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