Loading...
04/29/1997 - City Council SpecialSPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY APRIL 29,1997 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM, MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING I. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION U. VISITORS TO BE HEARD III. ROTARY CLUB AMPHITHEATER PROPOSAL IV. DISCUSSION RE: TEEN CENTER V. LOST SPUR GOLF PROGRAMS VI. FIRE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING REVISIONS VII. TRUCKING STUDY/EDC AND APC FINDINGS VIII. OFF-STREET PARKING AND OUTDOOR STORAGE IX. OTHER BUSINESS X. ADJOURNMENT TO: FROM: DATE: MEMO city of eagan HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES APRIL 25, 1997 SUBJECT: SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING/APRIL 29, 1997 A Special City Council meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, April 29, 1997, beginning at 5:00 p.m. in the 2' floor Conference Rooms at the Municipal Center building. The following items were scheduled for discussion: ROTARY CLUB AMPHITHEATER PROPOSAL The Eagan Rotary Club in its ten years of existence has been involved in various community projects. One of the first projects was a collaboration with the City to restore and update the original Town Hall building. The Rotary Club provided supplies and sweat equity to restore and repaint the outside of the building. As a means of celebration, the Club held one of its noon meetings in the Old Town Hall building and enjoyed a presentation by City Councilmember Wachter on the history of the community. Another project involved a funding contribution for the handicapped accessible playground equipment that was installed in Blackhawk Park. The Rotary Club members also provided sweat equity and assisted the Parks & Recreation Department in assembling the equipment. In addition to these projects and other community involvement, the Rotary has adopted a vision for an amphitheater. The Club agreed that certain funding from each of the Annual Art Galas should be set aside and earmarked for an amphitheater. A committee was formed, consisting of Rotary Club members, to tour amphitheater facilities around the Twin Cities and proceed to formalize the vision for the Eagan community. A brief VCR tape that tells about Eagan Rotary Club and the Amphitheater project was prepared and shared with each member of the City Council. The Eagan Rotary Club Amphitheater task force is at a point in their process that a presentation, discussion and reaction by the City Council is necessary before any additional planning can continue on the project. For a copy of the information that was previously shared with the City Council, minus the VCR tape, refer to pages _& through $. DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide direction to the Eagan Rotary Club on location, scope of the proposed Amphitheater and funding for the project.. TEEN MEETING FORUM UPDATE At the April 15 regular City Council meeting, the City Administrator was directed to place the teen meeting forum item on the Special City Council work session agenda. This will provide an opportunity for the City Council to have dialogue regarding the teen meeting forum that was held at Eagan City Hall on Sunday, April 13, and discuss the agenda for a second meeting that is scheduled for Sunday, May 4. For a copy of the agenda and notes that were recorded at the teen meeting forum, refer to pages through _. City Councilmember Blomquist mentioned her knowledge of Dr. Dick Hardel at the April 15 City Council meeting and would ask him to provide some guidance about teens, teen centers and their structural use of time. Dr. Hardel and family are residents of Eagan. Attached on page is a copy of a letter from Dr. Hardel for the City Council to consider at the work session. DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide direction regarding future teen meetings. LOST SPUR GOLF PROGRAMS Parks & Recreation staff has been meeting with representatives of the Osman Shrine Temple to consider a collaborative arrangement between the Lost Spur and the City of Eagan to provide some level of golf programming by the City. Staff has made efforts to contact and meet with Jene Sigvertsen, Chair of the Long -Range Planning Committee for the Osman Shrine Temple, to further determine if the City can provide some services to the Lost Spur. Enclosed on page is a memo from the Director of Parks & Recreation that essentially states there has not been a contact. According to the greens superintendent, it appears that the City will not be involved with the Lost Spur Country Club this year. FIRE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING At the April 15 City Council workshop, David Kroos, representing Boarman, Kroos, Psister, Vogel & Associates, architects, presented plans along with cost estimates for the new Fire Administration building/ambulance facility. There were a number of questions raised about the cost and the architect was directed, along with the Fire Department Building Committee, to meet and look at various ways to reduce the square footage and preliminary cost estimates in an effort to meet the budget guideline that was established at $1.5 million for this capital project. i� There have been several meetings with the architects since the last City Council workshop. For a copy of suggestions that came out of those meetings, refer to a memo enclosed on pages L1 through 4.5::. As additional summary, staff has reviewed the space needs analysis that was performed in 1990 that included the Fire Administration building needs, an estimate for constructing a new Fire Administration building that was performed by Art Dickey & Associates during 1996 and a review of the square footage and cost projections given the comprehensive analysis by our architects. The architects and staff are making every effort to provide a building that allows for a level of quality similar to the Police and Municipal Center facility.,, continues to integrate the ambulance facility due to its centralized location in the community, considers a full basement for future expansion and, finally, accommodates program objectives for the Fire Administration needs. Another question is whether the Fire Administration building should include some additional square footage for eventual expansion. As directed at the last City Council meeting, the architects were also asked to comment on the time table for construction and how there may be savings provided, depending on when building and construction occurs, given the fact that winter construction is more expensive due to inclement conditions. DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide the architects and Fire Department Building Committee with additional direction regarding the proposed Fire Administration building. TRUCKING STUDY/EDC & APC FINDINGS In mid 1996, the City Council gave direction to the Advisory Planning Commission to consider criteria that would help the City Council consider viable locations for trucking related operations. Among the questions to be addressed by the study were: 1) Should trucking/distribution centers be allowed as a permitted use in all industrial areas? . 2) Should there be some land use provisions that limit trucking to certain areas within existing industrial parks? 3) Should there be criteria that provides buffering in those areas where trucking is a permitted use? As the Planning Commission reviewed criteria during the summer and fall of 1996, it became apparent that trucking was closely tied to transportation in general. As a result, the trucking industry was invited, along with business and residential neighborhoods in Northern Eagan (areas from Hwy 13 to Hwy 149, north of Yankee Doodle Road), to participate as members of a trucking task force. The task force meetings proved to be very 3 beneficial, allowing a great deal of input by the trucking community, residential neighborhoods and business in general. At a meeting held on February 25, the Advisory Planning Commission provided a report to the City Council on their findings to that point, having facilitated meetings since the summer of 1996. At that meeting, the City Council asked the Economic Development Commission to look at trucking from their perspective. It was agreed that the APC would continue their work and the EDC would also do some research and that findings by both the APC and EDC would be presented at a special work session in 60 days scheduled for April 29. Both Commissions have worked hard and will be presenting their findings at the workshop meeting on Tuesday. For additional information, refer to the report that combines the recommendations and findings for both EDC and APC. This document is enclosed as a separate report. DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To review the findings of both the EDC and APC to develop policy relative to the expansion of trucking within the City. OFF-STREET PARKING & OUTDOOR STORAGE At the April 15 regular City Council meeting, direction was given to the City Administrator to include off-street and outdoor storage as an additional item to the April 29 City Council work session. It was scheduled to follow the trucking study, so the APC and EDC members that are present can listen and contribute their input. Staff has been working with the City Attorney's office to review and prepare some alternative versions to the off-street parking and outdoor storage for consideration by the City Council. The first version, enclosed on pages A through , is to eliminate off- site/outdoor storage and the second version, enclosed on pages through , a, is to keep the ordinance intact and enhance the scope by adding a standard that restricts off-site storage and parking in relationship to dominant on-site parking. DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide a policy direction to City staff relative to any change to the off-street and outdoor storage ordinance. OTHER BUSINESS The Special City Council meeting agenda has a number of substantive items for Council consideration and deliberation. If time permits and there is any direction the Council would like to provide, the following items could be considered: 1) general policy relative to leasing City property for use of communications towers; and 2) staff response to questions that were raised by the Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren law firm relative to the ordinance amendment regulating antennae towers, satellite dishes and wind energy conversion systems. MA Refer to page CU for a memo from Steve Dorgan, Associate Planner, entitled, "Leasing City Property for Use of Communication Towers." The only reason for providing some limited input is to help City staff to provide the correct guidance to AT&T as they request an application for a conditional use permit to use a communication tower on City -owned property. Their application will be forthcoming during May. The other item concerning the ordinance amendment regulating antennae towers, satellite dishes and wind energy conversion systems was continued to the May 6 City Council meeting. The memo enclosed on pages � through 7 will provide a response to the questions that were raised by the Larkin Hoffman law firm. If there are any comments by the Cite Council, staff will respond accordingly in preparing the final draft for the May 6 meeting. Again, there is no obligation to review either of these memos or have a discussion at the work session on Tuesday. This is completely an option for the City Council. /S/ Thomas L. Hedges S MEMO city of eagan TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: March 14,1997 SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMP'HITHEATER/EAGAN ROTARY CLUB For the past several years, the Eagan Rotary Club has had a vision of building an amphitheater to be located, used and enjoyed by the community. This outdoor facility would be used for concerts, plays, corporate picnics, youth programs and many other activities throughout the spring, summer and fall months. Each year, the Rotary Club sponsors an art gala during the month of February as its major fundraiser. The Club has decided to earmark funds from the art gala to help construct the amphitheater. A committee, comprised of Rotarians, has been meeting for several months to develop a program, a budget and explore locations that might be possible for the amphitheater. One location that is a favorite among the Rotary Committee members is the Oak Grove, south of the Unisys commercial building and north of the Lockheed Martin parking lot, west of Pilot Knob Road. The advantage of this location is a large and existing parking lot, topography that is desirable for an amphitheater and other natural amenities, all of which reduce the project cost. The Rotary Club would view the project as a partnership with the City, since the City would own the land and the facility would be turned over to the community for maintenance and operations. The Rotary Club would like an opportunity to present the concept in more detail to the City Council at a workshop in late April. To provide more information about the Eagan Rotary Club and the vision for an amphitheater, a tape wras prepared by Dr. Tom Wilson, who is also the Amphitheater Project Coordinator. Please view at your leisure. THIS ITEM IS NOT SCHEDULED FOR DISCUSSION AT MONDAY'S MEETING. THE ROTARY CLUB ASKED THAT THIS TAPE BE DISTRIBUTED THIS WEEKEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR YOUR PERSONAL VIEWING. THIS ITEM WILL BE SCHEDULED FOR A WORK SESSION IN MID TO LATE APRIL. City Administrator TLH/vmd r s I1 EAGAN ROTARY - EAGAN AMPHITEATRE PROJECT Projected Cost Elements Estimated Potential Revenue Sources Cost Element Cost Rotary Corporate City 1. Land (8.0 acre Q $40,000) $320,000 2. Parking (1 000 cars (M $1200) $1,200,000 $1,200,000 3. City Fees $15,000 $15,000 4. Structure $259,837 Building, Electrical, Pre wire 5. Audio / Lighting Equipment $29,235 Amp/mixer, mics, speakers Theater lighting & control G. Furnishings $5,918 TOTAL $1,829,989 $0 $1,200;000 Other $320,000 $15,000 $320,000 1/6197 EAGAN ROTARY - EAGAN AMPHITEATRE PROJECT Estimate - Summary Division #1 - General Requirements Division #2 - Sitework Division 03 - Concrete Division #4. Masonry Division #5 - Metals Division #6 - Carpentry Division #7 - Thermal & Moisture Protection Division #8 - Doom, Windows & Glass Division #9 - Finishes Division #16 - Electrical Division #10 - Specialties Division #11 - Equipment Division 012 - Fumishings Sub -total Profit (15°%) Contingency Total $11,390 $1,708.50 $3,986.50 $17,085 $36,441 $5,466.15 $12,754.35 $54,662 $12,903 $1,935.45 $4,516.05 $19,355 $37,897 $5,684.60 $13,264.08 $56,846 $52,120 17,818.00 $18,242.00 $78,180 $780 $117.00. $273.00 $1,170 $832 $124.77 $291.13 $1,248 $1,070 $160.50 $374.50 $1,605 $6,992 $1,048.73 $2,447.03 $10,487 $12,800 $1,920.00 $4,480.00 $19,200 Structure - Total $259,837 Sub -total Profit (15°%) Contingency Total $712.00 $106.80 $213.60 $1,032 $19,450.00 $2,917.50 $5,835.00 $28,203 Audio I Lighting Equipment - Total $29,235 Tax Contingency $292.50 $1,125.00 $5,918 116197 TEEN SPEAK -OUT April 13, 1997 7:00-8:30 PM Order of Activity -Welcome and introductions -Ice Breaker -Purpose and Getting organized -Brainstorming 1. What is it that you as teens like about our Community? 2. What is it that you would like to change? 3. Based on these ideas -Prioritize your needs -Think of some time lines -What are some potential obstacles? -Recap -Where do we go from here? 1. Resources to bring in 2. Next meeting date: Sunday, April 27? Monday, April 28? Sunday, May 4? Bring a friend FA TEEN SPEAKOUT April 13, 1997 Meeting Notes Following a welcome by councilmember Sandra Masin, introductions, and a "ropes" game the discussion was initiated concerning the matters at hand. Speak -out participants named several things that they like about our community. 1. The community is safe 2. There is less violence in Eagan 3. The school system is good 4. The city has nice parks 5. There are many school activities 6. The city continues to expand; Promenade for example. 7. There are many opportunities for sports in school and through EAA 8. Other extra curricular opportunities, such as music and the arts 9. Parks and Recreation activities Ideas were expressed concerning what the group would like to see changed. 1. The speak -out participants would like to see something that would pull the community together. 2. There should be more to do, such as: Rollerblading and skateboarding areas, bike rides and field trips. 3. Something free should be offered. 4. There should be something just for teens that has teen night. 5. A teen center that is -run and worked by teens -sponsored by local businesses -a source of jobs -a place to be Additional thoughts about a teen center: -could be used for Community Ed. and Parks and Recreation programs -schools could be used -show the community the effects of a community center -teens publish something of their own -talk to kids at school Ideas on activities at a teen center: -a place to be -concessions -a dance floor -basketball -tutoring -study groups -a pool -need food 6. Transportation/the lack of it /o The speak -out participants prioritized their list of what they would like to see changed. 1. Teen center 2. More to do 3. More youth involvement The following obstacles to establishing a teen center were recognized: -liability -money -location -transportation -stand alone vs. ? -keeping interest going -supervision -getting it to happen -communication}marketing An obstacle to providing more to do is attracting new businesses. More youth involvement means: -inclusion on commissions.'council/advison- boards -voting power -meetings to bring forward youth issues -getting youth involved in planning activities -adults do not want -negative publicity, the Mall of America for example. -getting youth involved creating a forum for meetings What's next? -form a group -tour teen centers * a facility such as Maplewood * Lifetime Fitness Partnership The group agreed to meet again. -Sunday, May 4, 1997 -7:00-8:30 p.m. -Community Room, Eagan Municipal Center -Bring A Friend!! YOUTH & FAMILY I-1`•S•T•I-7-U-T•E April 17, 1997 Merton $trommen. Ph.D., Founder Dick Hardel. D. Min., Executive Director Campus Box #s70, 2211 Riverside Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454-1351 Telephone 16121 330-1624 FAX (6121330-1595 TO: The City of Eagan Minnesota Council FROM: Dr. Dick Hardel RE: Teen Center and Structured Use of Time The latest research by Search Institute on developing healthy children, youth, families, and communities identifies 40 positive building blocks every child and/or youth needs to succeed and live a positive, healthy life. These are divided into two areas: external assets and internal assets. This research, which is the hotest in the country, shows that for support children and youth need a relationship with at least three other adults besides a parent. They need a caring neighborhood. Youth must be valued by the community (trained to do specific tasks and held responsible), given useful roles in the community, involved in community service. They need adult role models, clear family boundaries, neighborhood boundaries, and school boundaries. They need structured events with intergenerational support. Even age - level events need structure learning activities. Enclosed is a large brochure on the results of the study done in the Minneapolis area by Search Institute. It gives more detail of the 40 assets. If more assistance is needed in this area, I have presented the concept of asset building to communities all over the USA. Please contact me, if I am needed Sincerely, Dr. Dick Hardel Executive Director AN AFFILIATE OF AUGSBURG COU.EGE / i ,� city of eagan TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR 0FROM- KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION r DATE: APRIL 22, 1997 RE: LOST SPUR COUNTRY CLUB MEMO You had asked that I prepare a memo updating you on the status of our discussions with the Lost Spur/Osman Shrine. Dorothy Peterson and I met with )ene Sigvertsen, Chairman of the Long Range Planning Committee for the Osman Shrine Temple on March 27th. I would characterize the meeting as being very positive. The Shriners are losing members and the golf course membership has also dropped. They hoped to make some golf course Improvements as a result of the land trade that was done last year. I expressed that the City Council had given staff the approval to develop some joint programs that could be offered this year, but that we would have to move with some haste because of the newsletter deadline. Further, that we would look towards a longer term relationship that could include a lease of the course and operations of the driving range. We agreed that we would need to meet again, along with his golf course pro, to find the times for the programs suggested.. Meetings would also have to be held with the golf course greens superintendent. )ene welcomed our comments and we shared a great deal of Information. However, because he wanted to report on our meeting to his committee, and because the golf pro and greens superintendent were not yet available, we were not able to set up any additional meetings. We agreed that he would contact us to set up a time to meet again In ten days to two weeks. Neither Dorothy nor I have heard from )ene since that meeting. 1 recently called and left a message on his answering machine to let us know what the Shrine intends to do. At this time however, it would be too late to do any golf programming at the site since we have now missed the newsletter writing deadline. About ten days ago, on a tour of the parks with maintenance staff, we stopped at the golf course maintenance building. From the discussion with the greens superintendent, I learned that golf course membership was at or near the same levels from the year before and he anticipated ending up with more members this year. I will keep you posted on any additional discussions with )ene. If you have any additional questions, let me know. 13 BKPV Arcntrecture 4 April 1997 City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Ref: Fire Administration Building Dear Mayor and Council Members: On behalf of Boarman Kroos Pfister Vogel & Associates (BKPV), I would like to express our appreciation for the opportunity to work on the new Fire Administration Building. It has been a pleasure working with the Fire Department Committee. Their input and dedication to this project serves the community well. Inter,or Des,gn In its prominent site location on Pilot Knob Road, the new Fire Administration Building will serve as the gateway to the Eagan Municipal Campus. The design Eng,nee,ing solution should reflect the consistent level of pride and value the community places on all its facilities. A functional, flexible facility that meets the space needs of fire administration, training, and ambulance service is essential to the success of the project. We are at a critical juncture in the process where we need the input and direction of the City Council to ensure that the decisions we make today will serve the long term goals of the community in the future. The City, in its endeavor to balance the needs of fire administration, training and ambulance service in relation to its current facilities, conducted a preliminary needs assessment study in 1990 and a subsequent feasibility study in 1996 in preparation for the current design and construction phases of the project. The design committee has been meeting on a weekly basis to refine the space needs documentation, gather and address more specific site information, and analyze facility options and potential cost impacts. Space Needs Documentation Preliminary programming indicated a need of approximately 11,400 square feet for fire administration and ambulance service. In addition, a basement area for future storage and functional needs was also identified. The current space needs assessment includes the additional space needed for stairs, elevator, mechanical 212 N. 2nd Street and electrical rooms, along with increased space modifications for the projected Minneapolis occupancies for the training and conference rooms. The net to gross ratio was Minnesota 55401 adjusted from 20% to 25% to more accurately reflect the space needed for 612.339.3752 circulation, wall thickness, etc. for a facility of this type. Approximately 15,000 Fax: 612.339 6212 square feet is required to meet the essential space needs of fire administration Owe• Soa•roa-. AAA and ambulance service plus the area for future basement storage. J Ca,c 4 R•cos AIA Petr j Prste•. A A Ga•, J Ycge AAA Da.•CT k„•.ya^.AIA Ee,.a O::o•: -:, E^p..e• B 0 A R M A N • K R 0 0 5 • P F I S T E R • V 0 C E L & A S S O C I A T E Site and Building Concepts A survey of the property has been completed allowing the project committee to accurately address the physical constraints of the site. A drawing of the adjacent residential development provided the team with additional site information. A number of facility options have been evaluated based on the adjusted program and accurate site data. The preferred option is a multi-level structure with the public entry, administrative area, divisible conference space, and ambulance service functions on the main level; a divisible training room and fire prevention on the second level; and, fire department support areas, mechanical and electrical rooms, and future City storage on the basement level. The building size of this option is approximately 17,600 square feet including 2,600 square feet for City storage. An added communa) benefit is that this configuration allows the public access and use of the upper level training room while keeping main floor operations separate and secure. The concept is also sensitive to the adjacent residential development by screening vehicular and pedestrian activity from neighboring properties. The project team is in the process of developing cost impacts and cost options for the proposed facility in relation to both size and quality of the facility. As pan of the cost analysis, we are considering salvaging existing building materials in an effort to evaluate the cost effectiveness of re -using existing laminated wood beams. We look forward to the Council work session on April 15th, and are hopeful that the infori nation we present will assist the City Council in making informed decisions regarding the immediate and future goals of the Fin Administration Building. 15010 SENT BY 612 432 3780 4-25-97 : 15:19 : SEVERSON SHELDON- 681 4694:» 2/ 9 ORDNANCE NO. 205 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER ELEVEN ENTITLED "LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING)" BY AMENDING SECTION 11.10 REGARDING OFF SITE OFF-STREET PARKING; AND BY ADOPTING BY RE, RENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99. The City Couucil of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section 1. Pagan City Code Chapter Fleven is hereby amended by adding to 11. 10, Subd. 12. 1, to read as follows: Subd. 12.1. Off Site Off -Street Parking ,fie As Conditional Use. A. Scope of Application. For purposes of this subdivision only, Off site o$ -street parking mid- outdoor stmage shall mean such activity as a principal use on a parcel of land which shall be deemed servient to a dominant parcel on which a principal use is located and served by the off site off-street parking or oatdoor stm zge on the servient parcel. T13g Council believes that an exp nditt�or growing business soutetimrs_necdck additional off- reet ujilh ng storage vddch cannot he immd� Iy accommadated on the existing dominant uareel ofproperty The Council intends this provision to provide supplementary off site off-street parking oroutside-storIe sgjgjU& -sucet Wig or owside storage on the dominant parcel It is not the Council's intention to allow ontsnfc-qjLfijtg starragt-M o3- jtreetparking,LAluouALneater number of spaces or greater area an the servieuparCel than exists on the dominant 1AL"I. B. Conditional Use Permit Application. All applications for a conditional use permit for off site off-street parking and-outdow stomps shall include a detailed, to -scale site plan specifying the dimensions, location, design and compliance with the performance standards set forth herein. C. Performance Standards, Termination and Non Compliance. 1. Standards. No offsite off-street parking or-vutdooz sttnage, as described in Subparagraph A, shall be permitted unless the following conditions are met, in addition to those standards set forth in Subd. 4 of Section 11.40- A. The dominant parcel, which shall be served by the off e off-street parking.. outdoor stotage on the scT%ient parcel, cannot physically accommodate the parking oratorage needs of the principal use on the dominant parcel; SENT BY: 612 432 3780 4-25-97 ; 15:19 ; SEVERSON SHELDON-" 661 4694:# 3/ 9 b. The parcel on %tLich the off site off-street parking or outdomstatag is located and the dominant parcel which the off sit a off-street Parking 02 elutdOOiL St serves shall be within the same zoning districts, provided in R-4 districts, the servient parcel shall be within a K-4 district, Limited Business "LB", Neighborhood Business "NB", General Business ""GB", Community Shopping Center "CSC", Regional Shopping Center "RCS", "RB" Access Use, Limited Industrial "I - I ", General Industrial ""I-2"", and Research/Development District "R D". C. The servient parcel on which the tlff sit off-street Parking as outdvnrstorare area is located is a reasonable distance not to exceed 660 feet at the closest point from the lot line of the dominant lot to be served by the off site off-street parking or outdoot storar,c area; d. The off site off-street parking area shall meet the requirements set forth in Section 11, 10, Sub& 12, herein; e. zeqt:hcm=ts set fbith in Section 11. H), Strbd. 29 (e) ( 1), except these ptavision f. Off site off-street perking on the servient parcel shah have fewer ttarkingsgau&less parking area. and less area than the -dominant RAULlI 2. 'Termination. Any conditional use permit issued under this Subdivision or any Tight to obtain a conditional use permit under this Subdivision shall terminate upon the development of the servient lot on whirb the off --Zite off- street ffstreet parking o., otaderat stature area is located or upon the termination of the principal use located on the dominant parcel to which the off site off-street parking or outdavi sto, age area serves, which occurs first. 3. Non -Compliance. Failure to comply with any of the standards or conditions set forth herein or in the conditional use permit, or any other violation of City Code provisions, shall constitute sufficient cause for the termination of the conditional use permit by this Council following a public hearing. Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including ?enalty for Violation"'" and Section 11. 99, entitled "Violations A Misdemeanor" arc hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim Section 3. Effective Date. 717iis ordinance shall take effcct upon its adoption and publication according to law. SF -N7 BY: ATTEST: By. L.G. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk: Date Ordinancc Adopted: 622 432 3780 4-25-97 : 15:19 : Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: Date of Advisory Planning Commission Hearing: SEVERSON SHELDON CITY OF EAGAN: By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor 681 4694:# 4/ 9 SENT BY: 612 432 3780 4-25-97 : 15:20 : SEVERSON SHELDON-• 681 4694:# 5/ 9 ORDINANCE NO. 205 2ND SERIES AN ORDTNANCL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAP'T'ER ELEVEN ENTITLED "LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING)" BY AMENDING SECTION 11.10 REGARDING UFT SITE OFF-STREET PARKING; ANU By ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION t 1.99, The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section I, Eagan City Code Chapter Eleven is hereby amended by adding to 11.10, Subd. 12. 1, to read as follows: Subd. 12.1. Off Sit Off-street Parking and Off Site Outdoor Storage As Conditional Use. A. Scope of Application. For purposes of this subdivision only, off site off-street parking and off site outdoor storage shall mean such activity as a principal use on a parcel of land which shall be deemed servient to a dominant parcel on which a principal use is located and served by the off sijeo$=street parking or off sit e outdoor storage on the servient parcel. The Council bdieves that an enauding or sEamdus businitional vAjdng or a onal oulside storageimmediately t on the cxisting dominant glarcel of Vzopgrty. The Council intends twuroywonAa Jiroe jupplementary off site off-street pg Ea&Lwhir-h complements the cx sting off-streetr off SiJC outsid!zn the dominant parcel. It is not the Council's intention to allow off site outdoor storage off-strecilUjiW& ingreater n tuber of WaWaces or grcaler area on the sentient garcel than exists on the dominant parcel B. Conditional Use Permit Application. All applications for a conditional use permit for off site off-street parking and re outdoor storage shall include a detailed, to -scale site pian specifying the dimensions, location, design and compliance with the performance standards set forth herein. C. Performance Standards, Termination and Non Compliance, 1. Standards. No off,Site off-street parking or off street outdoor storage, as described in Subparagraph A. shall be permitted unless the following conditions are met, in addition to those standards set forth in Subd, 4 of Section 11.40: a. The dominant parcel, which shall be served by the off site off-street parking or off-street outdoor storage on the servient parcel, cannot physically accommodate the parking or storage needs of the principal use on the dominant parcel, /9 SENT BY 612 432 3780 4-25-97 : 15:20 : SENTRSON SHELDON'- 681 4694:" 6/ 9 b. The parcel on which the offsite off -sweet parking or off site outdoor storage is located and the dominant parcel which the off site off- street parking or outdoor storage serves shall be within the same zoning districts, provided in R-4 districts, the servient parcel shall be within a R-4 district, Limited Business "LB", Neighborhood Business "NB", General Business "G13", Community Shopping Center "CSC", Regional Shopping Center "RCS", "RB" Access Use, Limited Industrial "1-1", General lndustrial "1-2", and Research/Development District "R -D". C. The servient parcel on which the off site off-street parking or off site outdoor storage area is located is a reasonable distance not to exceed 660 feet at the closest point from the lot line of the dominant lot to be served by the off81Le of -street parking or outdoor storage area; d. The2ff site off-street parking arca shall meet the requirements set forth in Section 11. 10, Subd. 12, herein; e. The offsite outdoor storage area shall meet the requirements set forth in Section 11. 10, Subd. 29 (c) (1), except those provisions governing building or height restrictions. .0. g. Off site outdoor storage on the servient parcel shall be bermrd and landscaped on sides abuttingpublic right-of-way and residentially zoned districtz- The combined berming andscaping shall be a 6 foot tall screen that ir, 75% opaque abutting publicright-of-way and 100% opaque abutting �gsidential zanipgdistrict-; or residential uses. 2. Termination. Any conditional use permit issued under this Subdivision or any right to obtain a conditional use permit under this Subdivi4on shall terminate upon the development of the servient lot on which the_ite off- street parking or off site outdoor storage area is located or upon the termination of the principal use located on the dominant parcel to which the off site off-street parking or off site outdoor storage area serves, which occurs first. 3. Non -Compliance. Faihrre to comply with any of the standards or conditions set forth herein or in the conditional use permit, or any other violation of City Code provisions, shall constitute sufficient cause for the termination of the conditional use permit by this Council following a public hearing. 612 432 3780 SENT BY. 4-25-97 : 15:24 SEVERSON SHELDON 681 4694:# 7/ 9 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 "Violations A Misdemeanur" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim. Section 3. Mcth c nate. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication according to law. ATTEST: By: E.G. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk Date Ordinance Adopted: CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor Date Ordinance Pub}ished in the Legal Newspaper- Date ewspaper Date of Advisory Planuing Commission Hearing: C� / MEMO TO: Tom Hedges, City Administrator FROM: Steve Dorgan, Associate Planne� DATE: April 9, 1997 RE: Leasing City Property for Use of Communication Towers city of eagan GENERAL POLICY The City currently leases space to communication service providers for antennae and equipment buildings at water tower sites throughout the City. Leasing a portion of land for the construction of a communication tower and equipment building would be similar to leasing space on City water towers, however a policy needs to be established so that administratively staff has guidance for dealing with such requests. The proposed Tower/Antennae Ordinance provides for communication towers to be located in Industrial and Public Facility zoned districts subject to approval of a CUP by the City. General policy decisions are needed regarding the leasing of City property for the placement of commercial structures including: 1. Should the City lease property for the placement of commercial communication towers and equipment buildings? 2. Should the City sign Development Applications for consideration of placing commercial communication towers and equipment buildings on City owned property? 3. Should the City negotiate lease agreements prior to signing a Development Application for the placement of a communication tower and equipment building on City owned property? AT & T REQUEST The City has recently been approached by AT & T regarding the possibility of locating a communication tower on City owned property. They are specifically interested in a 3.5 acre site located at Chesmar Drive and Cliff Road. The property was previously occupied by a city water storage tank and currently has two small equipment buildings on the site. In order for AT & T to apply for a CUP for the use of a communication tower on the site, the City would have to sign the Development Application as the property owner. Therefore, direction is needed as to whether the City should commit to a Development Application for a CUP to lease a portion of City owned property for the use of a communication tower. cc: Mike Ridley, Senior Planner Lisa Freese, Senior Planner TO: Tom Hedges, City Administrator FROM: Steve Dorgan, Associate Planner DATE: April 21, 1997 city of eagan RE: Ordinance Amendment regulating Antennae, Towers, Satellite Dishes and Wind Energy Conversion Systems This memo is in response to a letter submitted to the City Council from Thomas Alexander of Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd. who represents the communication provider American Portable Telecom (APT). The Larkin -Hoffman Law firm has been on the City's mailing list to receive meeting notices and copies of the draft ordinance throughout the ordinance review process. No comment has been received regarding the ordinance until the Public Hearing and the City Council meeting. The following is an item by item response to the concerns raised in the submitted letter regarding the proposed Tower/Antenna Ordinance: 1. PARAGRAPH B. Buildine Mounted Antennae and Satellite Dishes Request: To allow commercial antennae to be located on buildings v ithin the Agricultural "A" and R-3, R-4, and R-5 Residential Districts. Reasoning for Standard: Legal staff has advised that residential districts provide for residential uses only. Therefore, no commercial uses should be permitted within a district zoned for residential uses. Currently, the City Code allows very restrictive uses within residential districts. For example, in-home occupations as a limited use operated by the resident of the home, and by CUP; Golf Courses or Day Care Facilities and Beauty Parlors (as an in-home business). Commercial antennae are designed to serve entire regions, not exclusively to serve residents of the surrounding areas. Also, by allowing commercial antennae in residential districts, a precedent may be set for other commercial uses to establish in the residentially zoned districts of the City. a3 Memo - Tower/Antenna Ordinance April l8, 1997 Page 2 The APC agreed with the advice of legal staff deciding that building mounted antennae are permitted in all nonresidential districts of the City and felt it would provide adequate coverage for the providers. In reviewing the existing residential housing stock within the city, the APC concluded that the current characteristic of residential housing, including multi -family structures, does not lend itself to commercial antennae locations at this time. Most multi -family structures within the city are 3 stories high (about 35 feet) unlike high rise residential structures in other metro area communities. 2. PARAGRAPH D. Freestanding Towers and Antennae Item 1 Request: To allow freestanding towers up to 165 feet in residential districts for commercial purposes. Reasoning for Standard: Legal staff has advised that residential districts allow for residential uses only. Therefore, no commercial uses should be permitted within a district zoned for residential uses. The proposed ordinance would permit freestanding towers 60 feet in height in residential districts for noncommercial uses only. The request is also made in the letter to increase tower heights to 165 feet to accommodate APT's technology. Public, health, safety and welfare issues must be considered when permitting the location of freestanding towers, including potential collapse onto residential buildings. In addition, residential zoned properties within the city would not accommodate required or proposed tower setbacks. The APC determined that the allowing freestanding towers in the proposed I-1, I-2 and P districts would provide substantial coverage throughout the city and that other districts may be included at a future date if a need was founded. Item 2 Request: To allow freestanding towers as a conditional use within all commercial districts and as a permitted use in the Limited Industrial Districts (I-1), General Industrial Districts (I-2), Public Facilities (P) and PD Districts. Reasoning for Standard: The APC determined that at the present time, with the establishment of the communication service networks within the city, that freestanding towers should be limited to specific zoning districts of the city. They noted proposed zoning districts I-1, I-2 and P would provide substantial coverage throughout the entire city for freestanding towers in combination with building mounted antennae in all nonresidential zones. At a later date when the communication networks are more established and a need is shown for locations within other districts, the ordinance could be revisited to determine if other districts should permit freestanding towers. The APC concluded that it is easier to add additional districts at a future date versus removing approved zoning districts and leave nonconforming uses. A wait and see approach was a y Memo -- Tower/Antenna Ordinance April 18, 1997 Page 3 determined as the most desirable approach to the implementation of the ordinance. (1) Subpart (a) (iii) Request: lfwas noted by APT that their system is designed to operate at 165 feet and the permitted height of a freestanding tower -should be changed to 165 feet. Reasoning for Standard: A land -use decision is needed to determine the permitted height of a freestanding tower. Based on discussions with the APC and communication service providers over the last year, the limit of 150 feet was established. The 150 foot height was found to accommodate most all required antennae heights and is consistent with what other communities have approved as a maximum height. A representative of APT, Attorney Peter Coyle from Larkin -Hoffman, attended the APC Public Hearing and made no mention to the need for a 165 foot height requirement for freestanding towers, but made request for an additional height requirement at 125 feet with two users. He indicated that their antennas are typically located at those heights. (2) Subpart (b) Request: 'To allow a setback requirement which is equal to the height of the tower plus ten (10) feet. The proposed ordinance would require towers to be set back a distance two times the height of the tower from a residential structure. Reasoning for Standard: The APC analyzed this requirement during the ordinance review process. Representatives from the communication service industry requested a setback which would be equal to the height of the tower from a residential structure. The APC determined that the communication towers were not compatible with residential districts. In addition, it was determined that for public safety reasons, the towers be setback 2 times the height of the tower from a residential structure. (3) Subpart (c) Request: To allow towers in the side yards. be located in the rear yard only. The proposed ordinance requires a tower to Reasoning for Standard: As policy, staff has considered a "rear yard" as being the area of a lot located from the back corner of the principal building on a lot to the back property line. The "side yard" was not originally approved as an approved location for a freestanding tower. However, there is no issue with including the "side yard" as an approved location for a freestanding tower. (4) Subpart (g) Request: To revise the standard of the proposed ordinance which requires accessory, equipment in excess of and area which is 10 feet (W) x 10 feet (L) x 5 feet (H) in size to be completely enclosed. The revision would permit the aggregate of equipment encasements not to exceed the proposed dimensions. aS'­ Memo - Tower/Antenna Ordinance April 18, 1997 Page 4 Reasoning for Standard: The intention of the standard was to consolidate the equipment within a specific area and if the equipment exceeded the specified area, an enclosure or building would be required. In addition, the intent of this standard is in line with the outdoor storage requirements of the City Code which require all outdoor storage to be completely enclosed. At the APC Public Hearing, a representative from the Larkin-Hoffamn Law Firm stated that an enclosure of 10 feet (RD x 10 feet (L) x 5 feet (H) was sufficient for their proposed equipment. The APC originally recommended an enclosure be required for all equipment, however in response to their request agreed that equipment that was encased in a cabinet and below a certain dimension would be acceptable. The AFC's intention was to allow encased equipment of a limited size not be required to provide an enclosure. The requested change to the ordinance would allow for the disbursement of the equipment throughout a site. (5) Subpart (i) Request: To modify the co -location standard which reads: The planned equipment would exceed the structural capacit)? of the preferred co -location site, and the preferred co -location site cannot be reinforced, modified, or replaced to accommodate the planned equipment er- its equi" at a reasonable cost, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer. Reasoning for Standard: The intent of the proposed ordinance is to promote the co - location of communication antennae onto existing or proposed freestanding structures. The standard requires a communication service provider to be flexible when siting antennae. Revising the proposed standard defeats the purpose of a co -location requirement. By not requiring a communication service provider to be flexible with the planned equipment at a reasonable cost, providers are able to avoid the co -location requirement. 3. PARAGRAPH E. General Standards a. Item 5 Request: Same comments as provided in Paragraph D, Item 2, Supart g. b. Item 8 Request: To revise the following standard: Structural design, mounting and installation1p ans for of a tower, antennae or satellite dish which requires a building permit shall bei approved by a qualified licensed engineer; and Memo - Tower/Antenna Ordinance April 18, 1997 Page 5 Reasoning for Standard: The proposed standard puts the burden of proof on the communication service provider to verify the structural integrity of a tower and/or equipment on-site from a qualified licensed engineer that the installation was correct. The City staff is not qualified to inspect structural design and installation of proposed towers and equipment. By changing the proposed standard, no requirement will exist for the City to attain verification that the installation of equipment is performed according a submitted set of plans. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding these responses or the proposed Tower/Antenna Ordinance. Steve org Associate Planner A-11EX:SL Attachment: Letter from Thomas Alexander of Larkin -Hoffman cc: Lisa Freese, Senior Planner Mike Ridley, Senior Planner memoltower ord tomH 4_18.97 a ? Al IORNF.F<AT LAW P.L.I. April 22, 1997 JAMES SHELDON 2100 Piperjaffray Plaza SEVERSON, SHELDON, ^'t 444 Cedar Street DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A. t Saint Paul, A4innesota 55101-2160 7300 — 147TH ST W STE 600 APPLE VALLEY MN 55124 Firm (612)290-6500 Fax (612)223-5070 E -Mail RE: 26,472 (872) J:IRDIN F.LA1V@�AOL.COAI Citi -Cargo & Storage Company, Inc. v. City of Eagan Donald h1.Jardine Dear Mr. Sheldon: John R. O'Brien Gerald Dl. Linnihan Alan R.Vanasek This letter is in follow up to our conversation after the Eohn ngem. .FlickKenney,Jr. Eugcnc J. Flick recent executive session where you indicated that you would / Charles E.Gillin be looking to revising the City's .outside storage ordinance. tni The following are some general observations. Obviously, the Pierre N.ReJ. Pierrc N. Regnier Mark A.Fonken conditional use permit process provides the opportunity to George W.Kuehner consider community concerns and allows citizens an avenue to Miry A. Ria Patti J.Skoghmd voice concerns and the applicant the opportunity to address Scan E.Hadc these concerns. The City Council has less discretion in Timothy S.Cmm g dealing with a conditional use permit, since their discretion Lawrcncc M. Rocheford James G.Golctnbeck has already been fixed. in the criteria set forth in the ordinance. Kerry C. Koep David J. Hoekstra James K.Helling In looking at off-street parking and outside storage, it MichaMarlene S. Alarlcnc S. Gan•is appears that off-street parking and outside storage are not Mary P. Rowe outright permitted uses and can only be utilized with a Karen R. Cott conditional use permit. Therefore, the intent is obviously to NathanW.Hart Joseph E. Flynn restrict and/or prohibit outside storage and off-street Thomas L. Cummings parking. This intent should probably be set forth in the Sari ret L.Jo n;on . Shari L. Jo}tnson ordinance. In conjunction with this overall intent, has the Eli zabethB.Hayes City ever considered an interim conditional use permit, which LaurenceA. Diamond Katherine E. Kenneddyy y p is limited to a period of ears and expires on a given date? Cara J. Debes Yvonne Al. Flaherty The key to the present ordinance is defining dominant and Brenda L.Theis servient. Jerre F. Logan (1921-1983) I believe that the best way to define dominant and servient would be to list various factors the Council can consider in Somrmembers ahoadmitted defining dominant and servient; the primary and first category to practice law in 11 strovain, North Dakota, Florida would be size. The servient parcel should not be larger than and Illinois the dominant parcel. Second, I believe that the overall addition of the servient parcel should not change the overall character and use of the dominant lot. Third, I think the Council should have leeway to consider the negative effects of allowing outside storage. Does the request for outside storage benefit solely the owner of the land over the general April 22, 1997 Page 2 public? If it does, it will be akin to spot zoning. The Council should also have conditions whereby they consider health, safety and welfare impact upon adjoining property owners as to value, aesthetic/screening, negative impacts on traffic, etc. I realize that this is very general but hopefully of assistance. Very truly yours, JA DINE, LOGAN & O-BRIEN, P.L.L.P. ,..r Th (;Zes G. Golembeck ►-° Direct Dial: (612) 290-6567 JGG:vme Trucking Study - Summary and Conclusions Advisory Planning Commission 11 u i Il city of eagan MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Egan and City Council Members FROM: Chair Carla Heyl and the Advisory Planning Commission DATE: April 25, 1997 RE: Trucking Study - Summary and Conclusions At the special workshop with the City Council on February 25, the Council asked the Commission develop alternatives focused on land use, transportation, buffering, environmental and aesthetic issues. The APC has worked on these issues at during the last two months and we feel that the following report states the APL's understanding of the issues regarding trucking; defines what is a trucking land use; and makes recommendations for changes to the zoning code regarding buffering, screening and setback requirements in I-1 district. The APC has also identified properties that should be reviewed further to determine whether or not I-1 zoning is appropriate. With the City Council's direction, the Commission would like to proceed with drafting code amendments for screening, landscaping, setbacks in the I-1 district. In addition, we would like to move forward with a process to study and make recommendations for specific land use changes on the parcels the APC has identified as marginal for trucking uses. The APC requests City Council direction on what code changes or further study to work on and welcomes any suggestions that you may have on the process to follow. Thank for your consideration. APC Trucking Study Report April 24,1997 TRUCKING STUDY APC PROBLEM DEFINITION AND STATEMENT OF CONCLUSIONS DEFINITION OF TRUCKING During the March 10" workshop meeting, the APC defined what uses they consider to be trucking and what they do not consider trucking. These definitions are summarized as follows: Truckin,: The APC defined trucking to include the following uses: freight terminal; outside truck/trailer storage; truck sales; truck leasing; and service of trucks/trailers. Not Trucking: The APC determined that manufacturers taking delivery of materials or shipping product and end user taking delivery of a product are not considered trucking, although the APC acknowledged that these uses generate truck traffic to and from the site (i.e. retail stores like Target or Rainbow, Coca Cola, West). The APC also concluded that warehousing generates truck traffic, but they are in the business of storage, not transport so they are not a "trucking" business. Industry Terminoloay: The APC definition is generally consistent with how the trucking industry categorizes itself, which is summarized as follow: • Full Load Carriers - Delivery of full truck load to destination/end user (e.g. Dart, Schneider) • L -T -L (Less Than Full Load) - cross -dock transfer of items from truck to truck, no storage of items as in warehousing, carry less than full truck load, use variety of vehicle types and sizes (e.g. UPS, Roadway, Freightmasters) • Cartage - Cary loads on final leg of the trip (e.g. A&H Cartage, Citi -Cargo) • Warehouse - Items delivered and picked up by truck, but stored for period of time between delivery and pick-up (e.g. Terminal Warehouse). Warehouses generate truck traffic, but are in the business of storage, not transport • Freight Terminal - Trucks arrive, unload or transfer items, trucks leave (e.g. UPS) Source: Gary Santoor ian, Dart Transit, Mark Reimer, Freightmasters PROBLEM DEFINITION The APC reiterated the issues identified by the APC and brought forward during the public work sessions which occurred during the winter. The identified problems are generally nuisance oriented compatibility issues - visual/aesthetic, noise, fumes and pollution, and traffic congestion and safety concerns. These issues can be categorized as generated either on-site or off-site and are summarized in the table on the next page. Page 1 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 ON SITE ISSUES OFF SITE ISSUES VISUAL AESTHETICS • Appearance of storage areas • Appearance from Right of • Appearance of building way • View of outdoor activity • Community Gateway NOISE • Idling Trucks -engine noise • truck tire noise • Moving trucks -engine • truck acceleration & exhaust acceleration, hitching & noise Safety Beepers • other auto traffic • Other outdoor activity • airplane over -flight noise AIR QUALITY • Fumes from Idling Trucks • Moving Traffic on main • Volume Sensitive -Flow to & transportation corridors from site • Congestion effects • Industrial emissions HOURS OF OPERATION • Noise 0 Congestion/Capacity • Safety • Noise -impact on sensitive land use along corridor LOCATION FACTORS • Adjacent to different land • Access to principal use transportation corridors • Other intervening land uses 1. Movement with City: including ROW County & local Roads 2. Movement into & out of City: County Roads, state & interstate highways TRAFFIC • Impact on capacity for other • Congestion/Capacity traffic • Safety • Safety The APC made the following conclusions: • The APC determined that most of these issues are not specific to trucking but rather are related to industrial development in general. • The greatest conflicts arise where industrial development is in close proximity to a different, less intense land use such as residential, or public. • Off-site impacts are secondary and are often associated with the traffic generation and truck movement throughout the city's transportation system. The zoning code cannot appropriately address off-site impacts, they would be better addressed through roadway corridor studies. • Different solutions are needed to address different sets of issues, but a solution to one issue may create or exacerbate other issues. On-site impacts can largely be addressed through effective site design and development standards whereas off-site impacts cannot. Page 2 APC Trucking Study Report April 24,1997 TRUCKING BUSINESS REGULATION WITHIN EXISTING I-1 CODE To better understand the current process and standards which apply to trucking businesses, the APC examined the current I-1 zoning code. The attached matrix in Exhibit A details all I-1 uses, both permitted and conditional. The following observations and conclusions were made: • All of the uses the APC defines as trucking are currently considered conditional uses in the I-1 district. • Standard I-1 and other general zoning provisions apply. • Conditional uses require a public hearing. • Variances to the setback standards for I-1 land across ROW adjacent to R, A and P districts have often been requested and granted in the past. • Evaluation of a CUP request is done on a case by case basis for each specific use and site. • Because the ordinance does not have specific conditions which must be satisfied for the CUP to be granted, review is guided by the general conditional use permit provisions which relate broadly to the public health, safety and welfare. • The City has discretion in evaluating these requests to attach whatever reasonable conditions are deemed necessary to mitigate anticipated adverse impacts associated with the development. • Without specific conditions or performance standards the trucking industry has not been provided with any guidance to identify appropriate sites. VISUAL IMPACT ZONES The APC identified visual impact zones which have high visibility for visitors passing through and coming to our community. The APC believes that development in these corridors is pivotal for the city's image. These visual impact zones are illustrated in Exhibit B. The APC identified the I-494, I -35E and Hwy. 77 corridors as visual impact zones through the City. The APC also believes that Yankee Doodle Road between Coachman and Lexington, as the main artery through City's central commercial area, should also be considered a visual impact zone. The APC developed the following recommendations for future development within and along these visual impact zones. • Review zoning of the undeveloped land along these corridors to ensure that property is properly zoned to guide development in the direction that the City deems desirable in these locations and to protect it from development deemed undesirable. • Limit uses with truck parking and outdoor storage in these corridors. • Evaluate outside storage and buffering/landscaping design standards to determine whether or not they provide sufficient and effective buffering from ROW and adjacent uses; and if necessary revise standards to be more effective. • Consider prohibition of these outside activities in some locations by rezoning to a less intense use if design standards cannot accomplish the desired protection. Page 3 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 MAJOR TRUCK TRANSPORATION ROUTES The APC also examined the existing roadway system and identified the roads that it believes are, and should continue to be, the truck transportation routes to service the city's industrial area. These routes were identified based on several factors including current truck traffic patterns, land use, roadway functional classification and roadway capacity. The routes identified by the APC as truck transportation routes are also shown on Exhibit B. The roads are primarily in industrial areas, but in order to provide adequate access and circulation to the principal arterial highway system it is necessary to have some major truck routes pass along the edge of some residential neighborhoods (i.e. Bur Oak Hills, Wescott area neighborhood). The APC observed that: • Revision of design standards for residential development along these corridors would not be effective in resolving problems because most of the residential zoned land is built -out in these corridors. • As public improvements are made to these roadways, efforts to mitigate noise and provide visual barriers through landscaping should be considered where appropriate. • Reasonable visual protections of these routes should continue to be the objective of the city's on-site design standards because these major truck transportation corridors also double as major arteries through the City for residents, employees and visitors. • Screening requirements may not, or should not, necessarily double as noise mitigation where adjacent different land uses are separated by roadways. INAPPROPRIATE TRUCK TRANSPORATION ROUTES In addition to identifying major truck transportation routes, the APC also identified the stretch of Lone Oak Road, between Pilot Knob Road and Hwy. 13, on which they believe truck traffic should be prohibited now and in the future (see Exhibit B). • The design and grade of the existing roadway present serious safety threats to truckers, motorists and pedestrians interacting within this stretch of roadway. • The existing residential development along this segment as well as the steep grades make road improvements challenging at best and possibly inappropriate. • The APC acknowledges the implication of the County Road status of Lone Oak Rd on the ability of the City to restrict truck traffic, but recommends that the City negotiate further with the County to see if this objective can be achieved in some other way. SCREENING/LANDSCAPING/SETBACK STANDARDS The APC acknowledges that on-site buffers in industrial areas cannot practically meet significant noise reduction objectives and should instead function primarily to provide visual screening. The APC believes visual screening is an important element in making these uses work in the community and therefore, should continue to be a requirement. The APC reviewed graphic illustrations of current code requirements (Exhibit C) and several section drawings illustrating various screen (berms and landscaping) heights relative to setback buffers (Exhibit H). The following conclusions were made: Page 4 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 • The existing 100 foot setback buffer poses significant difficulties for development of some industrial properties; particularly parcels that were subdivided many years ago and are small or irregular in shape. Without more specific screening requirements, the larger setback alone is not an effective buffer. • If solid screening materials are required (e.g. berms, landscaping), a 50 foot setback rather than the current 100 foot requirement appears to provide adequate visual buffering where roadways intervene between incompatible uses. A 50 foot setback is currently the standard for all property abutting a major thoroughfare, which is often the situation where industrial property is across the street from non -industrial property. • Where conforming residential properties directly abut industrial properties, a 100 foot setback on the industrial property may still be appropriate. As screening standards are developed, this setback requirement should be evaluated for reasonableness and effectiveness. • A combination of berming, walls, solid fences and landscaping which creates a solid visual screen should be required where outdoor storage areas abut public right-of-way and/or residential, and possibly other low intensity uses. • Buildings can provide screening. Therefore, solid landscaping and/or berming is not required in front of buildings. Current regulations ensure that loading docks do not face residential property and that architectural design standards be met. • The existing screening standards are somewhat redundant and ineffective. These standards should be revised to ensure adequate screening provisions. OUTDOOR STORAGE The current outdoor storage standards were initially drafted to address commercial outdoor display of products such as rock salt and windshield fluid at a convenience store. However, they have been applied to trash enclosures, industrial storage and display. As a result, variance requests are quite common, particularly with regard to outdoor storage in industrial areas. The APC reviewed the existing outdoor storage standards (Exhibit E) and made the following observations and conclusions: A distinction should be made between commercial outdoor storage, industrial outdoor storage, commercial display areas, and trash enclosures. Standards should be developed, as necessary, to address these different situations. The APC noted that many of the existing standards addressing commercial outdoor storage and trash enclosures and should be retained. The current standards include a requirement for enclosing the outdoor storage area but do not specifically require screening. Screening should be required for outdoor. storage in industrial areas where it abuts public right-of-way or residential and other low intensity uses. In industrial areas, it may not be practical to require screening to be taller than the items being stored outdoors. In situations where the stored items are quite tall (e.g. 16' truck), a building or landscaping that will grow taller may provide the most appropriate screening. Page 5 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 NOISE MITIGATION ANALYSIS To better understand the factors involved in mitigating the negative impacts of noise, Mark Jepsen of SEH presented information regarding the relative levels of different types of noise (Exhibit F), what factors influence noise transmission, and the effectiveness of various mitigation measures. Based on this information, the APC made the following conclusions: • Noise transmission is affected by several factors including distance, elevation, natural barriers, characteristics of terrain, and ambient noise level. • The effectiveness of mitigation measures varies depending on the type of noise generated and the quality of the intervening space. Consequently, the combination of different types of noise limits the effectiveness of any one mitigation measure. • The distance between generator and receptor has less impact on mitigation than what is within that intervening space (solid barrier vs. open space, vegetative cover vs. hard surface). • On-site development standards do nothing to mitigate traffic noise generated by an intervening roadway. I-1 PROPERTIES WHERE TRUCKING USES MAY BE MARGINAL OR UNDESIRABLE The APC identified four industrial areas of the city for detailed study (Exhibit G). The areas selected were either in visual impact areas or in transitional land use areas. The APC did not include the industrial properties on the northwest side of Hwy. 13 because Hwy. 13 is a significant divider and acts as the transition area between different uses. In looking at the I-1 properties and general development patterns in those areas, the APC identified specific parcels which they consider marginal or possibly undesirable for trucking uses. These specific parcels are indicated by an "i" shown within the parcel on the each of the four detail maps. The APC considered these parcels marginal for one or more of the following reasons: • Small size makes it difficult to develop larger trucking use on the parcel. • Odd shape presents constraints to development of trucking use. • The parcel is located within an identified visual corridor. • Access to the property commingles with residential and/or school traffic. • The parcel is close to residential, school or park development. • Presence of natural features such as trees, steep slopes and wetlands that make it difficult to develop with large footprint buildings. POTENTIAL IMPLEMENTATION STEPS Before proceeding with any actions, the APC is first requesting feedback from the City Council on the observations and policy statements presented in this report. Specifically, does the City Council concur with the following: 1. Definition of what is and what is not "trucking" 2. Definition of the problems and issues. 3. Visual corridors, and appropriate and inappropriate truck routes identified by the APC. 4. Parcels identified as marginal for trucking uses. Page 6 APC Trucking Study Report April 24,1997 Second, the AFC's observations and conclusions in this report recommend additional analysis of some specific elements of the zoning code and possible amendments. For those parcels identified as marginal for trucking, the APC is recommending further study of alternative zoning options to ensure development of appropriate uses. The APC is requesting direction from the City Council whether to pursue the following actions. 1. Zoning Code revision of industrial screening and setback standards. 2. Zoning Code revision of industrial outdoor storage standards. 3. Develop other specific performance standards for trucking uses (i.e. storage, location, minimum size, etc.). 4. Further study of alternative zoning options for parcels identified as marginal for trucking uses, including meeting with those property owners to discuss alternatives. Finally, the APC encourages the City Council to include noise analysis and mitigation in corridor studies. The APC recognizes that noise is an issue, but the ability to address noise mitigation through the zoning code is limited because much of the problem noise is generated by traffic on major roadways and in many instances the properties have already been developed so new standards would not resolve the problem. Page 7 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 LIST OF EXHIBITS A. Table -Existing I-1 Uses Compared to APC Trucking Definition B. Map -Showing APC Visual Impact Zones & Truck Route Recommendations C. Illustrations -Current Landscaping & Screening Standards D. Table -Summary of Issues Regarding Existing I-1 Standards E. Table -Summary of Issues Regarding Outdoor Storage Standards F. Noise Mitigation Information G. Detail Maps & Summary 1. T.H. 55/149,& Bur Oaks Area 2. McKee Area 3. Central Area Vicinity 4. SE Industrial Area H. Sections -Alternatives for Visual Buffer Standards Page 8 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 EXHIBIT A Table -Existing I-1 Uses Compared to APC Trucking Definition 1 1 1 1 1 J i 1 11 1 1 1 11 EXHIBIT A USE 1-1 DISTRICT TRUCKING (by APC definition*) OTHER ASSOCIATED PERMITS if Trucks or Auto Repair (in bldg.) P Trailers Ice/Cold Storage/Battling P N (mfg., storage, warehousing of) a'Office P N Machine Welding P N Paper P (mfg., storage, warehousing of) N Theater/Indoor Commercial Recreation P ;Radio/Televtsit n P N Antenna Tower Class 1 Restaurant (no on -sale liquor) P N Class I Restaurant (with on -sale liquor.) CUP N Liquor License Research Laboratory P N Trade School P N Warehouse (associated sales, P N and showroom) Wholesale (associated sales, P N and showroom) Armory/convention center P N Animal hospital or clinic (no outside kennel) P N Outside Dog Kennel CUP N Amusement" Devices P N (<3 machines, w/in 200' of, another) Amusement Devices CUP N (3+ machines, over 500' from another) Truck or Freight Terminal CUP Y CUP for Outdoor Storage Contractor's Yard CUP N CUP for Outdoor Storage Explosives CUP N (storage,_use; mfg. of Outdoor Storage (on-site and of anything) If Trucks or when accessory to principal use CUP Trailers Sales Yard,forBuilding Materials CUP N CUP forOutdoor Storage Sales and Service for CUP Y CUP for Outdoor Storage (of vehicle Trucks and Passenger Vehicles inventory and those in for service) Rental Lots CUP N CUP for Outdoor Storage Carrrruck Wash CUP ? Truck Stop CUP Y Motor Fuel Sales CUP N On -Sale Wine/Beer CUP N Off -Street Parking/Outdoor Storage CUP If Trucks or Exempt from height restriction that (as principal use on a parcel) Trailers applies to other outdoor storage ' APC defined "Trucking" as including the following: Freight Terminal, Outside Truckfrrailer Storage, Truck/Trailer Sales, Truckfrrailer Leasing, Service of Trucks P = Permitted Use CUP = Conditional Use A-1 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 EXHIBIT B Map -Showing APC Visual Impact Zones & Truck Route Recommendations 1 1 t 1 n d n I bin d■�nl■■ ■ �I s a ._ ji Ilk 4 O , !d� tPr�r` .I� 1 — � f J � - X � G -� ;, �' •- r ■ •may _ OIL: _ `d t a� _ _ . e [1 v f' I �-v ,:`"� �'J is �� 1` ■■■■■�i� � —.. _.. ? 1 r t_,. —_. — _`wln � .' � Ali ii � 7 WINi h ■ I 4 hw Ail" � ; iv �Ir■ � � Lw1 �III�1, ' Vlsual, Impact Zone /V Major Truck Routes inappropriate Truck Route : ' Residential 4. Parks and Public Facilities . . _ Commercial v ori"Momft O"W 104w""M Marais ate.Tsai - Industrial . .z APC Trucking Study Report April 24,1997 EXHIBIT C Illustrations -Current Landscaping & Screening Standards [l EXISTING ZONING CODE REGULATIONS REGARDING I -I AND OUTDOOR STORAGE USES BUILDING SETBACKS PARKING SETBACKS I SCREENING I OTHER 1-1/1-1 • 40' - Front/public street (50' if major thoroughfare • 20' - Side • 30'- Rear • 20' - Front/street • 5' - Side • 5' - Rear • Parking, loading service, utility and outdoor storage must be screened from street or adjacent different land use to achieve 75'%, opacity year-round at maturity • Landscaping rr freeway corridors (I - 35E, 494, TH 77) • Existing wooded areas designated in Comp Plan?? shall be preserved who 50' adj, to freeway. Beyond 50', max. 40% removal allowed • Planting screen must be provided w/in min. 25' setback from freeway (NO'T'E: conflicts with above requirement of 50' setback @ freeway) • Loading areas not permitted along front side ofbuilding • Where loading area faces public street, 40' landscaped yard required I-I/A, R, or P When 1-I abutting or across street • 100' - Front • 100' - Side • 100'- Rear • 100'- Front • 100' - Side • No separate rear setback defined • Parking, loading service, utility and outdoor storage must be screened from street or adjacent different land use to achieve 75",6 opacity year-ruund at maturity • Where 1-I building or parking w/in 200 ft. need solid 6 ft. fence or hedge, except max. 4 ft. fence or hedge allowed where adj. to street • Loading docks, truck parking, or open storage not allowed on side of I -I district abutting A, R, P • Loading areas w/in 300' of R district require CUP i C-1 OUTDOORSTORAGEI (CUP) • Enclosure shall not encroach into any front building setback or other required setbacks • Enclosure allowed at parking setback along side or rear lot lines per above • Parking, loading service, utility and outdoor storage must be screened from street or adjacent different land use to achieve 75% opacily year-round at maturity ■ Sec. 11. 10, Sub.20.C. states maximum fence height to be 6 feet • Sec. I I.10 Sub. 29.C.(' states items stored shall not exceed height of enclosure • Loading docks, truck parking, or open storaige not allowed un side of I -I district abutting. A. R, P ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES OF EXISTING CODE REQUIREMENT The attached five drawings illustrate application examples of current code requirements relating to I-1 setbacks, screening and outdoor storage. Several code requirements are repeated on the various examples, but shown in different situations. Each example is briefly described below. Example A (I -1/I-1) • Standard required building and parking setbacks • 40 ft. landscaped yard where loading docks face the street. Need clarification on setback when loading docks do not face street --- while loading dock will be setback 40 feet because building must be setback 40 feet from street, does standard parking setback apply to loading area/truck parking? + Standard landscape screening of parking or loading areas to achieve 75% opacity at maturity Example B (I -1/R w/150 ft. ROW separation) 0 100 ft. landscaped yard where I-1 abuts R, A, or P • Loading dock within 300 feet of R district requires CUP. In this example, the overall separation between the loading dock and any residential buildings is 300 feet because a 50 ft. setback is required in the R district where it abuts a major thoroughfare. Example C (I 1/R w/100 ft. ROW separation) • 100 ft. landscaped yard where I-1 abuts (includes across street) R, A, or P • Loading dock within 300 feet of district requires CUP. In this example, even though the loading dock completely separated and screened from view by R district by a 100 ft. ROW, the building and landscaped yard, a CUP is required because the overall distance between the loading dock and the R district is less than 300 feet. Example D (I -1/R w/ 80 ft. ROW separation) • 100 ft. landscaped yard where I-1 abuts R, A, or P # Maximum 4 ft. (min. 3 ft.) fence or hedge required along public street where I-1 building or parking within 200 ft. of R district • Loading dock within 300 feet of R requires CUP Example E (I -1/R directly abutting) • 100 ft. landscaped yard where I-1 abuts R, A, or P • 6 ft. fence or hedge required where I-1 building or parking within 200 ft. of R district 1, • Loading dock within 300 feet of R requires CUP C-2 C-3 EXAMPLE A • f i I J IL _— Jl C-4 EXAMPLE B 1. rdl EXAMPLE C I i 1 C-5 EXAMPLE D 0 4� C-6 H - - - EXAMPLE E m M a i 4-1 I I � r • 1 I 1 �. � I r I I • t' C-7 �3 V m M a i 4-1 I I � r • 1 I 1 �. � I r I I • t' C-7 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 EXHIBIT D Table -Summary of Issues Regarding Existing I-1 Standards 1 1 t Il 1 1 1 !I t it 1 t 1 EXISTING CODE I-1 STANDARDS PROVISION OBSERVATION 100 ft. landscape buffer yard for buildings • No specific requirements for and parking where I-1 abuts A, R, or P landscaping, therefore assume standard zoning district 75% opacity standard. • Noise mitigation data indicate a solidly planted buffer 100 ft. deep (vs. single solid row of plants) is needed to provide effective noise level reduction. This would be very expensive and impractical. • No buffer yard requirement specified for parking along rear lot line. • Road right-of-way width not considered part of buffer, therefore actual separation between I-1 building/parking and A, R, P zone could be over 300 feet. Where loading area faces public street a 40 • Need clarification of situation where ft. landscape yard required. loading dock does not face street (i.e. comer lot); does parking lot abutting loading dock need to be setback 40 feet or does standard 20 ft. setback apply? Where I-1 building or parking within 200 ft. • Somewhat redundant with requirement of A, R, P a solid 6 ft. fence or hedge is for a 100 ft. landscaped buffer yard required, except where adjacent to street, a where I-1 abuts A, R, P. maximum 4 ft. fence or hedge is required. • Could apply in situation where I-1 lot is separated from A, R, P property by another lot but is still within 200 feet. Loading dock within 300 ft. of R district • Could apply in situation where I-1 lot is requires a CUP separated from R property by another lot but still within 300 feet. • Would apply in situation where loading dock/area not visible to R property but still within 300 feet. MW APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 EXHIBIT E Table -Summary of Issues Regarding Outdoor Storage Standards I] [I 11 1 r 1 1.1 1 EXHIBIT E EXISTING CODE - OUTDOOR STORAGE STANDARDS PROVISION OBSERVATIONS Outdoor storage items shall be placed within an • By definition and as applied in the past, this enclosure includes display and trash. All such enclosures shall be attached to the • What is the purpose of this standard? Is it to keep principal building except in the I-1 District. storage out of building setback and required yard areas? The enclosure shall be made of material suitable • In I-1, suitable enclosure is often a chain link to the building and the items to be stored. fence. • Screening enclosure is discretionary • Screening defeats purpose of display • Enclosures for trash usually match building materials. The enclosure shall not encroach into any • Purpose is to keep storage and display in side and established front building setback area or other rear yards behind building line. required setbacks The enclosure shall not interfere with any • A good site design standard pedestrian or vehicular movement. The items to be stored shall not exceed the • Variance needed to store anything taller than six height of the enclosure. feet (max fence height) • Much industrial storage, especially truck and trailer storage (10'-16'height) almost guarantees variance request for this provision • If chain link fence is suitable, what is purpose of limiting height of materials when enclosure doesn't screen? The display area shall not take up required • Terminology implies differention between parking spaces or landscaping areas. storage and display, but definition and historical application of ordinance does not. The display area shall be surfaced with concrete • Terminology implies differentiation between or an approved equivalent to control dust and storage and display. erosion. The surface shall be properly • A good site design standard. maintained to prevent deterioration. The square footage of outdoor display areas • Terminology implies differentiation between shall be included in the calculation of required storage and display. off-street parking for the principal use of the • Makes sense if display (consider like additional property. retail floor area) but is additional parking necessary if storage? OTHER OBSERVATIONS: • This ordinance was initially drafted to address commercial outdoor display of products, such as rock salt and windshield fluid at a convenience store, but has since been applied to trash enclosures and industrial storage and display such as trucks and trailers. • By definition, outdoor storage includes "display, stock, keep, sell or trade outside ... any items of merchandise, supplies, materials, finished goods, inventory or other movable property, trash receptacles, or motor vehicles" yet terminology distinguishes between storage and display. • These provisions do not allow for outdoor storage in LB or RB. If application of ordinance includes trash enclosures, then LB and RB must have trash stored indoors. E-1 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 EXHIBIT F Noise Mitigation Information 612 490 2150 04/10/97 14:30 $612 490 2150 SEH ST PAUL CiverwWw of Wkwlzo AJ7ii1ya* MethodoiDgy 1. Standard traffic related noise analysis model is STAMINA software, developed by the FHWA.. Version used locally, MINNOISE, is a variation of STAMINA that assumes a higher proportion of heavy trucks in the vehicle mix than the FHWA version. 2. Key factors modeled in the noise model: Distance (from source to sensitive receptor locations) • Elevation (differences between source and receptor locations) Natural barriers (berms, buffers, etc, between roadway and receptor locations) Intervening terrain characteristics (hard versus soft, covered by vegetation versus bare ground, eta) Traffic volumes Vehicle mix (auto, small/medium/heavy truck) Vehicle speed 3. Noise levels are measured in dBA (decibels weighted for the purpose of measuring the human response to sound.) Li 0 refers to the state noise level standard, in dBA, exceeded 10 percent of the time for a peak one hour period. Daytime peak threshold = L10 (65dBA}, nighttime peak threshold = L10 (55018A) L50 refers to the state noise level standard, in dBA, exceeded 50 percent of the time for a peak one hour period. Daytime peak threshold = L50 (60 dBA); nighttime peak threshold = L50 (50dBA) • Federal noise standards = 70 dBA Q110003/0004 Traffic related noise levels are estimated for both daytime (7 a.m. -10 p.m.) and nighttime (10 p.m. - 7a.m.) periods. Nighttime peak period is typically the 6 a.m. - 7 a.m. moming commute period. Nighttime peak standards are widely exceeded during this time period in most metropolitan areas. Moderate volumes on a typical local street cause a violation of the L10 (55dBA) standard. Monitoring equipment is accurate to within +/-1 or 2 dBA (at best). Variable nature of traffic Flows on adjacent street causes wide fluctuation in background noise levels when attempting to establish observed baseline levels. Under typical circumstances, a doubling of traffic volume on a typical street adds +3 dBA, which is just perceptible to the human ear. Doubling of intervening distance typically reduces noise levels -3 dBA over hand ground surface, and -4.5 dBA over soft ground surface. • Generally, an increase of +10 dBA sounds twice as loud to the human ear. F-1 612 490 2150 04/10/97 14:30 $612 490 2150 SEH ST PAUL 4. FHWA noise abatement criteria: • If at or over 70 dBA, noise should be mitigated to 65 dBA or lower. • If mitigation is not feasible, a noise variance is needed from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). • If an ISP is required, MPGA requires mitigation to state standards, except for freeways. 5. MN/DOT benefit/cost criteria for mitigation: • Mitigation strategy must achieve at least a 5 dBA reduction • Maximum cost/dBA per receptor is $3250 (e.g. $16,250 per receptor site for 5 dBA reduction). 6. MPCA generally do not enforce until the following criteria are met: • Total (with project) dBA threshold exceeds specific standard by at least 10 dBA • Additional noise levels due to project is at least 10 dBA beyond measurable background dBA level (in order to demonstrate a clear causal relationship to new development) 7. Industrial Site Issues: • Along Hwy. 149 (industrial side) a 100 hoot setback would reduce total noise to residents on opposite side by 2-3 dBA versus a 25 foot setback. • Noise barrier along industrial property would need to be of sufficient height to prevent a Gear sight line between the level of the exhaust stacks on heavy trucks and the upper story of residences opposite Hwy. 149. (Probable level of noise mitigation of a 15 - 20 hoot high barrier. - 4 - 6 dBA-) • Combined impacts of airport noise, traffic noise and industrial noise limit the overall effectiveness of any individual solution. F-2 0004/0004 612 490 2150 04/l0/97 10:10 FA.Y 612 490 2150 SEH ST. PAUL SITUATION la) —�� q (d) (e) Q003/008 ATTENUATION 3dBA/OD 4.5dBA/DD 5dBA for 1st 30m 5dBA for 2nd 30m 10dBA max 1 st 3dB for 40.65% Area ROW 5d9 for 55.90% Area 1.5dBA for EACH ADDiTIONAL ROW 10dBA max WALL 20 dBA max BERM 23 dBA Max Figure 8. Attenuation of Highway Traffic Noise F-3 612 490 2150 04/•10/97 10:10 FAX 612 490 2150 SEH ST. PAUL Sound ]Levels and Human Response Z002/008 F-4 Iso Carrier deck jet operation 140 Painfully loud 130 Limit of amplified speech Jet takeoff (200 ft.) 120 Discotheque Maximum vocal effort Auto horn (3 ft.) Riveting machine 110 Jet takeoff (2,000 ft.) Shout (0.5 ft.) 100 Very annoying Shouting in ear N.Y. subway station Heavy truck (50 ft.) 90 Hearing damage (8 hours) Shouting at 2 ft. Pneumatic drill (50 ft.) 80 Annoying Very loud conversation, Freight train (50 ft.) 2 ft. Freeway traffic (50 ft.) 70 Telephone use difficult Loud conversation at 2 ft. Intrusive Air conditioning unit 60 Loud conversation at 4 ft. (20 ft.) Light auto traffic 50 Quiet Normal conversation, (100 ft.) 12 ft. Living room 1 Bedroom 40 Library Soft whisper 30 Very quiet Broadcast studio 20 10 Just audible 0 Threshold of hearing - i Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Noise Pollution, (Washington D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, " S August 1972), p. 6. :ITRANS�.wwRNER�NOISE F-4 APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 EXHIBIT G Detail Maps & Summary 1. T.H. 55/149 & Bur Oaks Area 2. McKee Area 3. Central Area Vicinity 4. SE Industrial Area `--�c;- ---------------- i X Detail Map r _ Area #2 �L Detail Map Detail Map Area #i Area #3 =� Tom= LL •� I i �— - X,,4 WaS _4�� N of Eagan II �- , - I� j �1 TS cP� Detail Ma —�y'- Area #4 l Detail Area Reference Masa �� 2000 0 2000 4000 Feet City of Eagan CamKnity DevelMnent Oepanment -- DETAIL MAP # 1- T.H. 55/149 & BUR OAKS AREA OBSERVATIONS I • Small, irregular shaped lots. Some may be non -conforming in terms of size. Limited buildable areas; odd shapes make it difficult to develop without encroaching into required setbacks. • Access to T.H. 55 and 149. Corridor study currently underway. Will likely recommend limitations on number of access points. New developments may need to share consolidated accesses. • Proximity to residential, although major thoroughfare separates R and I uses (highway has 150+ foot right-of-way). Potential for incompatibilities and nuisances (noise, traffic, smells). • Proximity to proposed North Park and various undeveloped properties zoned Ag. Current code requires 100 foot buffer. Would result in creation of existing non- conforming properties along Mike Collins when/if North Park rezoned to P. • Properties within airport noise impact zone. • Railroad constricts east/west traffic circulation. Also serves as a buffer between I uses and future North Park. IDEAS & SUGGESTIONS • Limit or prohibit "trucking" uses, particularly at NE corner of 149 and Yankee Doodle. • Allow or encourage a mix of commercial and small light industrial uses. • Encourage property consolidation, lot combination. • Develop additional buffering/landscaping standards to adequately buffer adjacent different uses while reducing the current requirement for a 100 foot buffer yard. • Develop modified buffer standards for I uses adjacent to athletic fields (less buffering may be ok due to intensity of athletic use). G-1 w W r ~ Z � T J � Z OV rliir-mjlm m DETAIL MAP # 2 - McKEE ADDITION OBSERVATIONS • Small, irregular shaped lots. Some may be non -conforming in terms of size. Odd shapes make it difficult to develop without encroaching into required setbacks. • Adjacent to residential, although separated by major thoroughfare. Visibility from I -35E a major corridor into and through Eagan and gateway to central area. • Access onto Lexington; County will likely want to limit the number of access points, particularly given residential driveways across street. IDEAS & SUGGESTIONS • Encourage property consolidation, lot combinations. • Limit or prohibit "trucking" uses. • Limit or prohibit outside storage; possible exception on lots that are large enough to achieve adequate buffering. • Develop additional buffer/landscaping standards: along freeway corridor; abutting residential. • Allow or encourage mix of commercial and small, service oriented industrial uses (e.g. print shops, dry cleaners). Examples: 1) small strip center like that on Lone Oak and Eagandale Blvd. w/o the gas station) that might cater to resident and employee needs in area, and 2) small manufacturingloffice uses w/o outdoor storage. • Encourage complementary uses to spin off existing uses such as Knox (e.g. the store, lighting store). G-2 �:J .y::: �. i I P y— m05 U� cu 3 �g a�ch cn — m U� m 0 0 -- o I I N + C C � o � I _ .0 I 0 1J "� N46 1J a LU 0 U� y . e 0 o w z �o N O Z DETAILED MAP #3 - CENTRAL AREA VICINITY OBSERVATIONS • Visibility from major road corridors. Property on west side of Lexington visible from I-35 E; property on east side of Lexington visible from Yankee Doodle Road (major entry into Central Area) • Proximity to Central Area - commercial and residential mix; image; aesthetics. • Proximity to residential on south side of Yankee Doodle. • New development to north tending to be more commercial (e.g. Homestead Village hotel, post office retail facility). • Transportation patterns; potential conflicts with residential and commercial traffic around Promenade. • Properties within airport noise impact zone. • Natural features (trees, wetlands) make property more difficult to develop with large footprint buildings and large parking lots. IDEAS & SUGGESTIONS • Limit or prohibit "trucking" uses • Allow or encourage a mix of light industrial (smaller scale) and commercial uses • Develop additional screening/buffering standards to: improve aesthetics; buffer views from freeway; carry through landscape "theme" established @ Promenade; enhance Yankee Doodle streetscape G-3 C Gry ofEagan Detail Map #j *� Central Area Vicinit, " �0 � � Existing Structures Buildable Area Buildable Area Calculation (square feet) 0 Identified as Marginal for. Trucking Use 300 0 Sao 600 900 Feet ICity of Eagan Community Development Department April 15, 1997 1344085.3 I w 1 238254.8 CO. HVIIY. NO. 28 ::: d: ;' DETAILED MAP #4 - SE INDUSTRIAL AREA OBSERVATIONS • Small lots; some are existing non -conforming in terms of lot size, setbacks and buffer requirements. However, many were granted variances for their non -conformities. • Close proximity to residential, school and park; uses potentially incompatible (i.e.) parking located behind buildings adjacent to residential and school properties. • Compliance with outdoor storage standards has been an issue in this area. • Access; only access to industrial properties is from T.H. 3 which is also used by residential and school traffic. Potential traffic conflicts. • Large still undeveloped I-1 parcel abutting T.H .3 is key piece as it has good development potential and is located at a gateway into the City and to the school and neighborhood. • Many of the properties within Halley's Addition are developed to their maximum potential based on current setback requirements. • Only one trucking use currently located in this area and that one is not in compliance with City Code. • Some roadway improvements taking place - Biscayne being paved; Gun Club and 120`h, to Biscayne, will get rural pavement with Evergreen development. IDEAS & SUGGESTIONS Prohibit "trucking" uses in area Limit or prohibit outside storage, particularly on east side of Biscayne which abuts residential and school properties. Continue to work with property owners to bring properties into conformance with City Code regarding uses and outdoor activities (including storage). ME II, Ck,ofEogan Detail Map #4 Industrial Area LZ I - Existing Structures Buildable Area 100000 Buildable Area Calculation I0 (square feet) ( Fh Identified as Marginal 0 for Trucking Use 100 0 100 2W Feet City of Eagan Community Development Department April 15, 1997 RED PINE LN. APC Trucking Study Report April 24, 1997 EXHIBIT H Sections -Alternatives for Visual Suffer Standards I 1 A r 1 r SECTIONS - ALTERNATIVES FOR VISUAL BUFFER STANDARDS The attached section drawings attempt to illustrate various buffer options using berms and landscaping. The intent of the buffer is to provide visual screening and improved aesthetics. Information received from the City's consultant (SEH) regarding noise mitigation indicate that to achieve a perceptible reduction (e.g. 5 dBA) of on-site noise, a buffer 100 feet deep with near solid landscaping would be needed. This does not seem to be a practical requirement for properties the City has determined are appropriate for industrial development. On all the sections, a standard 16 foot tall truck was chosen as the object to be screened from view since outdoor storage of trucks seems to be a common request on industrial property. We also believe outdoor storage of items taller than 16 feet will be exceptions. The sections also assume level topography. Obviously, the effectiveness of screening will be affected by the elevation of the viewer relative to the object being screened. However, you cannot write a code standard to address all situations. Following is a brief description of what the section drawings depict. SECTIONS 1-3 • These sections all illustrate how different plant heights affect screening. Plant heights range from 3 feet (minimum required by code for screening of parking lots) to 8 feet (evergreen tree). While taller plants are available, they are also more susceptible to transplant shock and may take longer to grow. Therefore, planting a smaller plant may result in achieving the desired full screening sooner. In addition, taller, larger plants begin to get very expensive. Need to consider what is reasonable to require at time of installation vs. allowing time to grow to achieve full screening potential. (Note: Section 7 shows 10 foot evergreen tree). • All show a 6 foot berm (common height for screening purposes) • All show a 40 foot buffer/setback (minimum horizontal distance required for 6 foot berm at maximum 3:1 slope) • These sections illustrate that a shorter buffer can provide effective screening if the vantage point fairly close since the line of view is directed upward more sharply. Taller buffers provide better screens from vantage points that are further away. SECTIONS 4-6 • These sections all illustrate how changing the berm height affects screening. • All show a minimum 3 foot planting (minimum required by code to screen parking lots). H-1 • These sections illustrate the different horizontal buffer/setback distance needed to accommodate the various berm heights at a maximum 3:1 (33%) slope as required by code. (see table below) SECTION 7 Illustrates the existing code requirements for buffer/setback (100 ft.) in context of a 100 ft. road right-of-way and required setbacks on the abutting "R" property (50 ft.). Shows that the current code results in an actual horizontal distance between the house and the industrial building/outdoor storage of 250 feet. Shows a 6 foot berm with 10 foot plants (16 feet total to match truck height). View of truck from house at ground level could be fully screened with 6 foot berm and plants less than 10 feet tall. Screening the view from the second level of the house would require at least 10 foot plants. Table: Setback needed for various berm heights BERM HEIGHT SETBACK COMMENTS (FEET) (FEET) 3 20 Current code parking setback along public roadway 4 25 6 40 Current code building setback along local or collector street; and where loading area faces public street 8 50 Current code building setback along major thoroughfare 10 60 H-2 Trucking Study - Summary and Conclusions Economic Development Commission 1 I 1 i 1 I 1 TO: MAYOR EGAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CHAIR GARY MORGAN AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 24, 1997 SUBJECT: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ISSUE FINDINGS - CITY OF EAGAN TRUCKING STUDY The Economic Development Commission is grateful for the opportunity to provide comments to the City Council as part of its consideration of the City's Trucking Study. As noted in the Council's charge to the EDC, the Commission recognizes that land use, transportation, buffering, environmental and aesthetic issues are appropriate to be considered by the Advisory Planning Commission. By extension, the EDC findings address issues of business climate, expansion and development , adequacy of transportation infrastructure and the associated benefits or consequences to the community. The primary basis for a review of these issues is the City's adopted Economic Development Goals, a copy of which is attached. The Commission attempted to address the extent to which the trucking industry in general advances or conflicts with these goals. In particular, the Commission identified employment and tax base as two important issues for discussion. Because trucking tends to be a support activity, the Commission also considered it important to discuss how the presence of trucking relates to other businesses or activities that are priorities within the City's goals and the value of those relationships. From a long term perspective, the Commission also considered the extent to which current development decisions offer benefits or create costs today and in the future. Definition of the Industry For purposes of their findings, the Economic Development Commission is using a definition similar to that outlined in the Advisory Planning Commission Conclusions. The general categories of trucking are: • Full Load Carriers - Deliver full truck loads to destination/end user • L -T -L (Less Than Full Load) - Cross dock transfer from truck to truck with no warehousing, carry partial loads or combined loads with a variety of vehicle types • Cartage - Carry loads on final leg of trip • Air Freight Cartage - Serves the airline and Eagan -based freight forwarders by picking up and delivering freight at the airport, intermediate shippers and the freight forwarder's Eagan -based terminal • Warehouse - Deliver and pick up items by truck, but store them for a period of time between delivery and. pick up, generate traffic but are in the business of storage, not transport • Freight Terminal - Trucks arrive, unload or transfer items, trucks leave (Sources: Gary Santoodian, Dart and Mark Reimer, Freightmasters) EDC -1 EconomicDevelopment Issues The Economic Development Commission's discussion purposely excludes issues of land use planning and the compatibility of land use which would duplicate work of the Advisory Planning Commission. Throughout the EDC's discussion, however, it was apparent that economic development issues are very closely linked with land use and transportation issues. In the context of the City's Economic Development Goals, the EDC addressed the following issues and questions. The Commission's findings with respect to each issue follow the questions. Employment Impacts - To what extent does the trucking industry retain, expand and diversify the City's employment base? Do the jobs associated with the industry offer a living wage? Are the jobs typically held by City residents? Do the jobs contribute to the diversity of employment within the City? Do the businesses tend to attract primary dollars from outside the community so as to encourage higher economic activity within the community? Discussion - The Commission determined that the industry does offer a living wage or wages capable of supporting a household. Information provided by Freightmasters indicated hourly wages of 9.75 to 13.25 for warehouse workers, clerical and drivers. Salaried employees ranged from Supervisors at $29,600 per year to Upper Management at $72,000. Approximately one in six of the company's jobs were held by residents of Eagan, a level that other business representatives on the Commission consider to be comparable to other industrial employers. Another firm, Justman Freightlines, reported that nearly half of their employees live within the City. Trucking industry jobs contribute to the diversity of employment to the extent that trucking does not become the dominant industry in the community. To the extent that trucking jobs are desirable for the community, policies which permit existing companies to operate and grow will tend to retain jobs. As with any business however, if the City comes to rely too much on a single industry, it becomes more vulnerable to the economics of that industry. Since trucking is a support industry, its ability to attract primary dollars depends upon its markets and their products. In this respect, certain of the freight forwarders and full load carriers are more likely to attract outside dollars than may some of the freight terminals and local L -T -L firms. 2. Tax Base Impacts - Does the trucking industry retain, expand and diversify the City's tax base as compared to other commercial and industrial uses? Other uses in general? Does the presence of the industry tend to expand or limit the community's exposure to changing economic conditions? Does the industry utilize property at a higher and better use than other commercial and industrial alternatives at the present time? In the future? Discussion - While there was some belief expressed within the Commission that the economic development aspects of the trucking issue did not extend to tax base impacts, the Commission as a whole found that trucking uses were comparable in tax base value with many comparable industrial properties. This is partially due to the fact that many manufacturing concerns also have large amounts of outside storage and EDC -2 activity, a characteristic stereotypical of the trucking industry. In addition, certain types of trucking facilities have "relatively" little outside storage since their trailers are stored at the users locations or because the firms have a substantial corporate presence in addition to the trucking activity. For example, the presence of both Dart and Freightmaster's headquarters result in a more intensive mix of in -building activities versus outside storage space than may be typical of some trucking uses. To the extent that the City can encourage the location of headquarters or similar improvements in association with trucking, tax base would be enhanced even further. If it is true that trucking uses create tax base on par with other industrial uses, policies which permit, existing companies to operate and grow will tend to retain that tax base. The Commission found that regardless of the current tax base comparisons, there are potentially higher industrial uses of property than trucking, but they determined that the abundance of undeveloped land in Eagan means that the absorption of industrial property will not result in an actual demand for the "partially" developed trucking sites until all open space is utilized. In addition, no community can expect to see the highest development of all of its property, meaning that some lower intensity uses will continue to function in the community for the foreseeable future. At the very least, the Commission believes that some industrial property owners will not see a viable development alternative for their property for some time unless lower intensity uses are permitted. A key point which relates to the transportation infrastructure below is that the contribution of a firm to the tax base must also be considered in the context of its relative impacts to service. It is beyond the Commission at this time to perform any precise analysis, but it is recognized that heavier truck traffic does have a substantially higher impact on roads and streets than do the same number of car trips. If there were some way to quantify this impact, it may be possible to determine whether trucking firms are net contributors to the tax base -service demand balance that the community attempts to achieve. 3. Relationship to Other Businesses - How does the trucking industry relate to other businesses -and what is the value of its proximity to other businesses? - Does the presence of certain types of business activity require trucking support in close proximity? - Are there unique aspects of Eagan's location or economy which fit it to the trucking industry? Airport? Interstate system? Other? - Does the presence of trucking within the community tend to encourage the formation of other businesses which further the City's economic development goals? - Does the industry contribute to the creation of massings of economic activity? Discussion The City of Eagan is extremely attractive to trucking firms because of its access to the interstate and highway system, access to the airport and availability of relatively inexpensive, undeveloped land. The Commission found that there are numerous employers whose functions depend on trucking to a significant degree. For example, the Postal Service Bulk Mail Center relies on a number of contract firms both within and outside of the community to haul loads to other distribution facilities around the country. Domestic and international freight forwarding firms require ready access to their customers and the airport to consolidate, document and deliver products to airlines and air cargo stations. EDC -3 The Commission found that while it may not be essential for the trucking firm that supports these activities to be within the community, they are likely to be within close proximity. To the extent that they are seen as a net contributor to the tax base as discussed above, it may be worthwhile to have the firms within the community paying taxes to support their service demands rather than paying taxes somewhere else and using the City's infrastructure without contributing to it. It is unlikely that the presence of trucking within the City attracts any other firms listed among the City's economic development targets. Dependent businesses such as truck service and repair present the many of the same issues and challenges (outdoor storage, esthetics, etc.) that the trucking industry itself does. It appears that trucking firms are attracted to the City for the reasons outlined at the beginning of this section and the massing of trucking activity is a result of these factors and not because trucking firms attract other trucking firms. 4. Image and Visibility of the City - How does the industry contribute to or limit the City's image and visibility? To what extent does the physical image of trucking facilities lend itself to the image of the community? In what ways does trucking raise the visibility of the community or enhance its external image? Discussion The Commission recognizes that as an industry, trucking must make an extra effort to present a favorable presence to its surrounding area. In some commercial and industrial areas, this may be less of an issue than it is where industrial uses abut residential land uses or roadways, particularly gateways to the City. The specifics of managing appearance through such things as screening, berming and building standards likely belong with the Advisory Planning Commission. There are also examples such as Dart's headquarters where the desire of the company for a positive corporate image lends itself to a more attractive image for the community. Even so, trucking is a use which typically involves outside storage of frequently changing industrial machinery in the form of its rolling stock. In a different way, however, the mobility of the rolling stock contributes to the awareness of the City by outsiders and the traveling public. Trucking firms are well known for painting a wealth of information on their vehicles. Business people in many areas around the country are aware of Eagan as a business address because the trucking firms which serve them announce the fact in their correspondence and on the sides of their trucks. Trucks enroute pass countless people along the road and in other communities who develop name recognition for the City based on this feature of the industry. 5. Relationship to Transportation Infrastructure - Does the presence of the industry create pressures on other levels of government to improve the transportation infrastructure - state and county roads - or does it contribute disproportionately to congestion and safety concerns on road systems which cannot be anticipated to be improved in the foreseeable future? The City's economic development environment and the trucking industry benefit from sufficient roadway capacity. Can they reinforce one another or must they conflict with one another in the use of that resource? EDC -4 Discussion Road improvements tend to follow demand. Certainly .no roads are built where no traffic is expected on them. Therefore it is likely that some level of congestion is a precursor to road improvements. Unfortunately, the State of Minnesota has disconnected the linkage between traffic demand and funding to meet those demands. MNDOT is not opposed to undertaking improvements of it roadway system, provided that local governments and, by extension, their business and development communities assume the additional costs. Eagan is not unique in this regard. It is unusual in that its growth has far exceeded anyone's expectations, especially those of the state and region's transportation planners. As a consequence, the City has dramatically higher needs than many other communities. Considerable cooperative effort is being undertaken by the business community, City and County in addressing certain of these issues in the areas of Highways 13 and 55 and Yankee Doodle Road. Even so, the presence of the problem does not automatically or even easily convert to its solution. If the demand for traffic capacity by trucking or any industry is to result in funding from the state, it will be because of steps taken by the business community and City to differentiate transportation demand on Eagan's roads from that on other roads. If such efforts are unsuccessful, it will be especially important for the City to consider constraints to capacity as part of its decision on the trucking issue. 6. Future of Trucking vs. Redevelopment - What is the life expectancy of the trucking industry within Eagan? Is it similar to or different than other communities? A number of areas that have been trucking centers historically, such as St. Paul's Midway and Roseville, are expending public funds to clean up and redevelop former trucking sites. Should the City of Eagan anticipate a similar life -cycle in the future? What factors contribute to the concentration of trucking activity in a community? (Proximity to markets, road system, available space, other?) What factors contribute to the relocation of trucking from a community? (Changing markets, increasing land values, other changes?) Does the presence of the airport, interstate system or other factors extend the life -expectancy of the industry or does Eagan's historic high growth shorten the time frame until redevelopment pressures occur? Even if trucking uses are ultimately redeveloped, is it an advantage to the community to have this economic activity in the meantime? Discussion The Commission finds that there has been a progression in the location of many trucking uses. Historically, the industry was located in the St. Paul Midway area equally distant from the Minneapolis and St. Paul industrial areas. The uses moved first to areas such as Roseville which offered less expensive land which still had ready access to industry through the expanding transportation system. With property values rising in Roseville, the industry is again moving and, as noted above, Eagan is one of the next attractive places to locate. Similarly, trucking firms associated with the airport are moving from their airport and Bloomington locations for the same reasons. EDC -5 With some exceptions, such as the freight forwarders who are more location sensitive, trucking can be considered a transitional use. If the City accepts this premise then it is essential that the City anticipate the way in which trucking development now can be made to accommodate future redevelopment and the relationship of other uses to trucking and the ultimate uses of the sites. Areas such as the Midway and Roseville which have seen trucking relocate away have redeveloped and are redeveloping the areas to other uses ranging from higher intensity warehousing to office and retail uses. The ultimate redevelopment use may present challenges as well. An example was cited in Roseville where the intensity of the redevelopment as an office park is expected to generate significant levels of automobile traffic in adjacent neighborhoods along collector streets that serve the area. Regardless of the current or future use of property in the City, it is important that travel demand management be considered as a way to relieve congestion in the peak hours and better utilize the transportation infrastructure whether the City is successful in expanding it or not. As noted above under the section on tax base, trucking may be an appropriate generator of tax base for some interim period, provided that the City recognizes that there may be future costs in the form of public redevelopment assistance to bring about more intensive uses. 7. Expectations of the Development Community - In addition to conclusions on the issues themselves, the Commission briefly addressed the local development environment for the trucking industry. Leading up to and during the trucking study period, firms proposing to expand or locate within the City have sometimes had one or more applications denied. The value and importance of the public process is obvious, but some business people have indicated that clear direction from the City Council is necessary on this issue to better define development expectations for both the applicant and the community. Repeat applications are expensive, time consuming and disruptive to the business and the community. Specific conclusions from the completed trucking study can reduce this duplication of effort and the costs for business location and expansion. Findings and Recommendations Based upon the discussion presented, the Economic Development Commission makes the following findings and recommendations for City Council consideration in the formation of policy related to the future development of trucking activity in the City of Eagan. Findings • Trucking positively addresses a number of the City's economic development goals. • Eagan's location, transportation infrastructure and proximity to the airport and the rest of the region make it attractive to trucking businesses. • These features may foster a demand for trucking locations within the City which may be beyond the capacity of the City's infrastructure. To the extent that the City can encourage headquarters, warehousing and other such improvements in association with trucking, the positive impacts of trucking are increased and at least some of the negative consequences are diminished. EDC -6 Recommendations • Efforts should be made to retain existing trucking businesses who have made an investment in the City and permit them to expand. Limitations on future trucking locations and development should not unnecessarily limit the ability of existing companies to operate and expand within the City. If the City can set reasonable, but appropriately high, standards for trucking development, market forces will lower the demand for new trucking locations without reducing the ability of quality firms to locate and expand in Eagan. • To the extent that truck traffic does create more wear and tear on local streets than other types of development and Eagan bears a disproportionate burden for such impacts in relation to the region, the City should lobby and advocate for a greater sharing of state and federal highway and aid funds (gas tax, etc.) to support local street construction and maintenance. • Clear policy direction is necessary from the City Council to the development community with respect to the locations where and circumstances under which trucking uses will be permitted. EDC -7 CITY OF EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS Adopted 8/6/91 Amended 10/7/93 1. Retain, Expand and Diversify Tax Base - Keep residential property taxes as low as possible through a broad, substantial tax base - Limit adverse effects to community's revenue position due to economic conditions - Achieve economies of scale available for larger concentrations of property value - Encourage and leverage private investment in local properties. - Identify and target quality businesses. 2. Retain, Expand and Diversify Employment Base - Provide job opportunities for Eagan residents Limit dependence on narrow job categories Enhance buying power for Eagan businesses' goods and services. 3. Nurture a Healthy, User Friendly Business Environment Enhance cooperative, interactive processing of development applications. Identify City customers and customer needs and means to meet them. - Be proactive and responsive to economic development opportunities. - Consider and evaluate financial investment in priority developments and redevelopment areas. 4. Enhance the Image and Visibility of the City Encourage sense of community and community identity through recognition of City as economic activity center, corporate headquarters, the business community of choice, etc. - Enhance external image of City as economic destination, corporate center, etc. Develop identity as major economic center in addition to the Minneapolis/St. Paul central business districts, as Bloomington/494 strip is doing. - Develop and maintain community quality standards including appearance expectations, natural amenities and attractive gateway developments. 5. Attract Primary Dollars from Outside the Community Produce goods and services sold outside of the community in regional, statewide, national and international markets such that dollars are brought into the community and not just circulated within it. - Improve Eagan's ability to attract shoppers and'service users from outside of the community from the freeway and highway system. EDC -8 6. Retain, Expand and Diversify Retail and Service Facilities for Eagan Residents, Employees and Businesses Create massings and synergies of retail activity - Provide a broader spectrum of locally available choices in the areas of retail goods and services to reduce the outflow of Eagan dollars to other communities and to reduce Eagan residents' dependence on long car trips for goods and services. 7. Create Massings of Economic Activity Create focuses and areas of commercial/industrial, retail and hospitality/entertainment activity that will naturally encourage related and spin=off businesses. Encourage substantial development of existing economic activity areas within context of Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. 8. Communicate Effectively with Businesses and Developers - Encourage public participation and awareness of community assets and development activities. - Implement a business development marketing plan. - Network, cooperate, coordinate and benchmark with other agencies and cities. - Support a Chamber of Commerce EDC -9 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TARGETS 1. Commercial/Industrial - Encourage the Formation of Jobs which Enable Individuals to Support Households - Attract Clean Industry/Manufacturing - Attract Service Industries - Encourage Expanded Business Service Sector - Promote Eagan as Location for Headquarters and Branches of Major Companies - Support and retain existing businesses and jobs. 2. Hospitality Attract Visitors and Tourism Visitors and Convention Bureau Capitalize on Mall of America Market and Traffic Expand Lodging Opportunities for Local Businesses 3. Retail - Capitalize on Mall of America Market and Traffic - Explore Other Regional Market Opportunities - Attract Larger/Major Anchors - Encourage Big Ticket Retail such as Auto and Marine - Facilitate Revitalization/Redevelopment of Depressed Areas - Specifically encourage: - Men's and Women's Fashions - Upscale Grocery - Department/Junior Department Stores - Furniture - Full -Service Sporting Goods - Electronics - Office Supplies/Stationary - Camping Outfitters - Hobby and Crafts - Home Maintenance 4. Entertainment/Service - Expand Available Food and Beverage Options - Promote Youth -Oriented Entertainment - Attract Evening Entertainment Opportunities - Specifically: Upscale and Ethnic Restaurants Theaters - Racquet Sports Golf Facilities 5. Health/Medical Services - Attract expanded alternatives and levels of service in health care Promote Eagan as a location for one or more hospitals Encourage the location of other health related industries EDC -10