Loading...
12/04/1996 - City Council SpecialAGENDA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING Wednesday Y December 4, 1996 5:00 p.m. Municipal Center Building Community Room I. ROLL CALL & ADOPTION OF AGENDA II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD III. REVIEW "DRAFT" LAWN CHEMICAL ORDINANCE IV. WETLAND BANKING PROJECT INVESTIGATION V. REVIEW "OPTIONS" FOR USE OF RICHARD HOLZ PROPERTY VI. CONSIDER NATURAL & SCENIC GRANT ANDERSON PARCEL ACQUISITION VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURNMENT MEMO — city of eagan TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CI`TY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: NOVEMBER 27,1996 SUBJECT: SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING/DECEMBER 4,1996 A Special City Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, December 4, 1996, at 5:00 p.m. in the Community Room of the Municipal Center building for the purpose of reviewing four items that are under consideration by the Advisory Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Commission. There will be a light lunch available at 4:45 p.m. if you prefer to eat prior to the meeting.. REVIEW "DRAFT" LAWN CHEMICAL ORDINANCE In recent months, the City Council directed preparation of an ordinance that would remove or restrict the use of fertilizer applications. Several weeks ago, the Natural Resources Subcommittee of the APRNRC met with City Councilmembers Masin and Wachter to further discuss a "draft" lawn chemical ordinance. The outcome of that meeting was a recommendation to the APRNRC and subsequently to the City Council to prepare a "draft" ordinance that would limit the amount of phosphorous in commercial law fertilizer applications to no greater than 3% in commercial applicators. This ordinance would quire the licensing of all commercial applicators. Attached on pages through is a draft of that ordinance. For additional information on this item, refer to a memo enclosed on pages 44— through ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide direction to the APRNRC and City staff regarding the draft ordinance that regulates the use of phosphorous in commercial lawn fertilizer applications. WETLAND BANKING PROJECT INVESTIGATION The Minnesota Legislature is requiring developers and communities to replace wetlands at a ratio of 2:1. The law allows for cities to consider replacement on either an on-site of off-site basis. Due to the fact that Eagan is approximately 80% developed, there are less opportunities to secure suitable land for future wetlands within the corporate limits. Since the law does provide for off-site replacement, consideration is being given to securing a site outside the City referred to as "wetland banking" that would help the City meet its wetland replacement ratio of 2:1 for future development. The whole concept of "wetland banking" might provide the City the necessary economic development tools if a full service hotel, corporate office building or some type of manufacturing is looking at a site in Eagan that requires off-site replacement of wetlands to meet their development responsibilities. For additional information on this matter. refer to the enclosed memo on pages through #—. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide direction to the Natural Resources Committee of the APRNRC and staff as to whether the City should further consider an off-site "wetland banking" outside the community. This action could be taken as a collaborative effort with Dakota County Highway DOT or another municipality or without other jurisdictions. REVIEW "OPTIONS" FOR USE OF RICHARD HOLZ PROPERTY At the November 18 APRNRC meeting. various scenarios were reviewed regarding the future use of the Richard Holz property- that was acquired to provide access to the Holz Farm Park from Cliff Road. The recommendation of the APRNRC is to rent the house. allowing further evaluation of the property in the future. For additional information, refer to a memo enclosed on pages d through -1 IJ that was included with the APRNRC November 18 packet. Minutes of that meeting are also attached on pages through "_. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide direction to the APRNRC regarding future use of the Richard Holz house. CONSIDER NATURAL & SCENIC GRANT APPLICATIONS/ ANDERSON PARCEL ACQUISITION Several months ago, the City authorized submission of a Natural and Scenic grant application for the purpose of funding approximately 50% of the acquisition cost for a 7.5 acre parcel adjacent to Patrick Egad Park. The property is referred to as the Anderson parcel and is located south of the access road into Patrick Egan Park off Lexington Avenue. The City has been notified of a grant award; however. the amount is approximately $27.000 which is approximately 10% of the entire cost instead of the 50% request made with the M grant application. Enclosed on page- through is a copy of a memo regarding the status of the City grant application. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: It is important to bring closure to this item. Therefore, direction is requested to pursue one of the following actions: 1) Pursue a modification to the grant award based on the City's purchasing less land, such as 4-7 acres with the City's match taken from the park site development fund; or 2) The City is no longer interested in the scenic grant and turn down the grant award. OTHER BUSINESS There are no items for consideration under Other Business. /S/ Thomas L. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator 3 CITY OF EAGAN �)P An Ordinance Relating To Lawn Fertilizer Content and Application Control (November 18, 1996 draft) 1.1 PURPOSE The City of Eagan has conducted studies and reviewed existing data and literature to determine the current and projected water quality of various lakes within the community. This information indicates that lake water quality may be improved if the amount of phosphorus from fertilizer and vegetative sources entering the lakes through the storm drainage system as well as overland runoff is reduced. This ordinance defines the regulations that the City of Eagan will use in maintaining and improving lake resources enjoyed by its residents and other users. 1.2 DEFINITIONS A. The term "commercial applicator" means a person or firm that has a commercial applicator license issued by the Minnesota Commissioner of Agriculture. 1.3 REGULATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL LAWN FERTILIZER APPLICATORS A. License Required. No person, firm, or franchise shall engage in the business of commercial lawn fertilizer application within the City of Eagan unless a license has been obtained from the City as provided herein. B. License Application Procedure. Applications for a commercial lawn fertilizer applicator license shall be submitted to the City water resources coordinator at least 30 days prior to the date of the initial lawn fertilizer application each year by the applicator within the City. The application shall consist of the following: 1. Application Form. Application forms shall be provided by the City and will require the following information be provided by applicants: a. The name, address, and telephone number of the applicant and any individuals authorized to represent the applicant. b. The policies your company uses to determine the timing of lawn fertilizer applications and identify weather conditions acceptable for lawn fertilizer applications. 2. License Fee. The license fee shall be designated from time to time by the City Council. The license shall expire on the 31 st day of December. The license fee shall not be pro- rated. C. Conditions of License. The commercial lawn fertilizer applicator license shall be issued subject to the following conditions which shall be specified on the license form: 1. Random Sampling. Commercial lawn fertilizer applicators shall permit the City to sample any commercial lawn fertilizer application to be applied within the City at any time after issuance of the initial license. The cost of analyzing fertilizer samples taken VA '),�Ajpr from the commercial applicator shall be paid by the commercial applicator if the sample analysis indicates that the phosphorus content exceeds the levels authorized herein. 2. Possession of License. The commercial lawn fertilizer application license or a copy thereof shall be in the possession of any parry employed by the commercial lawn care fertilizer applicator when making lawn fertilizer applications within the City. All vehicles operated for lawn fertilizer application within the City by the commercial applicator shall have affixed to (some portion of the vehicle) a sticker denoting compliance with the licensing requirements for that year. 3. Timing of Application. No fertilizer applications may be made when the ground is frozen or between November 1 and April 15 of the succeeding year. 4. Impervious Surfaces. Commercial applicators should not apply, spill, or otherwise cause to be deposited fertilizer on impervious surfaces. All fertilizer on impervious surfaces shall be removed before the commercial applicator leaves the site. 5. Buffer Zones. Fertilizer applications hall not be made within fifteen (15) feet of the edge of the water of any wetland, pond, or lake. Fertilizer Content and Application Rate. No commercial applicator shall apply any fertilizer to turf within the City which contains more than 3 percent by weight of phosphate expressed as P205. Annual amounts shall not exceed .5 pounds of phosphate expressed as P205 per 1,000 square feet of lawn area unless the need for increasing the total application and rate of application is documented by a lawn soil phosphorus test by the University of Minnesota Soil Testing Lab and taken within the previous two years. The licensee shall be responsible for maintaining a record of the pounds of phosphate expressed as P205 per 1,000 square feet of lawn applied to each lawn by the licensee during the year. 1.4 EXEMPT. Newly established turf areas shall not be limited by this ordinance on the quantity of phosphorus or phosphorus content of fertilizer applied for the first growing season. 1:5 RESPONSIBILITY OF LICENSEES The conduct of agents or employees of a licensee, while engaged in the performance of their duties for their principal or employer under such license, shall be deemed the conduct of the licensee. 1.6 NON-COMPLIANCE Failure to comply with any licensing requirement set forth in this section, or any other violation of City code, shall constitute sufficient cause for the termination of the license by the City Council following a public hearing. Failure to comply with the requirements of this section to secure a license before operating as a commercial fertilizer applicator within the city shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $ or to be imprisoned in the County danger for a period not to exceed days, or both. s TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION RE: REVIEW/PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF DRAFT LAWN CHEMICAL CONTROL ORDINANCE CONCEPT DATE: NOVEMBER 12, 1996 Background The City Council has directed the Advisory Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission (APRNRC) and staff to draft and present for the Council's consideration a lawn fertilizer control ordinance. On October 14, 1996, the Natural Resources Subcommittee met to review and select the key concepts that should be included in a lawn chemical control ordinance. A summary of that meeting is attached for your review. Please note that in addition to the APRNRC members and staff present, City Council members Sandra Masin and Ted Wachter also attended and provided direction. Based on the direction provided at this meeting, staff outlined a draft lawn fertilizer ordinance which is also attached. The draft was forwarded to the City Attorney's office for review, and while numerous wording changes were recommended by that office, the overall concepts outlined in the draft do not require any significant alteration. Commission Action Requested Staff requests that the Commission review and comment on the concept ordinance and, if appropriate, recommend that it be presented to the City Council for review and continent at an upcoming workshop. A wider public review would then take place if the conceptual ordinance is endorsed by both the Commission and Council. Aa,' /-: � �� .. %� Rich Brasch Water Resources Coordinator cc. Ken Vraa NATURAL RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE -MEETING SUMMARY - OCTOBER 14,1996 Persons Attending: 'Ted Wachter, City Council Sandra Masin, City Council Steve Thompson, APRNRC Daryle Peterson, APRNRC Tim Callister, APRNRC Michael Vincent, APRNRC Sharon Hills, City Attorney's Office Paul Olson, staff Rich Brasch, staff Meeting Summary: The meeting participants went over the Eagan Lawn Fertilizer Ordinance Conceptual Outline dated October 8, 1996 sent out with the meeting packet. The purpose of the discussion was to select the concepts that should be included in a draft lawn fertilizer ordinance. The outcome of the discussion was as follows: • The city should require commercial lawn fertilizer applicators to obtain a license from the City and the license should be processed at and issued by the lowest administrative level feasible (preferably the staff level). • There should not be a requirement to submit information on fertilizer formulations with the license application. Spot field checks should be all that is necessan, to determine compliance with license conditions regarding fertilizer content. • 'There is no need to for Concept 3 to be included in the ordinance if Concept 2 is dropped. • A license fee should be charged to help cover the cost of processing the license application.. The fee should be set by the City Council annually. • 'The following recommendations were made regarding conditions of the license: a. allow the City to randomly the fertilizers used by commercial applicators within the city to determine compliance with phosphorus content standards. b. drop the requirement for licensees to provide a no -phosphorus alternative; it is illegal because it interferes with inter -state commerce. c. require the license, or a copy thereof, to be in the possession of any party employed by the licensee when making applications within the city. d. require the licensees to have a sticker issued by the City affixed to their vehicle denoting the possession of a valid license for that year. e. drop the requirement that each vehicle be required to advertize the availability of no -phosphorus fertilizer alternatives; there are also inter -state commerce issues with this. f. include limitations on the time of application of fertilizer, a prohibition on spillage of fertilizer on impervious surfaces and a requirement to clean up any that is spilled, and a prohibition on application of fertilizer within 15 feet of the water's edge of any lake, pond, or wetland. g. limit the phosphorus content of any fertilizer applied within the city to 3% phosphorus by weight. h. limit the total amount of phosphorus that can be applied to a unit area of turf to .5 pounds per 1000 square feet, and require the licensee to track the total amount of phosphorus applied to each lawn over the season I. provide for an exemption from the previous two requirements if the need for higher rates of application or phosphorus content is documented by a reliable soils test. • Newly established turf grass areas should be exempt from the provisions of this ordinance regarding fertilizer content and application rate for the first growing season. • License forfeiture should be the primary enforcing mechanism for compliance with the conditions of the license. Fines/imprisonment should be considered as possible enforcement mechanism for carrying out commercial applicator activities without a license. • There should not be any provisions in the ordinance that apply to individual property owners fertilizing their own lawns. Staff was directed to assemble a rough draft of a conceptual ordinance, have the City Attorney review the draft for any "fatal flaws", review the draft ordinance with the APRNRC at its November 1996 meeting, then review the draft with the City Council to receive feed -back before pursuing a review by commercial fertilizer applicators who would be affected by the ordinance. Meeting summary prepared November 9, 1996 by R. Brasch DI TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION R.E. STATUS OF WETLAND BANKING PROJECT INVESTIGATIONS DATE: NOVEMBER 11, 1996 For some time, staff have been searching for cost-effective, environmentally sound methods of wetland mitigation that might be required in the future as a result of unavoidable wetland impacts caused by City -sponsored projects, such as development of parks, construction of city streets, etc. Staff have completed an investigation of opportunities to restore or create wetlands within the city limits as a means of meeting wetland mitigation options through wetland "banking" and wanted to share this information with the Commission, In addition, staff has found what it believes is a viable wetland banking opportunity outside the City of Eagan that merits additional investigation and is requesting that the Commission support authorization by the City Council to investigate this opportunity in more detail. Wetland banking involves the creation or restoration of a viable wetland in advance of causing impacts which require mitigation in the form of replacement wetland. The "credits" generated by the "banked" wetland can then be "withdrawn" as unavoidable impacts are incurred until the credits are used up. The Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA) requires that impacts in the Metro area be mitigated on a 2:1 basis, so we need twice as many credits in the bank as the area of wetlands we expect to impact. One big advantage of wetland, banking is that there is the potential to generate significant economies of scale. The unit costs of constructing small replacement wetlands are generally much higher than the unit costs of constructing large wetlands. In addition, banking is a much more efficient way to meet the processing requirements for wetland impacts. Thus, there are financial as well as procedural advantages to developing a wetland bank. In 1995, city water resources staff worked with a wetlands consulting firm and Dakota County to conduct a search for potential wetland creation/restoration sites that could be used for a bank. The first phase of the search focused on lands owned by the City of Eagan in an effort to reduce the land acquisition component of total cost. In addition, the search focused on parcels that would allow creation of 2 or more acres of wetland. In all, 100 parcels were evaluated. The results of the office survey indicated that 91 parcels were rated as having poor potential for wetland creation, 7 parcels as fair, 1 parcel as good, and 1 parcel as very good. Further investigation, including field visits, revealed difficulties in developing any of the sites. A number of factors contribute to the lack of good opportunities for wetland creation/restoration in Eagan. The steep topography adjacent to many wetland basins makes it very difficult and expensive to expand those basins to create additional wetland area. In addition, upland areas adjacent to these basins are often heavily wooded. Finally, areas of hydric soils that have already been filled or drained - generally the easiest areas to restore the conditions necessary to re- establish a wetland - often have permanent structures on them such as buildings, roads, utilities, etc. that can't be re -located cheaply. The best site on City -owned land for wetland creation/restoration appears be a parcel located just south of Westcott Road in Wandering Walk Park. A hydric soil unit about 3 acres in area has been covered with fill. The depth of fill has been estimated at 4 feet. Because the fill would have to be removed to expose the hydric soil unit, excavation would be needed. At $2/cubic yard, excavation costs alone would be almost S 13,000 per acre. In addition, a significant amount of storm sewer and detention basin work would be necessary to generate water in sufficient quantity and of sufficient quality to generate the hydrology necessary to sustain the wetland. While the project has some merit, it is of marginal enough financial feasibility to wan -ant a look at other options. In 1996, City staff initiated an effort to look at private parcels for wetland banking potential. Twenty-eight sites were evaluated. After office evaluation and field review, only two sites were ranked as having good potential. While both sites had some technical merit for establishing a wetland, land acquisition costs alone were estimated at about $45,00/acre for one parcel and $30,000/ acre for the other. Banking credit information released from the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources in December 1995 indicated that banked credits were selling for $500-$15,000/acre. In addition, information from the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District indicates that the Dakota County Highway Department considers $10,000/acre to be a reasonable value to pay for creating or purchasing wetland banking credits. These figures provide a useful yardstick against which to measure how reasonable the prospective costs of creating "bankable" wetlands in Eagan are. These cost comparisons and other information presented in the project reports indicate there is very limited potential to find an area that is both environmentally suitable and financially reasonable for use as a wetland bank within the Eagan city limits. Staff have indicated informally to the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District that we would be interested in knowing about potential wetland banking opportunities that arise in areas of Dakota County outside the City of Eagan. One such possibility has emerged in an agricultural area of Eureka Township approximately 5 miles south of Lakeville, where restoration of a drained wetland currently under cultivation could generate 20-35 acres of bankable wetland and upland buffer area This opportunity is noteworthy for several reasons. First, the project would involve restoration of a large historical wetland that is currently drained by a file line. These types of projects are 16) both cheaper than creating a wetland "from scratch" in an upland area and have a high probability of success. The SWCD's wetland specialist has very roughly estimated the cost at $7,000 - $9,000/acre, although there are a number of variables that could ,affect this unit cost. In addition, the landowner is very cooperative because he sees establishment and permanent protection of the wetland as compatible with his long-term development plans for the area which involve construction of single family residences on large (5-10 acre) lots. Finally, a number of other parties (including the Dakota County Highway Department and the Board of Water and Soil Resources) are interested in this project as well. These entities are experienced in wetland banking projects, and would provide partnership opportunities for splitting the costs (and benefits) of establishing the wetland bank. Staff requests that the Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council authorizing staff to proceed with further investigation of the wetland banking opportunity in Eureka township, including an evaluation of the technical feasibility of the project and an identification of the City's share of the cost of purchasing banking credits. Rich Brasch Water Resources Coordinator CC. Ken Vraa } TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION DATE: NOVEMBER 12, 1996 RE: RICHARD HOLZ PROPERTY ISSUE To determine the disposition of the Richard Holz property for recommendation to the City Council. MEMO HISTORY With the approved acquisition of the Richard Holz property, the Council directed staff to provide options for It disposition including the potential for subdivision and resale of the home. BACKGROUND Staff has been in contact with Dakota County Highway Department to determine the constraints for access from Cliff Road Into the property. In general, they are agreeable to any location as long as it consolidates the two existing accesses Into a single access. The City currently has a 16 foot wide access and there Is one into the former home of Richard Holz. Staff has established the criteria for locating the access which topographically, provides good sight distance onto Cliff Road and, as requested by the property owner to the west, removes the current 16 foot wide access point. The original intent of this property acquisition was to acquire it In order to provide a secondary access to Holz Farm from Cliff Road in addition to the one through the adjacent neighborhood streets. Other objectives Included the opportunity to provide trail opportunities for walkers adjacent to a park like setting and for group parking for events associated with Holz Farm. Staff has tried to provide options that adhere to these benefits. SITE DESCRIPTION The home Is a single level rambler with approximately 900 square feet. The home Is In fair to good condition having been built in the early to mid 1950's. The roof Is In good condition and the home has a relatively new furnace. The house Is connected to city water and sewer but also has a well which is in good condition. A 20' x 24' detached garage faces north with the side entrance of the home facing east. To the west of the home is another single family residence owned by Roger Weierke who operates a landscaping business. To the east Is Manor Lake. The topography drops rapidly from the garage to the lake; approximately 16 feet. The site has about 20 trees which exceed four inches In diameter. These trees are Green Ash, American Linden, Elm, Spruce and Apple. (See exhibit for existing conditions.) Relocation of the garage a appears to be a necessity In all of the options explored because of the road alignment required to provide for site parking. The cost for relocating the garage is In the $3,500 - 4,500 range. OPTIONS 1. SELL THE HOME AND REQUIRE THAT IT BE MOVED One option Is for the home to be sold and moved from the site. In pursuing this as a feasible option, staff contacted several home movers. Several came to the site to Inspect the home, but only a very few showed any interest. They noted that at the present, because of the availability of a number of homes In Richfield, the market was depressed. Consequently the offers received were very small. Only one contractor actually submitted a written proposal of $5,000 for the home. This option would provide the greatest flexibility for use of the property for parks purposes. The location of a parking lot and trail access could be maximized without the incumbrance of the home. The offer of $5,000, however, Is probably less than what might be expected at a later date although there should not be a high expectation that the home would ever be sold for more than $10,000. Attached are concept plans showing how the property might be developed without the presence of the home or garage. The plans show approximately 25 cars and 3 buses (Exhibit C) and 35 cars (Exhibit D). 2. RENTAL OF THE HOME The department has had several calls from people asking that they be considered if this is an option. Staff previously contacted agents in the rental housing market who have Indicated that home rental goes as high as $900 per month for this type of three bedroom home. unless there Is an opportunity to lease the home for a term longer than 6.9 months, a rental rate below market may even be difficult. The Commission Is reminded that because the property is now tax-exempt, 1/3 of any rental must be returned to the County as a form of tax. The rental option does provide some benefits other than Income. An occupied home Is less likely to be vandalized. The home has great visibility and the likelihood that It would be vandalized is small, however, unoccupied homes are always more likely to be targeted for this type of act. Although utilities are minimal in the home, the cost for heating it in the winter would not be an expense of the City since the renter would be made responsible for this expense. A renter would also be responsible for other "up keep" associated with the property reducing some of the work that would be the responsibility of the maintenance staff (grass mowing, snow shoveling, etc). The right renter might also be assigned the task of looking out for the Holz Farm property as well. The rental option could also be considered a "holding option". Activities at the farm have been showing increased Interest from the community. The last two events drew several hundred people and the barn was rented recently for a barn dance parry.. Several volunteer groups have been active in painting and restoring the home. The non-profit "Friends of the Farm" have just received an IRS ruling giving them a 501-3-C status. Given the increasing level of Interest, it might be prudent to simply rent the home for a period of years to determine the ultimate interest in the farm and how the Richard Holz home issue is best resolved. The home can always be sold, but once it's sold, other options are closed. 1.3 3. CIVIC USE Along the same lines as renting the house for living purposes, the City might want to consider the use of the home by one or more collaborative groups who need organizational space for their operations. For example, the City of Burnsville allowed the Burnsville Art Council and the Burnsville Athletic Association to jointly use a home in Alimagnet Park for a number of years. Edina has done the same with a home acquired within one of Its parks years ago. Other options under this category might include a group home or a facility for non -profits that benefit the community. Staff has not pursued this option with any organization but would be willing to see if there Is Interest In this at Council direction. An advantage of this avenue of rental Is again to have someone occupy the home to give It a lived In appearance and to pay the cost for up keep, i.e. heat, yard maintenance and snow removal. Some remodeling of the home may be required for this type of use and would depend on the user(s). It's likely the City would have to Issue a Conditional Use Permit, depending on the user, if this was to occur since this property Is currently zoned single family. The City might consider this option, like the rental option, as more of an Interim use rather than long term to allow Holz Farm to mature and develop. The need for this home, and all of its Immediate property, and how it might best be used will be better known after some experience. Identified as Exhibits E and F are concepts showing the parking lot and trail access if the property were to be used for either of these two uses, with parking for Holz Farm. These two concepts show removal of the garage. 4. OTHER CITY USE Department Heads were questioned if the home had possible use by other departments. None was expressed, although Its use for cold storage was mentioned as an alternative. Friends of the Farm committee see potential in the future for the use of the home as an adjunct facility to facilitate programming of the farm. It could be used as a volunteer staging area, supply storage, etc. 5. SUBDIVIDE FOR RESALE Staff has prepared two alternatives for the property If the home were to be re -sold. These alternatives generally follow the schemes presented at the time the Council was considering the acquisition of this property. Discussion with various individuals about potential resale differ widely as to value. Some believe this would be a "tough sell" given Its location near busy Cliff Road with access from a park road. Others believe that the property might be desirable because of the limited traffic on the park road, compared to most residential streets, and the scenic views of the lake and farm. Proceeds from the sale would be returned to the Park Site Fund and could be used to fund other park Improvements. Although the new property boundaries have not been revised by a property appraiser, based on the acquisition appraisal, the home might be sold for $80,000. As shown in Concepts G and H, the road to service the parking needs requires the relocation of the garage. These options show access to the home and a relocated garage from a new park road. in order to meet residential setbacks, the road must shift to the east, which required additional fill and grading. Staff reviewed the feasibility of iy constructing a road between the home and the property to the west with the Engineering and Planning Departments. They have determined that this is not feasible because of Insufficient space. There are approximately 35 feet between the house and property. A 10 foot wide setback from the property line with a 24 foot wide road would have the east edge of the road one foot from the house. An easement from the adjacent property would likely be required to construct a road in this location If proper setback requirements are to be met. Exhibits G, H and 1 show possible sale of the property with parking. Concept 1 shows the sale without the garage. ATTACHMENTS Several attachments have been prepared which reflect the options mentioned above. These attachments should help to stimulate discussion and graphically represent different concepts. Exhibit A: Existing Conditions - 50' scale Exhibit B: Cross Section Through House and Garage Exhibits C/D: Buildings Removed - Parking Alternatives Exhibits E/F: Home for Civic Use with Parking Exhibits G/H/I: Possible Sale\Rental with Parking FOR COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission should review the options and associated costs In preparation for a joint meeting with the City Council. A recommendation, or series of recommendations, should be discussed. r 1r r/ . GUFF ROAptoo lop wooj .� N -140 *40 IV 000 ! 000 .ow tv A 92,4 1 r` f tl► C • D� `� LAKE 1 1` � ♦1 t\� 1'ME � �` , t � rpt \ � ♦ i 926 � ♦ •t= t ►o�� �+�H � � i t tlt�t sK i •J 1 t eL 92.115 ,� t t HOVS E t t W ! f / � I 5 / t' j 3 0#0 / i 1 W 15" Ash Good .001 HOLZ FARM W. LILLY -PARK PLANNEI .000 928 NOVEMBER, 1996 0 10 tm 30 41D So ISO r t I 1 1/ 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS �► N go*•Q `' N /, EXHIBIT — A TREE INVENTORY Jay s= sPprm i NFAiLTFr A 8" Maple Good B 12" M8p1C Good C 8" Maple Good D 20" Ash Good E 12" Ash Good F 18" Elm Poor G 14" Ash Good H 12" Ash Good 1 50" Spruce Good J 40" Spruce Good K 12" AshGood L 30" Willow Fair F M 1.5" Ash Good N 4" Crab Good 0 8" Maple Good P 4" Crab Good Q 6" Crab Good R 1 12" Apple Poor S 12" Apple Poor T 15" Ash Good U 18' Spruce Good V 12' Spruce Good 3 0#0 / i 1 W 15" Ash Good .001 HOLZ FARM W. LILLY -PARK PLANNEI .000 928 NOVEMBER, 1996 0 10 tm 30 41D So ISO r t I 1 1/ 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS �► N go*•Q `' N /, EXHIBIT — A LAKE 924 , I * A� s 8 I� I I �l I I� .� �t♦� 1•E l 926 ' F I ► \•o \014 1 i I I � •I�r ' sK 1 iL r W 92b � 1 �..� , •u r �i • M I i i � .T 1 .o. c,�►R, . N' � � j t � i I +'6,� � / � •gyp 1 as R� ; „p/ 35 , ' ' HOLZ FARM 100 ' � � / I 1 I , ANALYSIS 928 ,i r PLAN VIEW / C.J. LILLY - PARK PLANNER + % .o. / j NOVEMBER, 1996 t SCALE: 1:50 I 930 9Z� 924 915 910 0 F2 CROSS SECTION 100 17 EXHIBIT — B too 930 9z5 920 915 \ � y \ ,? Q.00 20 it � ' 'I / 'i r • �. r � � r - � 1 30,� w\� ♦� \I t�� ee 1 Ir �1 �j il� i el 1 I fJ,f / PARKING ONLY BUILDING REMOVED of / Ilot HOLZ FARM PARK g lqn P 150 290 2 3D0 D I 1 f f l f I C.J. LILLY -PARK PLANNER t ► �,.,,.,�, `� 1 �` ° °� NOVEMBER 1996 ° l 1 \` ♦ .o�O \ �� \� \VZ1tU\FIELD J� f�—+—\N. {� ( jQ° \��`\\\1``\`�'�'.�30 ♦e \`\\�� VIII l 11 ! Hous � G � ♦ � ( � � �jfJ 1 - s�,� ..�,�....�,,� _ , ' �.�.,a, _ �� •1A, / , I ! J LAKE ARN EXHIBIT C 920••"' 83nt � ♦ � � N ` � \ l '- �1• / � ��' �i/� • {} � !� i it r PARKING ONLY ri r ,/ Pi BUILDING REMOVED olH OLZ FARM PAR K 1r'00, O aqo 2w app r D CJ. LILLY -PARK PLANNER NOVEMBER 1996 till, HOUSE% E3 I/ �r . �` LAKE a r ARN•��� i 11 r_ EXHIBIT - D Imo- -920• {` LIF ROADS �--• -� - -�-� _f _ `970 r \ r 49 ♦SII r �1 i{; 70-,! l CIVIC USE ONLY oll HOLZ FARM PARK 1513 2 3p 1 ,�! : i f r i I W. LILLY -PARK PLANNER I / �,,;�,,,� `�t� I r NOVEMBER 1996 I I /� ! � �► � 11 � 1� 1� 1 � \ -\ �,�- \\ �♦ r �1 �[;6tlltvZltUFIELD/ ---♦� \♦`1 1 1, 11 �9, LJQ�` E3�� ow-930 �♦ � t f f Ill / HOUSEED , / / ��•�w. /i� ///l l t . LAKE ARN r)d EXHIBIT - E v y - 920-'~ 0- _9 .- �� r . CLIFF ROADS r -r Il 1 101 CIVIC USE OILY ol / 1 Ir • % r HOLZ FARM PARK ,, Iso 2DO 2 300 D t I y j �, �,., �---1�i� � ►` ; � �I W. LILLY -PARK PLANNER NOVEMBER 1996 1. (�� � �> `• ~ `'�� �� ` �� � ��� X111 i 1-iOUSE % 1 t LAKE ARN EXHIBIT F ,?° /CLIFF - - � � � r. - - - � '��i � �' - •� .r r l � Y x:11,. �.._T +� �� �_ Z WE- ,9 2,0 �► j� 1 1 I I j i � i 1 `IN If /� .I� i i• !1 1111 •' -t?. ` , �rr ,II {)- � 1 � 111 �, /! III 1 1 _. � 'a " ;1' � �� � � ; � ' 'FOR POSSIBLE BLE SALE /70/ HOLZ FARM PARK 1 �' y; , r i D 52 11,313 150 200 2 3m, C.J. LILLY -PARK PLANNER / 1 NOVEMBER 1996 fE 0 F]ELD9 30 '�� 1 11 1 �� lirl i 1 LAKE EXHIBIT G - - ` - - • ' --� . CLIFF \ i ----- ---- - -w rir•rr i/ � sr'rr .920--j 41 VA f � r 11 l 1\ 1 ��---•--� \ r l i / ♦ t fl i � r i r! 1 1 --; C3 I;,' 1 ;,1,! , FOR POSSIBLE SALE Ir 01 I HOLZ FARM PARI i! 1 1 i1 / Q 5 Imo I 150 �a0 4LY r: r t � 1 ,.,! •� � r r ! i � C.J. LILLY -PARK PLANNER f•.:.,., �� l`� ` 1 t\ 1\ i NOVEMBER 1996 � � lr� � � �� �� ♦ \ \ \\\ X111. �1 till,l \•:=.N % `: 1 HOUSE, ` 11 1 / //�i ! ►, i . i LAKE u` 1 '�-` EXHIBIT - H - y ,? 0 al ri y rte' I I 00, I FOR POSSIBLE SALE O1 HOLZ FARM PARK r 1 1 ` 1► / J , l 0 5 Z10:13150 p0 2 3+D0 CJ. LILLY —PARK PLANNER NOVEMBER 1996 \` HOUSE % ......,:._.�• = r �--�-�. _ - `,k,.�„ ` � � � _ � � i,.� � � t� , � / � � l r � �ellLAKE .2--9--EXHIBIT - I Advisory Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Minutes of November 18, 1996 Meeting Page 3 Subject to Approval 'ARKS DEVELOPMENT UPDATE HOLZ FARM/CLIFF ROAD ACCESS Director Vraa explained that the original intention in acquiring the Richard Holz property was to provide a secondary access to Holz Farm from Cliff Road in addition to the one through the adjacent neighborhood streets. Other objectives included providing trail opportunities for walkers adjacent to a park like setting and group parking for events associated with Holz Farm. Director Vraa continued that staff has provided several options for the Commission to consider including selling the home and requiring that it be moved, renting the home, providing the house for civic use or other city use or subdivide the property and sell the portion with the house on it. Director Vraa then reviewed the site noting that the city currently has a 16 foot wide access to Holz Farm from Cliff Road along with the access to the Richard Holz property. Dakota County has requested that the accesses from Cliff Road be consolidated into one and staff has established the criteria for locating the access which topographically, provides good sight distance onto Cliff Road and removes the current 16 foot wide access point. In reviewing the option of selling the home and requiring that it be moved, staff solicited bids to move the home but found that with the availability of homes in Richfield, only one written proposal for $5,000 was received. It is possible, however, that an offer greater than $5,000 can be obtained at some time in the future but it was felt that $10,000 would most likely be the maximum that would be paid for this home were it to be removed. Concept plans were shown depicting how the access and parking could be accomplished without the presence of the house or garage. The option for renting the home was reviewed noting that not only would it provide an income, but it is less likely that the property would be vandalized with someone living there. The renter could also be responsible for the grass mowing, snow removal and other small tasks that would normally be the responsibility of maintenance staff. Agents in the rental housing market have indicated to staff that for this type of 3 bedroom home, rental can go as high as $900 per month. Since the property is now tax exempt, 1/3 of any rental must be returned to the County as a form of tax. It was noted that the rental option could be considered a "holding option" to determine the ultimate interest in the Holz Farm and how this property best fits into that equation. Another option presented included the use of this house for collaborative groups who need organizational space for their operations or a facility for non -profits that benefit the community. Specific inquiries have not been pursued with this option, Vraa noted. Rental of the property appears to be one way to maximize options as the City assesses the interest and growth of Holz Farm. Concepts were provided showing the parking lot and trail access if the property were to be used for any of these uses. It was noted that the concepts showed the removal of the garage. The option of using the house for other City use was also discussed by Department Heads although the only use identified was for cold storage. It was noted that the Friends of the Farm committee expressed an interest in the use of the home as an adjunct facility to facilitate programming of the farm. The final option discussed was the subdivision of the property and sale of the existing home. Proceeds from the sale of the home would be returned to the Park Site Fund to fund other park improvements. Based on the acquisition appraisal, it was anticipated that the home might be sold for $80,000. Concepts were reviewed showing possible sale of the property with parking. One of the concepts showed the sale of the home without the garage. Director Vraa concluded that the Commission should review the options and make a recommendation to the City Council relative to the use of the Richard Holz property. Member Kohlnhofer explained that the Friends of the Farm would prefer to see the building rented long term. Their preference would be to rent it to a "caretaker" who could not only take care of the existing home but also tend to the needs of the farm. It is their hope that this could increase the "farming" possibilities and expand this type of opportunity to Eagan residents. aSo" Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Minutes of November 18, 1996 Meeting Page 4 Member Petersen commented that the sale of the home should not be considered. He opined that renting the home or providing it for civic use allows more choices at a later date. If the interest in Holz Farm continues to grow, the option to expand for parking or programming exists. He felt there were too many benefits to holding onto the house rather than selling at this time. Member Vincent opined that it was pre- mature to make a decision to sell since Holz Farm is in it's infancy and the options need to be preserved for this property. Member Markell added that as Holz Farm becomes more popular there is a need for more land, not less, and supported the option of renting the property for the short term. After further input from other Commission Members, it was their consensus that the Richard Holz home not be sold at the present time. They preferred that it be rented until such time as a decision is made on the growth needs of Holz Farm and how this property can facilitate that growth. ml� FROM: "a DATE: city of eagan TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR TEEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION NOVEMBER 27, 1996 RE: NATURAL AND SCENIC GRANT - LEE ANDERSON PARCEL ISSUE The City has received a Natural and Scenic Grant from the State of Minnesota In the amount of $26,900. The question is to either return the grant funds or to proceed with a modified plan to purchase only a portion of the property the grant was Intended for. MEMO BACKGROUND The City submitted a grant application .In May of 1996 requesting $92,000 In funding to assist in the acquisition of the Lee Anderson parcel. This parcel is located south of the entrance to Patrick Eagan Park and east of Lexington Avenue. The parcel is approximately 10 acres in size. Mr. Anderson is interested in selling approximately 7.5 acres to the City for incorporation into Patrick Eagan Park, reserving 2.5 acres for a house to be constructed for him and his wife. The City received notification that the grant would be in the amount of $26,900 rather than the $92,000 requested. Staff has discussed the possibility of acquiring a smaller parcel with grant managers who have indicated that is permissible. Mr. Anderson has also indicated his willingness to discuss this. COMMISSION REVIEW The Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission reviewed this Issue In August, prior to the results of the Park Open Space Referendum. They recommended that the City give first priority to acquiring 4.4 acres (see site map) if the entire 7.5 acres could not be acquired. FACTS AND DISCUSSION The appraised value of the Anderson parcel is $25,000 per acre. The 4.4 acre parcel price would be $110,000 and the entire parcel would be $187,500. The parcel, because of its position and topography overlooking the park, has a significant Impact on Patrick Eagan Park. This is particularly true if the parcel were to be sold for residential development. Mr. and Mrs. Anderson live on Lexington Avenue next to the park, have grown to appreciate the park and realize the Importance of this significant natural resource If the land were sold for development purposes. They would much prefer to sell to the City, build a new home and enjoy the advantage of knowing the park will continue to be their neighbor. cp t9 Unfortunately the Open Space Referendum was not successful which was seen as the funding to match the grant. The question Is, should Park Site Fund dollars be used? The Advisory Commission has placed a high priority on the acquisition of at least a portion of this parcel. QUIONS FOR CIL CONSIDERATION The State Grant Managers have been patient waiting for a decision from the City, however, the Council must decide what to do with the grant award. They can either proceed with trying to acquire a portion of the Anderson parcel or return the grant. Because the grant is to be a 50/50 match, the City would need to Invest at least $26,900. With the grant funds, this would theoretically be enough to acquire two acres. The City's portion would have to come from the Park Site Fund. Option 1: Acknowledge the grant award but indicate the City Is no longer able to proceed. Option 2: Attempt to acquire a smaller parcel recognizing that the City's minimum Investment would amount to $26,900. Option 3. Acquire the entire parcel. KV:cm c7/12-4work.cc >r. 1 `� `;;,I' \' Recreation Sete Map � " I 'r \ ,+ \� �\ �\\ Anderson Parcel Acquisition , ! i 1 • I ,1"�� \\�.�\ �`�`\\\Vib/i�j�rjl 1 i sap CIJY / 1+ \ j 'vp'N ��1 \ liw � � y!I 1 to\jam. )Cb, Ott {111O911l\ � � � �.-♦ �!� r-�`-' / / y A f- � 1 \\ \<��► c t \\\�\�\ � ♦ \ cam••' � � _�.— �� � � � y' \ \\ \\\ \�\ . �\\\\\\ \ \ \ \ ��``� 1 C WE Y t1. 819.6 \\\AMNN NV �* \\\ o \\\o \\ \ a -_1..m • .• \\ `a., a~ ` �► \ `�� ^�� yds t ` ��\Z� \ \\ \ \ \ \ !♦ . 4.4 acres \ ) /j j rte: � \\ .,�\Z\� • . \ \ \ \ � . 1 .,a,•�., \ t t �• \ \ t \\\�\ \\ \ \ M `/ 6,\".il \�• \ \� �•. d 11I 1 -1r. r/�/•'-b"'�i� �' � - � �`��/� ) 1 I � 1 1111\,III,t111�;,1\\\\�\ `ee0 � �\\\\�!� t j �� OV / .. • �9 �--•--�,.. .� 1 1 1 111 ` \°� �_� ._ � � \\\\�\\ 1 < < OA ��.}� i� V / / ' 1 w 1 111 illll`11\\ \ �O ` 11'�� \ 1111t _ \ \ `.t 1\I 1 `Il�;lllftl - �s:--1 � /'r. �� •- �\\ i' -'� � ! � '� � iii/ I � 3.1 acres ! ` /4% //� % R I !j///!I � "' -��. �� � ♦ � i / / tel / � t � It�/ljl/�tl/f1.41 1 i�f ll�I 11111/t!(; if r / I / X111 Ililt III \ 114I / \ •`�� J ��, Ir 1 /// /ice X' rtTll ►, _ s� ti ����'•,�\ \� y � / f/// a//1 �( -- J/ 1 � o � // //i //r,,(, /lIr �, .-�, ' �'�• i r �� 1 •�.� I /r//�/'/i// 1'/� / Il►f iry I , `\\ 1 !Xe // ll1/ / / / •I' / I / 11 .. i / .f/�/ r •. — /NSC,/� �� /ii�r�E.& OF -K Y 11 r rx Woo 47 10 1 OW � II it 6�1�%/ - : .,r� �.rr \ S 1)..�'Jl♦ / I i l 1 1 \ \ o' • /, , / r111/li/ / /�i iii �— �~!� i rr►, , �� I J � f 1 � { 1 1 1 1 1 / / �� /�!!/� :I-f fm"Ialt-�ffrli%I' -' III t -' �• 11• \� \\\\\`���L :'/ 1�/ / 11 •� F- _ / � ! �..1_t_i.{.� 1 1 1 �•�1 \I � - _ li[11 � 1111 //f. /.,c tl — /rMr. DATE 1993/03/12Or 1EARIMS AM RE' FEftENCEII TO SEE I tL\\ ., ( 1 / ' 01iKOtA t�Ot1111Y OOORtIINAtE ZYSiEIi = s/i .' �'�� � �\\ •\� 44 x