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.