AR Ot T 1/. 01 . L 2 •XT t $&at i 01 AMMO. S Q S R,* 7 T A O SLIMOOO,R. ION ji-tv James R. Hill, inc. PLANNERS / ENGINEERS / SURvrroRs -- .0•..... 42 i..1 IX 1222.‘ 22 21.1P Request Illustration 1/2 Mile Radius z 0 0 0 `3 r 3 0 Y o� z A 0 t 0 r 7 I F1 I lJ Ill R Sri LI _J H II i -� 'IIII�I mu Jiaaall17411: It Ti — ma 'Nu EN Erb MN V NM ill 44 arAymr.:42,Vail!. sro,44* ..11,,,c...:11 nigroall 1 gm Tiottlilln;41 m. Lim" Iltatiatin I) PHI 1 • 1 L L:J r /5"' / INN = nilN, u cm sc, ck.• 4 953.16 953.31 TOP POWER POLE= 992.1 Xg582 IN 954.39 954.20- _ D UT1UTY -7- ELECTRIC R RECORD PLAT. TRANSFORMER WEST -=x-246.25---- OHP // ////////// pp��4 T.E ` •� 4 . A// o/ ////////////, FINISHED FLOOR ELEV.= 954.63 (\ \ // 954. n x T954.43 x R 953.23 1 FT vn!) ICONCRETE BLOCK RETAINING WALL X T 953.36 .93X AVER. - 981.3. X 953.22 47 958.38 954.58. OHP 4 d • • 44 4 • . 4 WELL CO X 953.97 TOP POWER POLE' '993.4 • -� 954.52 15' • 6 FT • CHAIN LINK .:ROO,F .OVERHANG •X.954.54 • X•954.18 X 954.55 954.65 944,50 T95456 T95. 4.53.... 69:67 N O 3.10 -- 248.25- . EAST 46.25 - EAST X T 953.82 X 953.91 953. Sr P 954.23. NCE 9.53..81 X 953.48 954:64 :.... \. :T•955.73 50' • WIPMEN' • AEA OLE 7'DIA.® 10 RASE 7.955.161 m X 93.95\� / I DRAINA AND UTILITY EASEMENT PER RECORD•PLAT. 1 T- x T 953.98 X T 954.28 OHP OHP 6 FT. CHAIN LINK FENCE 10 T 954.79 953.94 \ a 954.00- ' fICG Al Of X John & Julie Young 16275 Hudson Ave. Lakeville, Mn. 55044 12-31-97 Mayor and City Council Members City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Mn. 55122 RE: Essential Services Structure 4870 Biscayne Ave. Eagan, Mn. 55122 Dear Mayor, Council Members: There will eventually be eight wireless telecommunication licenses operating in the Twin Cities. (See St. Paul Press article). We have discovered a T mile wide corridor that 50% of the antenna's are being located in the City. (See Map) 1. We predict this corridor will eventually have a minimum of 30 antenna locations. 2. By next summer the number of antenna locations within the corridor will have gone from l to 12 in a 21 year period. ( A dramatic increase due to deregulation). 3. We also predict that in the next 42 months, that an additional 14 antenna locations will be placed within this corridor. This will bring the total to approx. 24 antenna locations within the corridor. ( This is only 4 new antenna locations per year in the corridor that we don't know about currently). 4. In the last 6 months we have observed interest in 4 new locations within the corridor. A. Co -location at Hwy 13 & Diffley Road B. The Public Facilty Application C. Lexington Ave. & Wilderness Run Search Area D. S.E. Corner of Eagan Search Area Three questions come to our minds ? 1. Why is our other property the only operational co -location site in the City on private property ? 2. How can the City encourage co -locations so a FIELD OF ANTENNA'S is not created ? 3. Why is it now we are prevented from doing another co -location site, no telecommunications company will even talk to us, with out u's having a permit first. D,_ „r, ts- n 3 x tit O 0A m A »�o o• e Y -v CAw C 0 0�! 3 0 3 e a ▪ ta- w' 0 0 a ;o to C to a o M r m o o • oq o » a a a. papin9 len;uaplsaa Iep;snpui plo 5 O� 5 • O 3 3 70 c N CD Q1 - I < O• R.2, O Ca VI. Co gu o mi N QQ 8c U • • • 14A THE DENVER BUSINESS JOURNAL LARCH 21.27, 1997 PSCo sees demand soar for antenna tower space By GINAH ZEIGER Business Journal Staff Reporler Public Service Company of Colorado anticipated some demand from wireless carriers for antenna space on its utility towers as new entrants began building out their communications networks, but noth- ing like what they got. "We didn't quite expect the volume or interest," said Shawn Hill, acting manager of technical services for PSCo. "These guys will downy and everything to get up and running:' Every major wireless company planning to serve metro Denver has approached the utility company, and most have signed lease agreements. PSCo has already installed 15 to 20 antennas for new per- sonalcommunications services (PCS) companies, and 50 locations are in various stages of progress, Hill said, It's show time for PCS, and placing antennas is key to their survival. Sprint PCS expects to begin offering service lat- er this month. VoiceStrearn PCS, owned by Western Wireless, plans to roll out sometime during the first half of the year, and U S West's PCS services could be ready by summer. PCS, the next generation of digital wire- less communications, is a line -of -sight technology, which means cells have to be higher than surrounding trees and rooftops. "You have to have them (antennas] in. certain places or calls drop or fade;" said Alan Woydziak, real estate manager of AT&T Wireless of Colorado. "The priori- ty for all of us (in the wireless business] is to put them on existing structures, at the height necessary to connect the network," The power towers and poles owned by the electric utility are the perfect solution — they're everywhere, they're big, and they're tall. "It's our first choice," said Tom Schilling, spokesman for VoiceStream PCS, one of the new providers expecting to begin offering service by July. Dealing with a single site owner speeds up the installation process, cuts costs, since the provider doesn't have to build a site, and often helps overcome community objections, "That's why PSCo works so well," Schilling said, "It lets us blend into the existing community." "They already have poles and towers in the community," said Woydziak. "There's no additional impact from adding our facilities." Some would disagree. Hanging more antennas — large panels measuring about 4 feet by 8 inches — on a single tower cre- ates visual clutter that annoys residents andraises red flags about property values. Over the last 15 years, some 22,000 antenna sites have been built nationwide as cellular phones and paging services spread. But over the next few years, an additional 100,000 sites will be erected to accommodate PCS, according to a survey by the Illinois Superconductor Corp. Ks—demand for sites increases, local com- munities have dug in their heels. Munici- palities from Lakewood and Louisville to Denver have imposed moratoria while they sort out the zoning implications. Local governments have a limited amount of leeway over tower sites. Provi- sions in the 1996 Telecommunications Act restrict them to using their zoning powers A cluster of antennae crowds the top o1 this tower near City Park, "We think we do our customers and the environment a favor by leasing space on them and not putting up new towers." — Shawn Hill Public Service Company of Colorado to control growth and accommodate com- munity concerns, but they cannot ban them outright. Among the most popular solutions for communities is to require competing wireless providers to share space on existing towers. That's created a mini -boom for PSCo, which has hundreds of towers. It's not a big money-maker in a S2 billion in rev- enue evenue utility, but it is a way to leverage existing assets, Hill said. Over the years, PSCo has evolved an elaborate infrastructure of transmission and communications towers. Transmission tow- ers — the huge four-sided lattice structures that carry large electrical lines — can sup. port several antennas, and a number of them host antennas from a half-dozen dif- ferent carriers, Communications towers, often single poles up to 300 feet tall, were built to handle PSCo's own microwave and paging and mobile phone antennas. Space permitting, they are also sites for third - party antennas, which sprout like big rect• angular ears at the 70• to 90 -foot level. One communication tower, at C-470 and Colorado Boulevard, supports anten- nas from AT&T, 1.1 S West and Nextel (formerly OneComrn), as well as Sprint PCS and VoiceStream PCS. Most of the wireless providers want sites in the same geographical locations. Demand for sites in downtown Denver and at the Denver Tech Center is especially high. Hill said, Downtown, the sites are mainly on rooftops, but they're tricky. Interference from skyscrapers, plus the overlap that occurs if competing cells arc too close together, makes them potential "trouble spots," he said. And, everyone wants sites along the highway corridors — 1-70, 1-25, U.S. 36. "We have existing structures," said Hill. "We think we do our customers and the environment a favor by leasing space on them and not putting up new towers." SAINT PAULPIONEER PRESS INSIDE TECH Telecommunications 7The wireless war will just get hotter in 1998. Wireless air time rates will probably drop 10 percent to 15 per- cent on average, expects Yankee Group analyst Mark Lowenstein. Thirty to 40 percent of new subscribers will opt for digital Wireless service, which generally offers more security and features than analog service, he forecasts. Competition is what will drive prices down, of course. Three providers — Sprint PCS, Aerial Communications and Nextel —� . entered the Twin Cites market in 1997, ending the duopoly long j enjoyed by AirTouch and AT&T Wireless. In 1998, US West will launch its wireless I service. Two other firms — NextWave Communications of San Diego and Northcoast Operating Co. of S onset New York — have licens- es to operate wireless phone net- works in the Twin Cities. But it's sync -fear if they'll try a 1998 launch. The largely phony war between Cell -phone competition incumbent local phone service will get hotter, so providers, like US West, and their expect some deals. challengers, including the long-dis- • tance providers, may just drag on. Each side wants to best position itself for battle. And each wants to weaken their opponents as much as possible at the outset. "It's sort of a .stand-off now," says Yankee Group telecommunications analyst Boyd Peterson. "The RBOCs (Regional Bell Operating Companies) are not going to give up one iota more than they have to." The local phone service competition that exists will be primarily for densely packed busi- ness markets, like downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul and the 494 strip. Some challengers are building impressive local phone networks around the country, he says. But even with a possible doubling of their cus- tomer bases this year, they'd only have 4 per- cent of the nation's phone lines, says Peterson. Sao Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting B. REZONING - ARTIFACTS GRAPHICS SERVICES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve/deny a Rezoning from Agricultural to Limited Business for a one -acre parcel identified as P.I.D. #10-10000-060-75 located on the west side of Lexington Avenue north of Yankee Doodle Road at 3345 Lexington Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 10. FACTS: • The property in question, while zoned Agricultural, is guided Central Area. The Central Area Comprehensive Guide Plan designation allows a mixture of uses ranging from high density residential to commercial and office. • The applicant is proposing the rezoning to Limited Business to allow conversion of the existing single family residence to approximately 2,000 sq. ft. of leaseable office space. The applicant also will plat the property and dedicate right-of-way to Dakota County for the future upgrade of Lexington Avenue. • At its regular meeting on December 18, 1997, the Advisory Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning. BACKGROUND/ATTACHMENTS: (2) December 18, 1997 Advisory Planning Commission Minutes, page LI) December 5, 1997 staff report, pages /a,3 through /3/. )/. Page 4 December 18, 1997 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION REZONING - ARTIFACTS Commission Chair Heyl opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding a Rezoning from Agricultural to Limited Business for a one -acre parcel located on the west side of Lexington Avenue north of Yankee Doodle at 3345 Lexington Avenue in the SE'/a of Section 10. Senior Planner Ridley introduced this item. Mr. Ridley highlighted the information presented in City staffs planning report dated December 5, 1997. Mr. Ridley noted the background and history, the surrounding uses and the existing conditions of the subject property. Mr. Ridley further added that the property would be platted by the applicant. The applicant was present to answer questions. No members of the public addressed the Commission. Commission Chair Heyl stated that the rezoning was consistent with the comprehensive guide and that the use of the structure as an office is reasonable for the area. Member Burdorf agreed. Member Burdorf moved, Member Miller seconded, a motion to recommend approval of Rezoning from Agricultural to Limited Business for a one -acre parcel located on the west side of Lexington Avenue north of Yankee Doodle at 3345 Lexington Avenue in the SE'/4 of Section 10. All voted in favor. PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: December 5, 1997 CASE: 10-RZ-29-11-97 APPLICANT: Artifacts Graphics Services HEARING DATE: Dec. 18, 1997 PROPERTY OWNER: Therese Wohlers PREPARED BY: Michael Ridley REQUEST: Rezoning LOCATION: 3345 Lexington Avenue COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Central Area (CA) ZONING: Agricultural (A) SUMMARY OF REQUEST Therese Wohlers is requesting approval of a Rezoning from Agriculture to Limited Business for a one -acre parcel located on the west side of Lexington Avenue north of Yankee Doodle at 3345 Lexington Avenue in the SE '/4 of Section 10. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivision 5 states, in part: 1. The provisions of this chapter may be amended by the majority vote of the council, except that amendments changing the boundaries of any district or changing the regulations of any district may only be made by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of all members of the council. 2. The Council shall not rezone any land or area in any zoning district or make any other proposed amendment to this chapter without first having referred it to the planning commission for it's consideration and recommendation. BACKGROUND/HISTORY The subject parcel is unplatted and is surrounded on three sides by the Eagan Promenade 2°d Addition (Promenade Oaks Apartments). Ms. Wohlers recently purchased the parcel from the property's long time owners Stanley and June Ketcham. /a3 Planning Report - Artifacts Rezoning December 18, 1997 Page 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS The one acre parcel has direct access to Lexington Avenue and is zoned Agriculture and designated on the Comprehensive Guide Plan as Central Area. The site contains an existing home with an attached garage that provide a foundation footprint of approximately 1,800 S.F. The site slopes to all four sides from the center and contains wooded areas around the north, west, and southwest perimeter of the property. A six to seven foot tall retaining wall, which runs along the east edge of the site, was built with the recent widening of Lexington Avenue. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The applicant is proposing to convert the existing home into office space that would be occupied by her own company (Artifacts) with the potential to lease additional office space to future tenants. There will be approximately 2,000 S.F. of office space available for lease after an interior remodel is completed. Compatibility with Surrounding Area - Conversion of the residential structure to an office use appears more compatible than the continued use of the property as a freestanding single family home surrounded by apartments and the county road. Site Plan — The existing building footprint will stay the same. Some grading will occur to provide for a parking lot and to improve site lines at the access point to Lexington Avenue. In addition, the applicant intends to also plat the property into Lot 1, Block 1, Wohlers Addition. Grading/Wetlands — Minimal grading will be necessary to prepare the site for the proposed 15 - stall parking lot. There are no wetlands on the site. Storm Drainage — Existing storm sewer is available within Lexington Avenue. Utilities — Sanitary sewer is available at the southwest comer of the site. Water main is available along the west edge of Lexington Avenue. Access — Access to the site is proposed by improving and widening the existing driveway to Lexington Avenue. Permits — All work within the right-of-way of Lexington Avenue including connection to the water main and driveway access reconstruction, will require approval from Dakota County prior to issuance of any permit for remodeling or grading. Airport Noise Considerations — The City of Eagan considered airport noise as a factor in its Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. With the State's decision to expand the airport at its current /.)y Planning Report - Artifacts Rezoning December 18, 1997 Page 3 location, the Metropolitan Council has adopted a revised Aviation Chapter that anticipates the impacts from the continued operation of the airport at its current location. On the basis of the noise policy contours in northern Eagan, the subject property lies within Noise Zone IV. Within this area, commercial office uses would be consistent. Because the proposed use would convert a single-family house for commercial purposes, the applicant should be aware of an outdoor aircraft noise environment of 60 DNL. While it is not a requirement, the applicant may wish to consider additional sound attenuation of the building if this outdoor noise level would intrude on the activities of the business. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION The proposed rezoning is consistent with the present Comprehensive Guide Plan designation. Conversion of the residential structure to an office use appears more compatible than the continued use of the property as a freestanding single family home surrounded by apartments and the county road. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval or denial of a Rezoning from Agriculture to Limited Business for a one -acre parcel identified as PID # 10-10000-060-75 located on the west side of Lexington Avenue north of Yankee Doodle at 3345 Lexington Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 10. FINANCIAL OBLIGATION — Artifacts There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $0 on the parcels proposed for platting. The pay-off balance will be allocated to the lots created by the plat. At this time, there are no pending assessments on the parcel proposed for platting. The estimated financial obligation presented is subject to change based upon areas, dimensions and land uses contained in the final plat. Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and connections proposed to be made to the City's utility system based on the submitted plans. Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount Water Availability Charge C/I $2,855/AC 1 Ac $ 2,855 Lateral Benefit Water C/I 26.25/ff 165.01 ff 4,322 Storm Water Trunk C/I .0421/sq ft 43,564 sq ft 1,830 Lateral Benefit Storm C/I 22.55/ff 40 ff 902 Total $9,919 The above financial obligation is computed using the 1997 fee schedule rates. The City will compute the financial obligation at the rate in effect at the time of final plat approval. 4 City of Eagan Location Map .:1 i 4 '. K\ • • OP II atV .040 iik •E ea COUNTY ROAD NOM (YANKEE DOODLE ROAD) -- CO,NY Subject Site . Lir TOWN MOM MeV. III i dm in io D D �� ' 'E et More." . !A' � rw+�rwRr q v`' $4044049i wocKwoee rRR. ,� � `i .; 'ih)`E . 1111). "'aft Or; •iii J ,v teaI 1.111.1um, s. ;� 1;. ia 11 ll Mr? t Li DP r .� ��.��rp �vh4!LiJ� a eoo 0 800 Feet Artifacts 3345 Lexington Avenue Rezoning and Final Plat Case No. 10-RZ-29-11-97 ,04)17 E City of Eapen Community Development Department Zoning Map Current Zoning A Agriculture Artifacts Case No. 10-RZ-29-11-97 City of Eagan Community Development Department 1000 0 1000 Feet Comprehensive Plan Map IND ( 111 CA 11 Pal CA • I 1 1 IND IND IND IND D -IV D•IV PF Guide Pian Designation CA Central Area Artifacts Case No. 10-RZ-29-11-97 City of Eagan Community Development Department /ft)9 'cc 1000 Feet IA; 7 LLI n. •••••• .0•1 / . . ft, .. ON awn 1 b ,vNnirs i ,,,,,- ;, 1, f4-1 fl j, (3r1N3AY . NOVNIL, v fa , j" • ' ,-%_m ' '1— . • i , ,, , . . .. _ 112=4____Al 1 , 6! . 0 3;4 s.) • • rr• 4) E, 14. rik• • • • 4(.. ;••• • • Pig s of 4 o(n 3 J tI 1i f li,' It 11 E1 is I IN slog rr .� arm li Zti )oa JaPen ... ...•....., . .. . • 1 Y ' Hamm) 95, \4 ~ �� _O z 1 {1 , / 0 , ; �{ i I- y- Q V r / \cl \•.\ e h` v / },' I 11 N z 1 i` IC)j ,O / /i / i CV \ \ it 1 I1 / , _... _ s L. .16 ,, i I rr3 W \. 0 �,. / fr z -tr .:.-17. ix xa:...I?� O ^•ti; f.. i Ir IL z ui /3). • PROMENADE Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1997, Eagan City Council C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — NATIONWIDE GROUP ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: > To approve or deny a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of rental trucks for the Acorn Mini -Storage facility which is under construction at 2935 Lexington Avenue (Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 10) on the northwest corner of Lexington Avenue and Lone Oak Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 3. FACTS: > The property is 14.29 acres in size and the west half of the site contains a large wetland and thick woodlands. The storage buildings are located on the eastern portion of the site. > The proposed truck storage area is located on the interior of the site and appears to meet the outdoor storage requirements in the City Code. > The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 18, 1997, and recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit, subject to conditions. ATTACHMENTS: December 18, 1997 APC Minutes, pages /33004944€4 . Staff Report, pages X311 through / 4 y. 13a Page 7 December 18, 1997 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NATIONWIDE GROUP Commission Chair Heyl opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding a Conditional Use Permit to allow the outdoor storage of rental and moving trucks for the Acorn Mini -Storage facility at 2935 Lexington Avenue (Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 10) on the northwest corner of Lexington Avenue and Lone Oak Road in the SE1/4 of Section 3. Planner Dudziak introduced this item. Ms. Dudziak highlighted the information presented in City staffs planning report dated December 9, 1997. Ms. Dudziak noted the background and history, the surrounding uses and the existing conditions of the subject property. The applicant was not present and no members of the public addressed the Commission. Member Burdorf moved, Member Miller seconded, a motion to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the outdoor storage of rental and moving trucks and outside storage for the Acorn Mini -Storage facility at 2935 Lexington Avenue (Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 10) on the northwest corner of Lexington Avenue and Lone Oak Road in the SE1/4 of Section 3, subject to the following conditions: 1. No more than four rental moving trucks shall be stored on the site. Storage of the rental trucks shall be only in the location shown on the site plan dated 11/19/97 and shall be enclosed by the fence around the development. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed on the outside edge of the storage area. 3. The storage area shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide to accommodate the truck storage without interference to the drive aisle. All voted in favor. / 33 PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: December 9, 1997 APPLICANT: Nationwide Group PROPERTY OWNER: Nationwide Group CASE: 3 -CU -38-11-97 HEARING DATE: December 18, 1997 PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Storage LOCATION: 2935 Lexington Avenue COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: IND, Limited Industrial ZONING: I-1, Limited Industrial SUMMARY OF REQUEST Nationwide Group is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the outdoor storage of rental and moving trucks for the Acorn Mini -Storage facility at 2935 Lexington Avenue (Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 10) on the northwest corner of Lexington Avenue and Lone Oak Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 3. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivisions 4C and 4D provide the following. Subdivision 4C states that the Planning Commission shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall issue such conditional use permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: A. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. B. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and City Code provisions. C. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. lay Planning Report — Nationwide Group (Acom Mini Storage) December 18, 1997 Page 2 D. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools. E. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be hazardous or detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. F. Will have vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public streets. G. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Subdivision 4D, Conditions, states that in reviewing applications of conditional use permits, the Planning Commission and the Council may attach whatever reasonable conditions they deem necessary to mitigate anticipated adverse impacts associated with these uses, to protect the value of other property within the district, and to achieve the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. In all cases in which conditional uses are granted, the Council shall require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as proof that the conditions stipulated in connection therewith are being and will be complied with. Subdivision 29.2-C of Section 11.10 establishes additional standards for outdoor storage. 1. Outdoor storage items shall be placed within an enclosure as necessary to achieve appropriate security and containment or for public safety reasons when determined necessary by the City. In General Business (GB) and Community Shopping Center (CSC) zoning districts, the enclosure shall be attached to the principal building and be constructed of materials which are aesthetically compatible with the principal building. In Limited Industrial (I-1) and General Industrial (I-2) zoning districts, the enclosure may be detached from the principal building. 2. The storage area shall be located in the side or rear yards and shall not encroach into any required front building setback area or other required setbacks. 3. The outdoor storage area shall be screened from view from the public right-of-way and from any adjacent property which is designated for residential uses in the Comprehensive Guide Plan. 4. The storage area shall not interfere with any pedestrian or vehicular movement. 5. The storage area shall not take up required parking spaces or landscaping areas. 6. The storage area shall be surfaced with concrete or an approved equivalent to control dust and erosion. The surface shall be properly maintained to prevent deterioration. /3s. Planning Report — Nationwide Group (Acorn Mini Storage) December 18, 1997 Page 3 BACKGROUND/HISTORY The property was platted in 1988 with the subdivision of Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 10. Indoor storage facilities are a permitted use in the I-1 zoning district. EXISTING CONDITIONS The west half of the 14.29 -acre site contains a large wetland and thick woodlands. Access to the site is provided from Lexington Avenue via a shared driveway with the adjacent Knox Lumber store to the north. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North — Knox Lumber, Zoned I-1 (Limited Industrial), Guided IND (Limited Industrial) South - Homestead Village hotel (under construction), Zoned PD (Planned Development) Guided IND (Limited Industrial) East - Two residences, Zoned A (Agricultural), Guided IND (Limited Industrial) West - I -35E EVALUATION OF REQUEST Site Plan — According to the applicant, Acorn Mini Storage provides storage space for businesses and individuals to store their personal goods and many times customers move their own property in and out of the facility. For this reason, Acorn Mini Storage proposes to keep up to four rental moving trucks on-site for customer rental. Nationwide Group has submitted a letter explaining their proposal and addressing the requirements in the city's outdoor storage ordinance. Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The proposed storage area is located on the interior of the property and is screened from the west and south by natural vegetation, and from the east by the storage buildings. The storage yard for Knox is to the north. Landscaping — No trees or landscaping would be removed. The proposed storage area is screened from other properties by heavy vegetation to the south and west, and by the buildings to the east. Wetlands/Water Quality — The wetland area on the property is not being disturbed by the construction of the storage area. Access/Street Design — Access to the site is provided from Lexington Avenue via a shared driveway with the adjacent Knox store to the north. Access to the truck storage area would be via the existing drive aisle along the west side of the buildings. The plan shows a parking lane /36 Planning Report — Nationwide Group (Acorn Mini Storage) December 18, 1997 Page 4 along about 100 feet on the west side of the drive aisle to accommodate the storage of the rental trucks. The storage area should be at least 10 feet wide to accommodate the truck storage without interference to the drive aisle. The storage area is proposed to be secured with a six foot fence. It is also proposed to have a bituminous surface. The storage area should include curb and gutter around the perimeter. Tree Preservation — No significant trees are proposed to be removed to accommodate the storage area. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor storage of up to four rental trucks. The storage of rental trucks is ancillary to the principal use, which is an indoor mini - storage facility. The proposal appears consistent with the outdoor storage requirements in the City Code. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval or denial of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the outdoor storage of rental and moving trucks at 2935 Lexington Avenue (Lot 1, Block 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 10) on the northwest corner of Lexington Avenue and Lone Oak Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 3. Approval should be subject to the following conditions. 1. No more than four rental moving trucks shall be stored on the site. Storage of the rental trucks shall be only in the location shown on the site plan dated 11/19/97 and shall be enclosed by the fence around the development. 2. Concrete curb and gutter shall be installed on the outside edge of the storage area. 3. The storage area shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide to accommodate the truck storage without interference to the drive aisle. /3 FINANCIAL OBLIGATION — 3 -CU -38-11-97 Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Center Ind Park #10 There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $0 on the parcel for which the conditional use is requested. At this time, there are no pending assessments on the parcel for which the conditional use permit is requested Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are noted. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and the availability of the City's utility. The collection of this financial obligation is not a condition for the approval of the conditional use permit. The financial obligation will be collected at the time of connection to the City's utility system or a future public improvement project. Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount None $0 Location Map Nationwide Group Conditional Use Permit Case No. 03 -CU -38-11-97 City of Eagan Community Development Department /39, 800 Feet Zoning Map Current Zoning 1-1 Limited Industrial Nationwide Group Case No. 03 -CU -38-11-97 City of Kogan Community Dovoiopmont Dopartmant 1000 0 1000 Feet Comprehensive Pian Map IND IND Guide Plan Designation IND Industrial Nationwide Group Case No. 03 -CU -38-11-97 City of Eagan Community Development Department /9/ 77 1000 0 1000 Feet 1 NATIONWIDE GROUP 2415 East Franklin Avenue ♦ Minneapolis, MN (612) 338-3850 ♦ FAX (612) 338-4267 November 17, 1997 City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122-1897 RE: ACORN MINI STORAGE; 2935 LEXINGTON AVE; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Nationwide Group is developing the Acorn Mini Storage facility at the above address in Eagan. We are seeking the city's approval to park no more than four U -Haul vehicles on the site. It is my understanding that storing these vehicles requires the city granting a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to the City Code. Please find below brief description of our request and how we plan to treat the storage of the four moving trucks. Acorn Mini Storage is engaged in the business of storing personal goods for individuals and businesses. Persons storing their goods move their goods on their own behalf. Acorn does not move customer goods. Many times customers are moving and storing goods which requires the rental of trucks as provided by U -Haul or Ryder. These trucks can be rented from Acorn on an hourly or daily basis. When possible, we strongly prefer to have several (no more than four) rental trucks located on-site for immediate customer rental. Following is a description of existing conditions: 1) The mini storage building is currently under construction. We anticipate opening in January of 1998. 2) The property is zoned I-1 The property was platted in 1988 with the subdivision of Eagandale Center Industrial Park #10. Access to the site is provided from Lexington Avenue via a shared driveway with Knox Lumber. 3) The property is 14.29 -acres and is heavily landscaped with thick woodlands. These woodlands will shield the outside storage area from view. 4) We are asking for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the parking of rental trucks (U - Haul). These trucks are rented to persons seeking to move their goods to or from the mini storage facility. 5) The city's Comprehensive Plan shows the site as: IND, Limited Industrial. 6) The following uses, zoning and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Knox Lumber, Zoned I-1 (Limited Industrial), Guided IND (Limited Industrial) South - Homestead Village hotel, Zoned PD (Planned Development) Guided IND (Limited Industrial) East - Two residences, Zoned A (Agricultural), Guided IND (Limited Industrial) West - Highway I -35E 7) No trees or landscaping would be removed. Following is a brief description as to how we plan to address the rental truck storage area: 1) The rental truck storage area would be on the back (west side) of the property and would be visible from the street or the adjoining properties. This area is highlighted in yellow on the attached site plan. The outdoor storage (truck parking) area would be completely screened from the adjoining properties by the building and wooded areas. 2) The storage area would not encroach onto any setback, parking or landscaped area. 3) The storage area will not interfere with any pedestrian or vehicular movement. We have provided a blacktopped area so as to provide a parking area separate from the driveways. 4) The storage area will be surfaced with a bituminous (asphalt) covering. 5) The storage area will be secured with six-foot fence. Please fe to contact me at 338.3850 should you have any questions. Sinc EL TTLIEB Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — TRANSPORT 21 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve or deny an amendment to the existing Conditional Use Permits to allow leasing of trucks and outside storage of trucks by someone other than the property owner at 920 Aldrin Drive subject to the conditions recommended by the Advisory Planning Commission. FACTS ▪ In March 1997 the property owner, Wayne Hoovestol, was granted CUPs to allow sales, leasing and servicing of trucks and trailers and outside storage of up to 50 trucks at 920 Aldrin Drive. One of the conditions of the CUP stipulated that sales, leasing, and service only be done by the property owner. Transport 21 is requesting an amendment to the conditions of the existing CUPs to allow leasing and light service of trucks by someone other than the property owner and to also allow outside storage of an additional 20 trucks on this property. ▪ No changes are proposed to the original site plan, building, or landscaping. There appears to be adequate space to park the additional 20 trucks without interfering with Hoovestol's parking needs. At their regular meeting on December 18, 1997, the APC recommended approval of an amendment to the existing CUPs to allow leasing, light service, and outdoor storage of trucks by someone other than the property owner, subject to the conditions in the staff report. BACKGROUND/ATTACHMENTS ▪ Minutes of December 18, 1997 APC meeting, pages / ./ tl regr Staff report, pages /if 7 through f S 4S Page 8 December 18, 1997 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TRANSPORT 21, INC. Commission Chair Heyl opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding a Conditional Use Permit to allow leasing of trucks on property owned by Wayne Hoovestol located at 920 Aldrin Drive, in the SEA of Section 11. Planner Farnham introduced this item. Ms. Farnham highlighted the information presented in City staffs planning report dated December 10, 1997. Ms. Farnham noted the background and history, the surrounding uses and the existing conditions of the subject property. The applicant was present for questions and no members of the public addressed the Commission. Member Bakken stated that the use was appropriate for the area pursuant to the traffic study which was conducted by the City. Member Bakken moved, Member Burdorf seconded, a motion to recommend approval of an amendment to the existing Conditional Use Permit to allow leasing of trucks and outside storage of trucks by someone other than the property owner at 920 Aldrin Drive, in the SE1/4 of Section 11, subject to the following conditions: 1. This conditional use permit amendment allows leasing, service, and outside storage of up to 20 trucks by someone other than the property owner. This is in addition to the storage of 50 trucks approved for the property owner. 2. All repairs and maintenance (including washing) of trucks and trailers must occur inside the building. 3. All signage must meet the requirements of the side code (City Code Chapter 4). 4. All other conditions of the original CUPs for this property shall apply. 5. The conditional use permit amendment shall be recorded at Dakota County with documentation provided to the City. All voted in favor. PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: December 10, 1997 APPLICANT: Mitchell Miller (Transport 21) PROPERTY OWNER: Wayne Hoovestol REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 920 Aldrin Drive (Lot 4, Block 2, Eagandale Corporate Center) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: IND - Industrial ZONING: 1-1 — Light Industrial CASE: 11 -CU -37-11-97 HEARING DATE: Dec. 18, 1997 PREPARED BY: Julie Farnham SUMMARY OF REOUEST Transport 21, Inc. is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow leasing of trucks on property owned by Wayne Hoovestol located at 920 Aldrin Drive, in the SE 1/4 of Section 11. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivisions 4C and 4D provide the following. Subdivision 4C states that the Planning Commission shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall issue such conditional use permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: A. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. B. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and City Code provisions. C. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. D. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools. / Y7 Planning Report — Transport 21 December 18, 1997 Page 2 E. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be hazardous or detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. F. Will have vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public streets. G. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Subdivision 4D, Conditionsstates that in reviewing applications of conditional use permits, the Planning Commission and the Council may attach whatever reasonable conditions they deem necessary to mitigate anticipated adverse impacts associated with these uses, to protect the value of other property within the district, and to achieve the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. In all cases in which conditional uses are granted, the Council shall require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as proof that the conditions stipulated in connection therewith are being and will be complied with. BACKGROUND/HISTORY In March 1997, Wayne Hoovestol was granted a Conditional Use Permit to allow sales, leasing and servicing of trucks and trailers on his property (920 Aldrin Drive) and to allow outside storage of 50 trucks. The conditions of the CUP for sales and service of trucks and trailers are as follows: 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded at Dakota County with documentation provided by to the City. 2. All repairs of vehicles must occur inside the building. 3. Sales and service is only allowed for vehicles owned or leased by the property owner. No retail sales or service is allowed. The conditions of the CUP for outside storage include: 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded at Dakota County with documentation provided to the City. 2. The exterior building materials shall conform to the City's Exterior Architectural Design Standards. 3. The developer shall revise the storm drainage plan to provide catch basin spacing and storm sewer pipe in accordance with the City standard for one catch basin and accompanying storm sewer per every 1.2 areas of drainage area. /41 r Planning Report — Transport 21 December 18, 1997 Page 3 4. The developer shall install a fire hydrant near the northeast corner of the proposed building to provide proper hydrant spacing for fire protection to the entire building. 5. All runoff from the site shall be directed to Pond EP -2.1 in accordance with the approved grading and utility plan for the Eagandale Corporate Center. 6. Mitigation for filling of the jurisdictional wetland within this parcel shall be carried out as per the wetland mitigation plan approved for Eagandale Corporate Center. Replacement of the wetland as per this plan must occur prior to or concurrent with the filling of the wetland. 7. The developer shall submit a photometric lighting plan indicating light levels at the property perimeter prior to issuance of a building permit. Many of these conditions were met during construction of the building. However, the conditions must be amended to allow the applicant (Transport 21) to lease and store additional trucks on this property. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site contains a one-story building, a 60 -stall parking lot for employees and visitors on the north side of the building and space to park 40-50 trucks on the side and rear of the building. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Industrial; zoned I-1, guided IND South - Industrial; zoned I-1; guided IND East - Industrial; zoned I-1; guided IND West - Industrial; zoned I-1; guided IND EVALUATION OF REQUEST Proposed Use - This request is essentially an amendment to the conditions of the existing CUP to allow leasing and service of trucks on the property by someone other than the fee owner. Transport 21 will be the primary leasing company, but they have two small leasing company affiliates that will also operate out of this location — Roseau Transport, Inc. and Trans Eagan, Inc. In addition, the original CUP allowed outside storage of up to 50 trucks on this property. This CUP would allow for an additional 20 trucks to be parked on this property. Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The proposed leasing use is compatible with the approved CUP and should be compatible with surrounding uses; all of which are industrial. Planning Report — Transport 21 December 18, 1997 Page 4 Site Plan - No changes are proposed to the original site plan approved for Hoovestol Inc. Transport 21 is proposing to use 5,300 s.f of the existing 18,244 s.f. building. This will include 2,600 s.f of office and 2,700 s.f. for truck cleaning and light service (i.e. replace minor parts). They are proposing to park a maximum of 20 trucks on the east side of the building. There appears to be adequate space to park these additional trucks on site without interfering with the truck parking proposed for Hoovestol's operation, which utilizes truck parking on the south (rear), and west sides of the building. Landscaping — No changes are proposed to the original landscape plan approved for Hoovestol, Inc. Access/Street Design - Access to the property is provided from Aldrin Drive. Signage — Transport 21 is proposing to share signage with Hoovestol. Hoovestol, Inc. had proposed a wall sign that was substantially smaller than allowed by code. That sign has not been erected yet. No monument sign was proposed, but code allows one per lot. All signage will be subject to the requirements of the sign ordinance (City Code Chapter 4). SUMMARY/CONCLUSION Transport 21, Inc. is proposing to lease and store up to 20 trucks on the Hoovestol, Inc. property at 920 Aldrin Drive. In March 1997, Hoovestol received CUPs for outdoor storage of up to 50 trucks and to allow sales, leasing and service of trucks owned or leased by the property owner. The requested CUP would amend the existing CUPs to allow outside storage of an additional 20 trucks and leasing of trucks by someone other than the property owner. No changes will be made to the site plan, landscaping, or building to accommodate the proposed use. Any additional signage proposed will be subject to the requirements of the City sign code. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval or denial of an amendment to the existing Conditional Use Permits to allow leasing of trucks and outside storage of trucks by someone other than the property owner at 920 Aldrin Drive, in the SE 1/4 of Section 11, subject to the following conditions: 1. This conditional use permit amendment allows leasing, service, and outside storage of up to 20 trucks by someone other than the property owner. This is in addition to the storage of 50 trucks approved for the property owner. 2. All repairs and maintenance (including washing) of trucks and trailers must occur inside building. 3. All signage must meet the requirements of the sign code (City Code Chapter 4). Planning Report — Transport 21 December 18, 1997 Page 5 4. All other conditions of the original CUPs for this property shall apply. 5. The conditional use permit amendment shall be recorded at Dakota County with documentation provided to the City. s/ FINANCIAL OBLIGATION — 11 -CU -37-11-97 Lot 4, Block 2, Eagandale Corporate Center There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $25,913 on the parcel for which the conditional use is requested. At this time, there are pending assessments in the amount of $116,032 on the parcel for which the conditional use permit is requested. Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are noted. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and the availability of the City's utility. The collection of this financial obligation is not a condition for the approval of the conditional use permit. The financial obligation will be collected at the time of connection to the City's utility system or a future public improvement project. Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount None $0 Location Map rW a 571 .♦ M OE r• • misAmmi .. :1111111mm 1111111 1 1 1 ub'ect Site it Y. MO b 1Iiurc 1111.' 44.‘‘. AMNIA 40.0h,. 44 1 1110 MN ■ MEM 1 :pit! t t► griDe • ����Pik1I ��� 1.■�Oft1V4&41 . tirtir ji imu rilatiIIi :rem :1 � �: ,,��/11 *!Fk 14,1/ `1 / Transport 21, Inc. 920 Aldrin Dr, Conditional Use Permit Case No. 11 -CU -37-11-97 City of Eagan Community Development Department /53 0 800 Feet E Comprehensive Plan Map IND IND IND d 0 IND Iv PF opirimipm ■1, Irm` milbou WEEIN 411 IND IND IND Guide Plan Designation IND Industrial Transport 21, Inc. Case No. 11 -CU -37-11-97 City of Eagan Community Development Department 1000 0 1000 Feet Zoning Map Current Zoning 1-1 Limited Industrial Transport 219 Inc. Case No. 11 -CU -37-11-97 City of. Eagan Community Development Department /sr 3 1000 0 1000 Feet /64 $ •-• NEW FACLITY FOR • • • HOOVFR1012'r • ; • moots ' • : If PePis �i Z sxEi 011h. ;a,; I r ONIINVld 911211 -IS N O O P i 4 N N 4 U 4- O a „ 4_ -' U C' i ms U n t C K m ` ' 1 R' 2. nee •.noI poo.600 a , N C n • ),III Hydron ion Pine N Oak 'a E 2 Junipsms Cninn.'1 Glsaasid 16. insr V 1.4i�41p11iyY1y0* 1. Hydronpon arbor. 'Mnabas' Pins Nigro Onerous bicolor _ slli I I. a•`1 a.• E: P R: i. o P • m o, ^• • 6. o N`... 2.. 1 0 ; V U N N P N P i P L• osin"s . 2 22E ARE- ,�� $ _' FIflY! ' > a „ 4_ 5 o V 1.4i�41p11iyY1y0* E. -' _ slli I o N`... 2.. P'.2"..r: Ot err eri,; Aillt:1' i II ,e li 41, 90.4 4.15 •I w /I/ —.infw-' ,....=s- -5i NEW FACILITY FOR: HOOVESTOL, INC. EAGAN, MN z.a.,44,123528 HCr6P5 fittiN a i LANDSCAPE PLA\ lup lllll lllllllllll 11111 • PEW FACLJTY FOR HOOVESTOL, FA( N, t*P4S9OTA 4D 1 ri flO 11'0 --q1-- igo I ; ; ; ; R I 1 g i 1 1 I.. 01 A ,k4 A A s A •A A z pi iFt \ / 1 0 II -0 gi CD 0 .\ /1 z LJ . > .. , 7 R • W-WFACLRYFOR , HOOVESTOL INC . F,,,,AM “...nT.,..NTA . 7 • 6..... . 4,,..• A,.. m.. • .. Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting E. REQUEST BY CAPONI ART PARK TO SUPPORT PROPOSED LEGISLATION GRANTING SPECIAL TAX & SPECIAL ASSESSMENT TREATMENT OF THE 60 ACRE TRACT OF PROPERTY (&,,1215 DIFFLEY ROAD ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve or deny support of proposed legislation to be presented to the Minnesota State Legislature which would continue "Green Acres" treatment for the 60 acre tract of property at 1215 Diffley Road known as the Caponi Art Park for special assessment purposes for five years, which would provide for taxation on the property under an agricultural classification for five years, and which would provide that if the property or any portion of it were during the five year period conveyed to anyone other than Ms. Caponi, a child of Mr. Caponi or a non-profit corporation, all deferred special assessments would be payable with interest and the taxing districts would "recapture" the tax differential between the agricultural classification and the appropriate classification otherwise assignable to the property. FACTS: The City has received a request from Anthony and Cheryl Caponi and also from David J. Kennedy, President of the Caponi Art Park Board of Directors, for the City's support of proposed State legislation granting special tax and special assessment treatment to the property currently known as the Caponi Art Park. Senator Deanna Wiener is preparing the proposed legislation and will introduce it in the 1998 Legislative Session. The Caponis are requesting a letter or resolution of support for the legislation from the City. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached on pages /61 through JO/ are copies of a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Caponi and also a letter from David J. Kennedy, President of the Caponi Art Park Board of Directors. /6a Anthony Caponi • 1215 Diffley Road • Eagan, MN 55123 December 23, 1997 Mayor Thomas Egan and Memeber of the City Council City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mayor Egan and Memeber of the City Council, We respectfully request the opportunity to appear before the City Council at the earliest possible date to ask the governing body for its support of proposed state legislation granting special tax and special assessment treatment to our 60 -acre tract of property at 1215 Diffley Road in Eagan, known as Caponi Art Park and Learning Center. The proposed legislation, as prepared by Senator Deanna Wiener after consultation with Mayor Tom Egan and County Commissioner Patrice Bataglia, would: 1. Continue "green acres" treatment for the property for special assessment purposes for five years. 2. Provide for taxation on the property under an agricultural classification for five years. 3. Provide that if the property or any portion of it were, during that five-year period, conveyed to anyone other than Ms. Caponi, a child of Mr. Caponi or a nonprofit corporation, all deferred special assessments would be payable with interest and the taxing districts would "recapture" the tax differential between the agricultural classification and the appropriate classification otherwise assignable to the property. The Caponi Art Park, a nonprofit corporation qualified as a charitable organization under section 501(c)(3) of the internal Revenue Code has been reorganized and is embarked on an ambitious program to develop the park as a unique artistic and cultural facility over the next five years. Its goal is to acquire all or a significant portion of the property for that purpose, and it expects in the interim to continue to offer and enhance the high quality cultural activities for which the Park is known. You have received a letter from the corporation's president, David J. Kennedy, describing the corporation's board of director's goals for the Park and its support for the proposed legislation. I think you are well aware of our long efforts to make the Park a reality, and we sincerely appreciate the assistance and support of the various taxing districts and governmental officials in our undertaking. We think, now, with the energy, talent and enthusiasm of the Park's board of directors and consultants (all of whom, by the way, are donating their time and abilities), the goal of all those efforts can be achieved - the creation of a unique cultural and artistic facility for the city, the county, the school district, the metropolitan region and the state. We think the passage of the proposed legislation is essential for that to happen, and we ask for your support. We are aware that what we ask is special treatment for tax purpose, but we want you to know it is not sought for personal gain. Our property is very valuable and we could achieve that gain quite simply by selling it. Our goal is the creation and continuance of this unique facility - a personal goal for over 20 years - and we think it doubtful that that can occur unless the proposed legislation is enacted. /6/ Anthony Caponi December 23, 1997 Page 2 A bill draft of the legislation has been prepared and is undergoing some technical revisions. Senator Wiener and Representatives Tim Pawlenty and Tim Commers will be presenting it during the 1998 legislative session. Senator Wiener has expressed her desire to present the bill early in the session and for this reason we are requesting a letter or resolution of support from the City. We'll be happy to appear before the City Council to discuss the request in whatever detail necessary. Sincerely, Anthony Caponi Cheryl`Caponi cc: Senator Deanna Wiener Representative Tim Commers Representative Tim Pawlenty Keith Carlson, State Tax Committee, staff David Kennedy CAPON! ART PARK AND LEARNING CENTER 1215 DIffley Road • Eagan, MN 55123 . 612.454.433E December 23, 1997 Mayor Thomas Egan and Members of the City Council City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mayor Egan and Members of the City Council: 1 am the president of Caponi Art Park, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, qualified as a charitable organization under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. We understand that Anthony and Cheryl Caponi will be asking the city council to endorse in principle proposed legislation that will give favorable property tax and special assessment treatment to the 60 -acre tract of property at 1215 biffley Road, known as the Caponi Art Pack and Learning Center. The proposed legislation would: 1. Continue "green acres" treatment of the property for special assessment purposes for five years. 2. Provide for taxation of the property under an agricultural classification for five years. 3. Provide that if the property or any portion of it were, during that five-year period. conveyed to anyotzc other than Mr. Caponi's spouse, a child or a nonprofit corporation, all deferred special assessments would be payable with interest and the taxing districts would "recapture" the tax differential between the agricultural classification and the appropriate classification otherwise assignable to the property. Our nonprofit corporation is embarked on an ambitious program to develop the Park as a unique artistic and cultural facility over the next five years. Our hope and expectation is to be able to acquire all or a significant portion of the property for that purpose. and we expect to continue to offer during that time in cooperation with the Caponis the high quality cultural activities for which the Patk is known. Our board of directors, and thyself personally, are convinced that unless the favorable tax treatment described above is granted. it will probably not be possible for the Park's development to become a reality. On behalf of the board of directors of the Caponi Art Park. let me respectfully request your favorable support of the concepts embodied in the legislation. We think its passage will make possible the continuation of a unique cultural facility for the city, the county, the school district. DQ}t135499 1E495-33 899-d 20/90'd 988-1 Ol£82££Zl9 AL3 N3AYa9 V 43NN3N-W ad IZ£:ll 18 -£Z -36o Mayor Thomas Egan and Members of the City Council December 23, 1997 Page 2 the metropolitan region and the state. You can be assured that all of our efforts will be directed toward that goal. 1 will be happy to appear before the city council in support of the legislation and to respond to any questions you may have about the corporation and its goals and activities. Yours truly, CAPONt By CC: Da J. Kennedy Its President Anthony arid Cheryl. Caponi Board of Directors JJR135t99 1064Q5-33 899-i 10/10'd 988-1 0188188219 /'77' N3A49 4 A03NW -wo) 1129:11 18-£8-000 Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting F. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT — CHAPTER 61 INDIVIDUAL COMPANIONSHIP/ESCORT SERVICES PROVIDER LICENSING ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve or deny an ordinance amendment to Chapter 6, Individual Companionship/Escort Services Provider Licensing. FACTS: • This ordinance amendment provides for the licensing of companionship/escort services providers. • Adult companionship or escort services establishments or businesses are to be licensed as an adult use per the ordinance approved on December 16, 1997. ATTACHMENTS: • Ordinance amendment on pages /6 d through /6C /6S ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER SIX ENTITLED "OTHER BUSINESS REGULATION AND LICENSING" BY ADDING SECTION 6.50 REGARDING INDIVIDUAL COMPANIONSHIP/ESCORT SERVICES PROVIDER LICENSE; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 6.99. The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter 6 is hereby amended by adding Section 6.50, to read as follows: Sec. 6.50. Adult Companionship/Escort Services Provider License. Subd 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to prescribe licensing requirements for escort services operating with the City in order to prevent criminal activity and provide for the health and welfare of citizens. Subd. 2. Findings of the City Council. The City Council of the City of Eagan finds that escort services can be used as fronts for prostitution and other criminal activity including but not limited to prostitution, thereby taxing City law-enforcement resources. The Council finds that escort services used as fronts for illegal sexual activity can also increase the risk of the spread of sexually transmitted diseased including but not limited to Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) for which currently there is no cure. Subd. 3. Definitions. The following words and terms when used in this Section shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: Escort shall mean any individual hired for the purpose of accompanying another to or about social affairs, entertainments, or places of amusement, or at any place of public resort, or within any private quarters for compensation or consideration of any kind. Escort Service shall mean any individual having a source of income or compensation derived from providing the services of an escort, or placement of an escort with a customer. Within the City - includes physical presence as well as telephone referrals such as phone -a -massage operations in which the business premises, although not actually located within the City, serves as a point of assignment of employees who respond to requests for services from within the City. Subd. 4. License required. It is unlawful for any person to provide, or to advertise for or offer to provide, escort services, whether individually or as an agent of or for an adult /66 companionship establishment or business, within the City without first obtaining a license therefor from the City. For purposes of this Section, the phrase "for a fee" shall mean to sell, trade or barter the companionship/escort services, for goods or services, which need not be simultaneously exchanged. Subd 5. License application. All applications for a license hereunder shall be accompanied by a medical certificate from a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of Minnesota, stating that the applicant has no communicable disease. All initial applications shall be accompanied by the license fee and the nonrefundable investigation fee. All initial applications shall also be accompanied by front and side view photographs. Applications shall be on a form provided by the City and shall contain all requested information set forth therein as the City may require. All applicants shall be at least 21 years of age. Subd. 6. Restrictions and regulations. A. Whenever companionship/escort services are provided, it shall be required by the licensee that the person who is receiving the services shall have his/her buttocks, anus, breasts and/or genitals covered with appropriate nontransparent covering. B. The licensee, while providing companionship/escort services, shall at all times have his/her buttocks, anus, breasts and/or genitals covered with an appropriate nontransparent covering. C. The licensee shall comply with any and all amendments to this Chapter and failure to do so shall be grounds for revocation of any license issued hereunder. D. The licensee shall not engage in, or permit any customer to engage in, fondling, caressing or specific sexual activities between the licensee and the customer, or between the licensee and any other third party, or between any other third parties. For purposes of this paragraph, the term "specific sexual activities" shall mean as the term is defined in the adult establishment regulations in this Chapter. E. No companionship/escort services shall be provided during the hours of 1:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. F. The licensee shall not provide any companionship/escort services to any person under the age of 21 years. For purposes of this paragraph, it is the licensee's burden to obtain a customer's proof of age which may be established only by one of the following: 1. A valid driver's license or identification card issued by Minnesota, another state, or a province of Canada, and including the photograph /6? and date of birth of the licensed person; 2. A valid military identification card issued by the United States Department of Defense; or 3. In the case of a foreign national, from a nation other than Canada, by a valid passport. SubcL 7. License and investigation fees. The annual license fee and the applicant's investigation fee for a license hereunder shall be determined by city council resolution. The initial license fee shall be prorated if the application is submitted for a license issuance before December 31st. Subd. 8. Application process and requirements. The provisions of the adult establishment regulations in Section 6.49 of this Code governing application, execution and verification of information; application consideration; persons eligible for a license; renewal license application; and restrictions regarding license transfer shall be incorporated herein and applicable to a license issued hereunder. Subcl 9. License and criminal violations - suspension and revocation. The provisions in the adult establishment regulations in Section 6.49 of this Code shall be incorporated herein and applicable to a license issued hereunder. Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including 'Penalty for Violation' and Section 6.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication according to law. ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: E. J. VanOverbeke By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Clerk Its: Mayor Date Ordinance Adopted: Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: /6 Agenda Information Memo January 6, 1998 Eagan City Council Meeting G. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT — CHAPTER 10, POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOG ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve or deny an ordinance amendment to Chapter 10, Potentially Dangerous and Dangerous Dog. FACTS: • In August of 1997, the City Council directed the preparation of an ordinance amendment authorizing the City Administrator to appoint a City staff member as the Administrative Hearing Officer for dangerous dog appeal hearings. • The proposed amendment clearly provides for an appeal process of a dangerous dog declaration. • The proposed amendment also provides a definition of "potentially dangerous dog" as the term is defined in the State statutory counterpart, Section 347.50. ATTACHMENTS: • Ordinance amendment on paged'70 through /29 /'9 ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER TEN ENTITLED "PUBLIC PROTECTION, CRIMES AND OFFENSES" BY AMENDING SECTION 10.11 REGARDING POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOG; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 10.99. The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter 10 is hereby amending by changing Section 10.11, Subd. 1, by adding the following definitions, to read as follows and to be alphabetically incorporated therein: Business Day: A day during which the City Hall is open to the public. Hearing Officer: The Eagan City Administrator, or any other City employee, as duly appointed by the Eagan City Administrator. Potentially Dangerous Dog: Any dog that has: (1) When unprovoked, inflicts bites on a human or domestic animal on public or private property., (2) When unprovoked, chases or approaches a person upon the streets, sidewalks or any public property in an apparent attitude of attack; or (3) Has a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals. Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 10 is hereby amended by changing Section 10.11, Subd. 7, to read as follows: Subd. 7. Potentially Dangerous and Dangerous Dogs. A. Minnesota Statutes, Sections 347.50 - 347.55, Adopted by Reference. Exce . t as otherwise s rovided in this Cha ter the re ulato and procedural provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 347.50 - 347.55 (commonly referred to as the dangerous dog regulations), as amended through Laws 1997, are / %D hereby incorporated herein and adopted by reference, including the penalty provisions thereof. B. Declaration of Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog. A city police officer, community service officer or animal control officer may declare a dog to be potentially dangerous or dangerous when the officer has probable cause to believe that the dog is potentially dangerous or dangerous as defined herein. A written notice declaring the dog potentially dangerous or dangerous shall be personally served upon the owner of the dog. The officer shall provide a copy of the notice served upon the dog owner, along with an affidavit of service, to the City Clerk. For purposes of a notice declaring a dog dangerous, the notice must include a copy of the provisions of this Section and Minnesota Statutes Sections 347.50 - 347.55 and a form, with instructions, to request an appeal of the declaration of the owner's dog as dangerous. C. Appeal. Any owner of a dog declared dangerous may appeal by serving upon the City Clerk, within three (3) business days of receipt of the notice declaring the dog dangerous, inclusive of the date the notice is received, a written notice of appeal. The appeal hearing shall be heard by the hearing officer within fourteen (14) days of the date the declaration notice is served upon the dog owner. The appeal hearing shall be conducted in an informal manner and the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules of Evidence shall not be strictly applied. The hearing need not be transcribed, but may be transcribed at the sole expense of the party who requests transcription. After considering all evidence submitted, the hearing officer shall make written findings of fact and conclusions on the issue of whether the dog is a dangerous dog within five (5) business days of the date of appeal hearing. The findings and conclusions shall be served upon the owner by U.S. mail, within the five-day time period. A owner's ri ht to a S1 eal or otherwise contest a dan erous do declaration shall be deemed waived if the owner fails to serve a written request for appeal as required herein or fails to appear at the scheduled appeal hearing date. D. Compliance With Dangerous Dog Regulations. Immediately upon receipt of the notice declaring the dog dangerous, the owner shall confine the dog in a proper enclosure as defined in Minn. Stat. 347.50. If no timely appeal is / 7/ received by the City Clerk or the appeal hearing officer finds the owner's dog is dangerous, the owner shall comply with the requirements of this Section, the provisions of Minn. Stat. §347.50 to 347.55, and the following: A, (1) County Registration required. It is unlawful to own or keep a dangerous dog within the City unless such dog is duly registered with the county auditor's office. 13, (2) Tag Required. It is unlawful for the owner of any dangerous dog to own or keep such dog within the City, unless a standardized, easily identifiable tag identifying the dog as dangerous and containing the uniform dangerous dog symbol is affixed to the dog's collar at all times. G: (3) Enclosure and muzzling required It is unlawful for the owner of any dangerous dog, while on the owner's property, to have such a dog outside a proper enclosure unless such dog is muzzled, as to prevent the dog from biting any person or animal but not injurious to the dog, and restrained by a substantial chain or leash and under the physical restraint of a responsible person. For purposes of this provision, "proper enclosure" means securely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the dog from escaping and providing protection from the elements for the dog. D (4) Destruction of dangerous dog. In the event that a dangerous dog appears to be an immediate danger to any persons or property, a police officer, animal control officer, ear, or other employee or agent of the city assisting a police officer or animal control officer is hereby authorized to summarily destroy such animal. El (5) Nonapplication to police dogs. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to any dangerous dog used by law enforcement officials for public work. Section 3. Eagan City Code Chapter 10 is amended by changing Section 10.11, Subd. 8, to read as follows: Subd. 8. Disposition of certain animals. A. Generally. The eetmeil hearing officer is authorized to order the destruction or other disposition of any animal upon a finding that the f lio.. inn: /9� (1) any dog or cat that The dog has habitually destroyed property or habitually trespassed in a damaging manner on the property of persons other than the owner; (2) any The animal has been declared dangerous, deg the owner's right to appeal under this Section has been exhausted or expired and the owner has failed to comply with the provisions of this Section or Minn. Stat. §347.50 through 347.55; or (3) any -The animal that habitually barks, cries, whimpers, howls, whines, or emits any other loud or unusual noises. In the event the eenneil hearing officer its his/her authority under this subparagraph, a sworn complaint of any person that any one of the foregoing facts exist may be brought before a district court judge in this county. Said judge shall issue a summons directed to the owner or person having possession of said animal commanding such person to appear before said judge to show cause why said animal should not be seized and killed or otherwise disposed of by the poundmaster or any police officer or animal warden control officer. Such summons shall be returnable not more than five days from the date thereof and shall be served at least three days before the time of appearance mentioned therein. Upon such hearing and fmding of the facts true as complained of, the judge may either order the animal killed or order the owner to remove it from the city or may order it confined to a designated place or may order its sale or other disposition as herein provided for the impounded animals. B. Notice and hearing. The council hearing officer, after having been advised of the existence of such animal as defined in subparagraph A of this subdivision and having decided to retain its authority under this subdivision, shall proceed as follows: 1. The owner of the offending animal shall be notified in writing as to the reasons the animal is subjected to disposition under this subdivision and, where applicable, the dates, times, and places of animals and person bitten, attacked, injured or disfigured or of other violations and shall be given ten days to request a hearing for determination as to the disposition of the animal. If the owner does not request a hearing within ten days of the notice, the council shall make an appropriate order including destruction or other proper disposition of the animal. The owner shall immediately make the animal available to the animal control officer for the ordered disposition. 2. If the owner requests a hearing for determination as to the disposition of the animal, the hearing shall be held before the council hearing officer at a date not more than three weeks after demand for the hearing. The records of the animal control officer shall be admissible for consideration without further foundation. After considering all evidence, the council hearing officer shall make an appropriate order within 30 days of hearing, including destruction or other proper disposition of the animal. The owner shall immediately make the animal available to the animal control officer for the ordered disposition. 3. The council hearing officer may apply to the district court of the county for subpoenas for hearings under item 2, above. C. Concealing of animals. It is unlawful for any person to harbor, hide or conceal an animal which has been ordered into custody for destruction or other proper disposition. Section 4. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including 'Penalty for Violation' and Section 10.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication according to law. ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: E. J. VanOverbeke By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Clerk Its: Mayor Date Ordinance Adopted: Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: Date of Advisory Planning Commission Hearing: /7y John & Julie Young 16275 Hudson Ave. Lakeville, Mn. 55044 12-31-97 Mayor and City Council Members City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Mn. 55122 RE: Essential Services Structure 4870 Biscayne, Ave. Eagan, Mn. 55122 Dear Mayor, Council Members: There will eventually be eight wireless telecommunication licenses operating in the Twin Cities. (See St. Paul Press article). We have discovered a 14 mile wide corridor that 50% of the antenna's are being located in the City. (See Map) 1. We predict this corridor will eventually have a minimum of 30 antennalocations. 2. By next summer the number of antenna locations within the corridor will have gone from 1 to 12 in a 22 year period. ( A dramatic increase due to deregulation). 3. We also predict that in the next 42 months, that an additional 14 antenna locations will be placed within this corridor. This will bring the total to approx. 24 antenna locations within the corridor. ( This is only 4 new antenna locations per year in the corridor that we don't know about currently). 4. In the last 6 months we have observed interest in 4 new locations within the corridor. A. Co -location at Hwy 13 & Diffley Road B. The Public Facilty Application C. Lexington Ave. & Wilderness Run Search Area D. S.E. Corner of Eagan Search Area Three questions come to our minds ? 1. Why is our other property the only operational co -location site in the City on private property ? 2. How can the City encourage co -locations so a FIELD OF ANTENNA'S is not created ? 3. Why is it now we are prevented from doing another co -location site, no telecommunications company will even talk to us, with out us having a permit first. Sin5rely, L/' John oun a a 03 1 fl a a 2 2 a a H 3 g 2. .5 0 3 i n S 0. x 3 a 3 x x a 3 x e a rm4i b77 flairir l!ief= a� Iins :". ilE"uo mea [iv m u .�,' :o� nYp��iu � l Ail. e�'(�I ®0'� fit f6 �l•`�'� ��i:� •® r a . 9111104411:4112w4® con;�,y g ®m®r 61-11 41 Pin �Ul= 1111111EIidEIll uunu�nuyb ,11 11 I 4A THE DENVER BUSINESS JOURNAL MARCH 21-27, 1997 PSCo sees demand soar for antenna tower space By GIHAH ZEIGER Business. Journal Staff Reporter Public Service Company of Colorado anticipated some demand from wireless carriers for antenna space on its utility towers as new entrants began building out their communications networks, but noth- ing like what they got. "We didn't quite expect the volume or interest," said Shawn Hill, acting manager of technical services for PSCo. "These guys will do any and everything to get up and running," Every major wireless company planning to serve metro Denver has approached the utility company, and most have signed lease agreements. PSCo has already installed 15 to 20 antennas for new per- sonal communications services (PCS) companies, and 50 locations are in various stages of progress, Hill said, It's show time for PCS, and placing antennas is key to their survival. Sprint PCS expects to begin offering service lat- er this month. VoiceStream PCS, owned by Western Wireless, plans to roll out sometime during the first half of the year, and U S West's PCS services could be ready by summer. PCS, the next generation of digital wire- less communications, is a line -of -sight technology, which means cells have to be higher than surrounding trees and rooftops. "You have to have them [antennas] in certain places or calls drop or fade," said Alan Woydziak, real estate manager of AT&T Wireless of Colorado. "The priori- ty for all of us (in the wireless business] is to put them on existing structures, at the height necessary to connect the network." The power towers and poles owned by the electric utility are the perfect solution — they're everywhere, they're big, and they're tall. "It's our first choice," said Tom Schilling, spokesman for VoiceStream PCS, one of the new providers expecting to begin offering service by July, Dealing with a single site owner speeds up the installation process, cuts costs, since the provider doesn't have to build a site, and often helps overcome community objections, "That's why PSCo works so well," Schilling said. "It lets us blend into the existing community." "They already have poles and towers in the community," said Woydziak. "There's no additional impact from adding our facilities." Some would disagree. Hanging more antennas — large panels measuring about 4 feet by 8 inches — on a single tower cre- ates visual clutter that annoys residents andraises red flags about property values. Over the last 15 years, some 22,000 antenna sites have been built nationwide as cellular phones and paging services spread. But over the next few years, an additional 100,000 sites will be erected to accommodate PCS, according to a survey by the Illinois Superconductor Corp A deniiridTorsites increases, local com- munities have dug in their heels. Munici- palities from Lakewood and Louisville to Denver have imposed moratoria while they sort out the zoning implications. Local governments have a limited amount of leeway over tower sites. Provi- sions in the 1996 Telecommunications Act restrict them to using their zoning powers A cluster of antennae crowds the top of thla tower near City Park, "We think we do our customers and the environment a favor by leasing space on them and not putting up new towers." — Shawn Hill Public Service Company of Colorado to control growth and accommodate com- munity concerns, but they cannot ban them outright, Among the most popular solutions for communities is to require competing wireless providers to share space on existing towers. That's created a mini -boom for PSCo, which has hundreds of towers. It's not a big money-maker in a S2 billion in rev- enue utility, but it is a way to leverage existing assets, Hill said. Over the years, PSCo has evolved an elaborate infrastructure of transmission and communications towers, Transmission tow- ers — the huge four-sided lattice structures that carry large electrical lines — can sup- port several antennas, and a number of them host antennas from a half-dozen dif- ferent carriers, Communications towers, often single poles up to 300 feet tall, were built to handle PSCo's own microwave and paging and mobile phone antennas. Space permitting, they are also sites for third - party antennas, which sprout like big rect- angular ears at the 70- to 90 -foot level. One communication tower, at C-470 and Colorado Boulevard, supports anten- nas from AT&T, U S West and Nextel (formerly OneComm), as well as Sprint PCS and VoiceStream PCS. Most of the wireless providers want sites in the same geographical locations. Demand for sites in downtown Denver and at the Denver Tech Center is especially high, Hill said. Downtown, the sites are mainly on rooftops, but they're tricky. Interference from skyscrapers, plus the overlap that occurs if competing cells are too close together, makes them potential "trouble spots," he said. And, everyone wants sites along the highway corridors — 1-70, 1-25, U.S. 36. "We have existing structures," said Hill. "We think we do our customers and the environment a favor by leasing space on them and not putting up new towers," SAINT PAUL PIONEER PRESS INSIDE TECH Telecommunications 7 The wireless war will just get hotter in 1998. Wireless air time rates will probably drop 10 percent to 15 per- cent on average, expects Yankee Group analyst Mark Lowenstein. Thirty to 40 percent of new subscribers will opt for digital Wireless service, which generally offers .more security and features than analog service, he forecasts. Competition is what -will drive prices down, .of course. Three providers Sprint PCS, Aerial Communications and Nextel — entered the Twin Cites market in 1997, ending the duopoly long en)oyed by AirTouch and AT&T Wireless. In 1998, US West will launch its wire e"�`I ss service. Two other. firms — NextWave Communications of San Diego and Northcoast Operating Co. of Syosset, New York — have licens- es to operate wireless phone net- works in. the Twin Cities. But it's unclear if they'll try a 1998 launch. The largely phony war between Cell -phone competition incumbent local phone service will get hotter, so providers, like US West, and their expect some deals. challengers, including the long-dis- • tame providers, may just drag on. Each side wants to best position itself for battle. And each wants to weaken their opponents as I much as possible at the outset. "It's sort of a .stand-off now," says Yankee Group telecommunications analyst Boyd Peterson. "The RBOCs (Regional Bell Operating ; Companies) are not going to give up one iota more than they have to." The local phone service competition that : exists will be primarily for densely packed busi- ness markets, like downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul and the 494 strip. . Some challengers are building impressive local phone networks around the country, he says. But even with a possible doubling of their cus- tomer bases this year, they'd only have 4 per- cent of the nation's phone lines, says Peterson.