Loading...
08/20/1996 - City Council RegularAGENDA RAJAN CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING RAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING AUGUST 20, 1996 6:30 P.M. I. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES (BLUE) III. VISITORS TO B8 HEARD (10 MINUTE TOTAL TIME LIMIT) IV. DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS (BLUE) V. CONSENT AGENDA (PINK) p A. PERSONNEL ITEMS i Z B'TOBACCO LICENSE, Byerly's, 1299 Promenade Place $ C. FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, Dairy Queen, Lot 1, Block 1, Eagan Promenade (� D. FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, Cattle Company, Lot 4, Block 2, Eagan Promenade E. REVISED DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT, Lot 1, Block 1, Galaxie Cliff Addition No. 1 (Kindercare) Ff.;tF. WAIVER OF SUBDIVISION, Government Lot 7 in Sect. 18 (Gary Fuchs) P�,� G. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, completion of Contract 95-21 (Schwanz Lake Water Quality YY Improvements) and authorize final contract payment P-7 O H. CONTRACT 95-08, Approve final payment/authorize City maintenance (Oslund Timberline Add. - Street Reconstruction) PP 2 ( I. AMEND, Civic Arena Budget 1�,o1'7J. EXEMPTION from gambling license, Ducks Unlimited, Eagan Chapter �Q K. TOBACCO LICENSE, Green Mill Restaurant P� 3()L. EXEMPTION from gambling license, Valley Viewers 4-H Club VI. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS (SALMON) 52, A. PROJECT 638R, Final assessment hearing (Yankee Doodle Rd.) VII. OLD BUSINESS (ORCHID) �' 3 S1',- A. CAPONI, Purchase proposal .(40 B. CONTRACT 96-13, Receive bids/award contract (Woodgate 2nd & Mallard Park 2nd Street Reconstruction, Slater Rd. - Sidewalk) VIII.. NEW BUSINESS (TAN) G f A. CONSIDER Stop sign request - Slater Rd. & James St. (p 0 B. PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT, Healy Ramme Company, to consider ' site plan modifications to construct a multi -family residential development consisting of 282 dwelling units on property legally described as Outlot B, Eagan Promenade located north of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Lexington Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 10 C. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION, 4.83 acres consisting of two lots, Honey Tree First y Addition and a PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, to construct two hotels on property legally described as Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 2, Mari Acres Second Addition located west of Nicols Road and bounded on the north, west and south by Erin Drive in the SW 1/4 of Section 30 /(PZD. APPEAL, designation of a dangerous dog, John & Michelle Schaefer, 2246 Whispering Trail IX. LEGISLATIVE/INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE (GREY) X. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA (GREEN) XI. VISITORS TO BE BEARD (for those persons not on agenda) XII. ADJOURNMENT XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, or status with regard to public assistance. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will attempt to provide such aid. MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: AUGUST 16, 1996 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR THE AUGUST 20, 1996 EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING ,I%i%��� :���✓r'%%.:/ ./,�: '�/• i�r :///r �/,r Ivy., After approval of the August 20, 1996 City Council agenda, regular City Council meeting minutes for August 4, 1996 and special City Council meeting minutes for July 30, and August 4. the following items are in order for consideration. MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Eagan, Minnesota July 30, 1996 A special meeting of the Eagan t ity oiti iof`f-iniac. i lii ;an Tuesday, July 30, 1996 at 5:00 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center Building. Present were Mayor Egan and City Councilmembers Awada, Hunter, Masin and Wachter. Also present wer�e::Senior Planners Freese and Ridley, Director of Parks and Recreation Vraa, Director of Finance Vah6verbeke, Director of Public Works Colbert and City Administrator Hedges. VISITORS TO BE HEARD Ray Rahn, owner of Carriage Fiefs Golf Ccsi e, appeared and informed the City Council that he is able to acquire some blacktop milling fr6ib a stre�:reconstruction project in West St. Paul and would like permission to apply a blacktop milling srii#ace to Wescott Trail from Yankee Doodle Road to the Carriage Hills Golf Course entrance. City Coun�ilmemberlCiiairperson of the Public Works Committee Wachter stated that he is in agreement with the ptAeedkie::iri:ffias;i'w~ivied the same with the Director of Public Works who felt the application should be under,the-directi6h-' *his engineering staff and once completed, would be an improvement to Wescott Trail. The City Administrator stated that a letter of understanding should be prepared releasing the City of any liability or cost reimbursement if it is decided that other street improvements should be made to Wescott Trail which would require a removal of the application. City Councilmember Hunter stated that a memo or letter should be provided to Mr. Rahn and copied to the City Council regarding the entire procedure, liability and other:;ppropriate language so there is a clear understanding between Mr. Rahn and the City.. City Councilmember Awada m6Vetl"'** i'ty Coun68ffiember Masin seconded a motion to authorize Ray Rahn, owner of Carriage Hills Golf Course; -Jo. appfy-:a blacktop milling surface to Wescott Trail from Yankee Doodle Road to the Carriage Hills Gotf:Co�ir$e:6rtt{artce under the direction of the Director of Public Works with the understanding the City is not respon'sfie::tpr:-any of the costs of the application. Mayor Egan thanked Mr. Rahn for his willingness to make the propo d improvement to Wescott Trail. D-11 STUDY City Administrator Hedges introduced the D -II Study stating that the Community Development Department has examined the City's R-2/D41::4a.rfd, supply and:.reviewed development trends over the past few years in these various land use and:: prtirtg::categoiries:at the request of the City Council. Senior Planner Freese reviewed the D -II Mixed::i�sidentii i -:l lid use designation stating that the Comprehensive Guide provides 0 to 6 units per acre and that 15 plats:fiave been approved on land guided D-11 since 1992 and that 11 of those plats were single feriily detacd, while 4 plats included 119 townhome units. She further stated from 1988 through 1992, hi iri. vBd on. R -II guide sites were primarily developed as single family residential with only 5 of tfxe;34::p1ei8:fti:eF.;ttsen single family. Senior Planner Freese also stated that approximately 1,960 acres are designated D -II Mixed Residential in the City and there's a total of 27 tracts of land totalling 284 acres of vacant D-11 land. She stated that this is about 14% of the total D-11 land supply. She further reported that the largest tracts of undeveloped land in this category are the 120:0drd::P0ter property, 57 acres owned by Blue Cross Blue Shield and 33 acres owned by Leo Muri:::::: Seriiit::i?lai<tner Freese stated that of the 826 acres of remaining residential land supply, 34%.: i�::ciesignated b7 if. -.'Mixed Residential. She further stated that townhome units currently comprise 18%:;6' fihe City's total hatising stock and it is projected that townhome units will comprise about 20% of the hou.qig9 stock at build out;::Oased on recent development trends. City Councilmember Hunter stated that the iiiadiligSiaiii¢jiiitfit with a build out, the distribution of single family and townhomes should remain relattvefq d6hatarl snd'66es not see the need to consider any further EAGAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JULY 30, 1996 PAGE 2 study or redesignation of the D-11 property.:,: Mayor Egan stated that if the Dart property should be changed to residential, this could have an impact gn:ihe overall housing balance. Senior Planner Freese stated that each parcel needs to be reviewed on a cdde by case basis and further stated there will be some impact on commercial/industrial residential balance::if:prQpekie%.are.r.&zQned from zoning/land use categories. City Councilmember Hunter further stated that il:ai;is cisucaTeapiit between single family and townhomes is proper. City Councilmember Wachter agreed that the balance is adequate. Mayor Egan shared his concern that some developers are buying' -:land at a high cost with the intention to maximize the amount of density which is driving up the land ccri:19i nd prohibiting the traditional single family detached housing developments. City Councilmember Wachter agreed stating that there is a shortage of estate lots. City Councilmember Awada stated that she is concerned about the results of the study stating that she would be an advocate for more single family detached housing developments. City Councilmember Wachter stated that the City should contact Leo Murphy and suggest his property be redesignated to a D-1 status suggesting that the parcel is best suited:fc Ksingle family detached housing. After further discussion, there was a consensus by the City Council :MiM staff :re*iew D -II parcels that are adjacent to single family detached developments and provide sOiO recomM-e' hdation as to which parcels should be changed to a D-1 status. City Administrator Hedges introduced the Trucking Study stating that staff has researched ordinances and prepared a summary of how trucking businesses are defined and regulated in other cities in the metro area and further has prepared maps showing the location of existing trucking and trucking related facilities in the City, which includes the inventory of in¢Ostrial land. City Councilmember Wachter stated that in his opinion, the City is at saturation..witK:: tt i::.iumber of trucking related facilities. City Councilmember Hunter stated that he is in a ceeli s±rit t�liitfi--'i6 three (3) alternatives the Advisory Planning Commission is directing staff to considet:i ICK,indlude # : the elimination of trucking as an allowable use and grandfathering existing facilities; 4 'to., develop defiMtions for trucking/trucking related uses for the Zoning Ordinance and to clarify what zohlhg;:41a- tric1s.:such uses would be permitted; and 3) to add a condition to the ordinance that would establish a 'f;OE`<E :fi vt;-Or..some other reasonable buffer delineation, from residential properties in which trucking facilities would':I Q`*t:be permitted. City Councilmember Awada stated that she is not in support of the first alternative to eliminate trucks as an allowable use and grandfathering existing facilities. She stated that there is a need for the City to clarify with the industry specific locations for trucking operations. After further discussion, City Councilmember Hunter stated he could support eliminating no. 1; however, he would like a map identifying what locations are appropriate for trucking facilities. Mayor Egan stated that. the location of trucking facilities in relationship to major trunk highways or interstates is a key point to n1iitiithe,.arriiifii:?vf truck traffic in the community. He further stated that the idea of a 1,000 foot buffar:from sin' R::fdfr-Vshould be given further consideration. Mayor Egan also stated that he could not supo6ita policy*-.... would discriminate trucking out of the community. Both Mayor Egan and City Councilmember Masin .stated that it would be helpful to involve the industry as much as possible in discussions relatiO: to trucks *hich would help create a measurable criteria and provide additional direction for the Advi6ti3i#liaritirig CriltiSsbn. Mayor Egan stated that there are many options for notifying the trucking indusfry' ,% sucft'* a,$- t -e-- i*flcan Trucking Association and Minnesota Trucking Association as well as some of the larger trucking facilities located within the community. FRANCHISE REQUEST FOR AIRLINER MOTEL City Administrator Hedges stated owners of the Airliner Motel about potentib reopened. Planner Julie Farnham appe n' site, including setbacks and frontage road substantial variances to current code 4t. property was rezoned to Business P*K- require a conditional use permit. Mayor:i the City assured the residents within or �affj$Cfis:been contacted by an attorney representing the :f¢r'the Airlirrer:tt be sold to a motel franchise, rehabilitated and fid' and stated tha .'.. pe to restrictions on the reuse of the Airliner access, the proper ". can only be reused or redeveloped through ;ombination with S-&itional parcels. She also noted that this 1::i�larch;: ?d::'U1e Ofore, the Airliner opening as a motel would i stafs:Itat:ti}ttS of an obsolescence motel is not the intent around the Airliner Motel when the property was rezoned to EAGAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JULY 30, 1996 PAGE 3 Business Park. After further discussion, it. was noted by the City Council that due to the rezoning, variances and other issues, surrounding the AirlineF #motel, it would not be feasible to provide any further direction, unless and until, an application is receiv2&6nd processed through the appropriate public hearings. SEPTEMBPR.-I i P C$l`a#)1j! RWERENDUM City Administrator Hedges statecf:#at the review of specific sites recommended by the Open Space Task Force to be included with the Septei"er 10 park referendum were deferred for review at this meeting by action of the Council at the July 16 regular meeting. City Councilmember Wachter stated that he would remove six (6) parcels including Cray Research, Dart, Bieter, Swenson & Curry, Caponi and the West End Hunting. Mr. Terry Sullivan representing residents of the Bur Oaks Addition submitted a letter and asked that consideration be given to adding Outlgts B, C and D of the Gopher Eagan 2nd Addition Industrial sites to be considered if the park bond referexiftrn is su=essful. City Councilmember Awada stat6d::that m6kiesidents would prefer having additional open space in their residential neighborhoods and wbiiid welcoffi� additional sites that provide open space for use by neighborhoods. Chairperson Dave Szott:4#:tho::F k...Referer4um Task Force stated that the list of sites to be presented to the community as a part:df:thQ: j :'4:bond: i#i�irendum is long; however, it does not mean that the City would acquire all of the sites and further, it is quite likely that all of these parcels are not for sale. He further stated that the Task Force did not look at small acreages next to residential properties. He stated that all parcels would be prioritized following a successful bond referendum. City Councilmember Awada again stated that there is a need to be flexible and allow the community to submit additional parcels for consideration. Lee Markell, Chairperson of the APRNRC.and member of the Task Force, stated that if the referendum is successful, the City would then,:pr0.r�e(l: with appraisals on the properties. Bea Blomquist appeared and stated that she doubts:WbiA€tei:t.bP'West End Hunting site could be acquired due to the pollution and strict MPCA regulatidi�$ :::: ify' Coot cilmember Hunter stated that there is clearly a fundamental difference being expressed-:in:'hatthe Citysf`ould acquire for park land pending a successful referendum. He stated that he agrees with'City CQ0hcilmember Awada that open space should be adjacent to residential subdivisions rather than acquiring rerrtiat:Qi?M:;space and that open space need not be just for natural reserve preservation. Mayor Egan asked that the :ity:Council go through each of the twenty-two (22) sites and determine whether they should remain as "candidate" sites in the upcoming referendum. City Councilmembers analyzed each of the sites and, after much discussion, agreed that the West End Hunting site should be eliminated from consideration. City Councilmembers concurred with the representatives of the Bur Oak Addition that any additional parcels should be given consideration as an option to the list after the referendum. City Councilmember Hunter stated that there is a need to establish a process for the public submitting paFcel; bt -. considsKratiiin. It was determined that request for consideration be directed to and held by,. 3116: t6d(OK0f<:9rk6':` nd Recreation until after the referendum. City Administrator Hedges asked:#.the appraisal performed on the Caponi property, specifically the 30 acres south of Diffley Road, could b6:s leased .t ::t*he Caponis. He stated that the Caponis are asking for the appraisal. City Councilmembers: etf.:fi>i #:#Yt Ppffilsal information can be released and further suggested that the Caponis present a pure flase a Fei3ri sii€16—the City, following a successful referendum, to consider the acquisition of the thirty (30) acres of land south of Diffley Road for park land. REQUEST FOR APPRAISAU200 ACRE DART PROPERTY Michael Vincent, a member of the appeared and requested consideration t property value. Bea Blomquist appearet# Parks and Recreation Vraa stated there and if direction was given to make an app if done at this time. Appraisals on propi t as a cost of acquisition. h?56:.P ks :Recreation and Natural Resources Commission, ,ye -'City Cm t3 ::to have the Dart property appraised for its I asked if thera30; a budget for these appraisals. Director of no dollars budd fed in the department's operational budget, 31, the appropriatefunding source would be the park site fund ritMftt ilt:r�titJim would be done with referendum dollars EAGAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JULY 30, 19.96 PAGE 4 After some discussion, City Councilmembers concurred that an appraisal for the 200 acres of the Dart property would be given consideratignj:with all other candidate sites pending a successful referendum for park land acquisition at the September'9'0 election. WINTER:m# ::..tiRfli4 fiViAi 1 STUDY City Administrator Hedges provided.background on the Winter Trail Maintenance Study. He stated that staff, including the Director of Parks and Recreation, Director of Public Works, Street Superintendent Erhart and Superintendent of Parks Olson, all of whom were present at the meeting, ,prepared a report detailing the costs and operational implications related to the implementation of a pathway plowing program. Director of Parks and Recreation Vraa reviewed five (5) designation categories as directed by the City Council at the May 7 meeting when path.wpy plowing was first received. Mr. Vraa and Mr. Olson reviewed the first category, which designates priority:pathways:dor school students that are required to walk to public school facilities. The second category wi s;commerGi81 centers, which include pathways at a one half mile radius of concentrated retail shopping outlets. The. bird category is business campus, which designates pathways at a half mile radius of large employers or.concentrations of non -retail business. Mr. Vraa and Mr. Olson stated that the fourth categoq.:is: fox;ewjt:: a gtties.-.including a half mile radius of the Municipal Center, Library and Civic Arena and recreational facilities, which includes pathways at a half mile radius of high volume winter recreational sites. Parks Superintendent Olson stated that a survey of 75 communities was completed and that 91 % plow some pathways or sidewalks, but not necessarily the entire community. Eagan, because the trails and sidewalks at the Municipal Center are done, would be Ane community that would be considered as responding yes. City Councilmembers reviewed:0::ii�:ar�ty'of issgkis such as how many miles of pathways should be included in a plowing program, wherl"tfie ,plowing shdi ld begin, what type of priority pathway plowing would take in the City's overall snow removai:af d-:'- :quickly the designated routes should be cleared and several other related policy questions. City Councilmember Hunter stated that this community is a driving community and to provide a total pathway maintenance program would be cost -prohibitive. He further stated that any winter pathway maintenance will increase property taxes as a new program. He went on to say that even a limited program will grow because people will want their trails cleared. City Councilmember Awada stated that there is some responsibility for plowing pathways adjacent to public school facilities and would suggest a revised program to plow an additional 20:)xes::vfi:Commrelresidential that are deemed highest priority by staff. She stated that this is a co>i i¢erable:;r cflof "�lh the 95 miles of trails that exist in the community. Mayor Egan agreed that scsiil trails stteil l be plowed and that staff would need to determine a good stopping point if a winter pathway,: mainte.r)g.nce program is implemented. City Councilmember Masin stated that the City should plowItbils, if f6r no other reason, to provide a safe environment for keeping children off the streets. City :i✓tilii7ieia#ief::tttcfiter stated that, in his opinion, it would be expensive to engage in a winter pathway *mi iiHtdhanei3'pf6ytam'.and would be skeptical about appropriating any resources or public dollars to such a program. Superintendent of Parks Olson stated that, $100,000 for equipment to get started in a limited -.pi the equipment and allocate the personnel.,.:"k:.V* be more efficient, depending on the scope:iif:tfie tra asked that staff evaluate the cost for the:siX:(6) mile; if maintained by a contractual arrangement. After should evaluate the results of the col Munity sur maintenance program. City Councilmei�tbOrs.:aUceei staff notify Dr. Peck, veterinarian at Pilot:*K-'0:An4..? at a minimum, it would cost the City approximately t.ftway maintenance program, if the City is to acquire I.'.Jhgt tme option is contracting for service which may merit, nce program. City Councilmember Awada of patt3way at school sites and the City Hall Campus further dlScussion, the Council agreed that Council ,ey to dibrmine further direction on a winter trail ;-VAth::6s: action. There was also a direction that the A:Hjmi *Wt of this discussion. EAGAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JULY 30, 1996 PAGE 5 COMPREHENSIVE WATERSUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION PLAN STUDY City Administrator Hedges stated*fhbt with the nearing completion of the trunk utility system build out, the Public Works Department has;:rphensive analysis of the water supply and distribution system, changes in previQi�ytjr::;:i1r j 4 d:: ia.{i?i .. patterns and has refined the needed improvements to complete the system fo. �Ahe ultimate needs of the community. Director of Public Works Colbert introduced Karen Cavett who wais representing the consulting engineering firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates and My' ne Schwanz, Superintendent of Utilities, who was primarily responsible for the Emergency and Conservation Plan elements. Public Works Director Colbert proceeded on with an explanation of the significant changes including population projections, possibly serving Inver Grove Heights, the plan to create an Ultra Low Zone, the elimination and removal of a 2.0 million gallon (MG) reservoir at Cliff Road from the .system, proposal to create an Ultra High Zone in the Fairway Hills/Parkview area and finally, consider-�fign and caistruction of an additional elevated water reservoir in the High Pressure Zone, preferably in:. river GrcLye:: Heights north of Cliff Road. City Councilmember Wachter raised a concern regarding the fieed to pri tide utility expansion and service to the City of Inver Grove Heights. City Councilmember Awnda stated -that she supports the document, including the benefit for the City of Eagan in serving Inver Ge&'t::hieigYit : c#�::Eo::ft.:necessity for an elevated water reservoir in the High Pressure Zone. Director of Public Works Colbert further provided background on the Metropolitan Area Water Supply Plan which, by legislative action, has mandated cities serving more than 1,000 customers to develop emergency response procedures and water conservation pians. Mr. Colbert reviewed the emergency plan stating that it includes emergency response procedures for. impliementation in the event of a water related emergency. He reminded the City Council of the:::0ity: rnplemented permanent odd/even sprinkling restriction. He further stated that there are ..bNo::tifttonil t:considerations, one to adopt an alternative rate structure which would induce conservation::fiiF:.'excessive::ibw priority use (lawn sprinkling) and the second would be an ordinance requiring efficient 'irrigs,tion.syste�t and prohibition of sprinkling between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., along with other water efficierit:Gc#�itleratons. After further discussion by the City Council, it wds::dettirmined that, at this time, there should not be a different rate structure and determined that the odd/even sprinkling restriction should continue as an effective conservation measure. OTHER BUSINESS City Councilmembers viewed a rem -0W:0 oUngikiW610racking system and acknowledged the new Municipal Center reader board. There Ind 6'no fiit ei`:tiiasiriess, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Date TLH MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Eagan, Minnesota August 6, 1996 A regular meeting of the Eagan City,: Council. was.held. on Tuesday, August 6, 1996 at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. PresenC-Wefe.:ffl yQr gam.';k. .Councilmembers Wachter, Awada, Masin and Hunter. Also present were City:Adm'in'is#tafor* om Hedges, Senior Planner Mike Ridley, Director of Public Works Tom Colbert, ard;City Attorney Mike Dougherty. Eagan Cub Scout Pack 445, Den 8, lead the Pledge of Allegiance. Councilmember Wachter move- -* Masin seconded a motion to adopt the agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0;:::. Councilmember Awada requested::ori:.pige::7;rig[ph 4, the word requirements should be changed to expectations. She also requested on page 9, paragraph 2, it should read, "Councilmember Awada stated the need for this variance was to protect residents from the heavy industrial uses the property was legally zoned for." She also requested on the same page, last paragraph, it should be noted that Councilmember Awada voted Nay concerning the licensing of construction debris refuse haulers. Councilmember Masin requested on page 12, slow down in spite of the stop signs located there:::.::; Round Table, it should state one activihrc::Gitt� :ver Councilmember Hunter requested-4ps::paige,8ti: to withdrew. He also requested that it be noted `1:he-:F only because of the day and that they preferred the be 0 4, it should state that many people do not requested on page 14, paragraph 3 under 3, the word amended should be changed I Councilmember Wachter voted Nay was dum be held with the November election. Councilmember Hunter moved, Councilmember Wachter seconded a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Hunter moved, .GQrifl"ii ibb r A*at3a seconded a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 City Administrator Hedges noteii t i l a:$uK11`eY �::conducted regarding the wading pool. He t ti also noted that there is a need for an executive session following tonight's Council meeting to discuss pending litigation. Councilmember Hunter asked if Mike Reardon, Cable Coordinator, would comment on some of the new things being done with the cable. Reardon discussed the character generator that has been borrowed from Meredith Cable and is being .used on a temporary basis. He stated they are still having problems with the one that was ori&fty:lxt5ti _ Councilmember Masin noted in:. and to the VNate ..Supply and Distribution Plan, a letter was received from the Metropolitan Council stating that they were"44"ry impressed with the job that is being done in Eagan. She also said it was noted th*.:F-agan's water treafti nt plants are 75% more efficient than most EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 2 water treatment plants. Mayor Egan saiditiat the report is a tribute to the entire Public Works Department and commended Superintendent of Utilities. Wayn.P.Schwanz and asked Director of Public Works Colbert to commend him on behalf of the City Corjil il;fgr:21 .f3i5aoado(j... and work on this issue. Councilmember Wachter stated that he is happy to see thie-t6sufts-afid.,tf�gfiked'both the Director of Public Works and the Superintendent of Utilities. He noted thOt':tie is interested in the rain sensors and feels they would be a contributing factor in the conservation '.sof; water. Councilmember Awada suggested that information regarding the report be included with the water bills. Mayor Egan also suggested that excerpts from the Met Council's complimentary report to the City be included as well. Councilmember Wachter asked Director of Public Works Colbert if he had checked on the status of the new well anticipated in Inver Grove Heights. Colbert stated he had not reviewed the legislation yet. In regard to Item C, Recommerjd6tion B4t.ville/Eagan Cable Commission City Participation in LIVIC Rights -of -Way Initiative. Councilmember...Hun.ter stated, that at first he was opposed to this request, but since costs are being paid for by the:':U4 f rati t is :f s; :lie will support it. He added that he feels the purpose of franchise fees is to promote and 16l3Dy ior'protectron of the City's right-of-ways as it pertains to the cable and telecommunications infrastructure. Councilmember Awada stated she disagrees with this proposal and hopes the legislature does not go along with it. She said there are two things associated with this request, including protection of public right-of-ways and management. She added that it would be difficult to have thousands of cities in the State create different sets of rules and regulations. She further added there should be State rules that govern this and...OeY:ihould include some form of compensation and rules for public rights-of-way, but this should. not:::loll:�irrisdiction decision. Councilmember Wachter asked how the costs are analyzed for Ns.- e:: fated tha Ht he is concerned about the right-of-way being torn up later on. Councilmember Masin_li&bd that it is i.ftortant to have control over these public rights- of-way. Councilmember Awada noted that:a::§Otstandard-bf rules should be applied to every city to avoid slowing up the information age. Councilmember,Allasifi::0dde.d.that by approving this the City would have more control in planning the community. Mayor Egari siat d:ttiet at his first board meeting at the League of Minnesota Cities this item was discussed and a decision was:frlade to approve the $325,000 expenditure and it was also considered at the annual meeting and was approved by all member communities. He further stated that if municipalities lose control over the installation of utilities, they will have lost a large amount of local control over their own systems. He noted there needs to be a system of checks and balances. Councilmember Awada stated it was her belief that from a financial standpoint it does not make good sense for any utility to tear up streets.:at:ttndom. .Maygr:�Egan asked Cable Administrator Reardon about the recommendation made by the Cle: C4ixarni$sitiji; Reardon stated that the dialogue'it the Cable Commission was similar to that of the Council, He noted that if each City has its own rules.Ai . ould be::9r.1 impediment. He further noted that if the City does not represent their concerns, their rig htsi4hay.:be.;lbMed..•.:.He:added that it is hopeful that some set of uniform rules be identified. He went on-.30:dft- is�ss::tt ::budget:that was developed by the task force. He noted that the Commission did recommend that the City use franchise fees for the purpose of helping the League of Minnesota Cities. He further noted that he is concerned with the rights-of-way the City is responsible for maintaining. He stated that some cities have experienced problems with streets being torn up numerous times. Councilmember Masin moved, Cnduftilift*beh:�:�Runter seconded a motion to approve a recommendation by the Burnsville/EagaK:C6,61e Commissiart::to participate in the League of Minnesota Cities' Public Rights -of -Way Program by*'cdtitributing $2,350:46:be paid from retained franchise fees. Aye: 3 Nay: 2 (Councilmembers Awada anti::Wachter) EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 3 In regard to Item V, Contract 9620- Yankee Doodle Road & agan Promenade, Councilmember Wachter stated he would like further In...r- ration on the design of the streetscape before he votes to approve the streetlight design element. Director of Public Works Colbert stated they have to know where and to what extent street lights or pedes>rrart dOctitgttve::lighting will be installed so that landscaping and streetscaping can complement it. Colbert:*'tri:d::tliat.tkii5::itoh-:could be presented at a later date along with the streetscaping. Councilmember Wachter stated that he did not want to slow the process, but added that he would like to know what the money- will be spent for. Colbert noted that they are trying to determine what the dollars are going to be and added that the contract does not need to be awarded and can be brought back to the City Council with the streetscape portion. He further added that if they go through this competitive bidding process they would have a better idea of budget limitations regarding what they want to do with lighting and subsequent streetscaping. A. Personnel Items Item 1. it was recommended to approve::ttie hiring. -':6f two persons to be named as police officers, subject to successful completion of the City'sphysical, psychological and drug testing examinations. Item 2. It was recommended to approve:'h6- ppo fttent:bfpat of Officer David Bork as a detective in the Eagan Police Department. Item 3. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Sandy Tupy as a seasonal temporary playground assistant. Item 4. It was recommended to approve the hiring qf.-' d]ey::Eller as a temporary intern in the Parks & Recreation Department. Item 5. It was recommended to approvBthe.:hiring of Mane Keeler and Laura Tippens as temporary high school clerical interns for the Parks & Rec�eatioi::aiid:Fire. Departments for the 1996/97 school year. Item 6. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Nicele::00witz, Jesse Miller, Ryan Darwitz and Karl Ulfers as skate guards for the Civic Arena. Item 7. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Angelynn Mock as a temporary seasonal recreation leader in the Parks & Recreation Department. Item 8. It was recommended to accept th.0:1etter.:ibf re.sjghi 66 from Civic Arena Manager Todd Burkart. B. Change Orders Municipal Cantor Btii dingwas recommended to approve change orders for the Municipal Center Building Project in;.a.:net amount of $1,676.70 as presented. C. Recommendation Burnsville/Eagan-:.; ':il i riirtii : Cily Participation in LMC Riq 0 Wav Initiative. It was recommended to approve a recommendatidri by the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commission to participate in the League of Minnesota Cities' Public Rights -of -Way Program by contributing $2,350 to be paid from retained franchise fees. (A separate motion was called on this item - Councilmembers Awada and Wachter were opposed.) D. Corrections to Ratite _d Minutes c regular City Council meeting minutes. E. Resolution Authorizing Execution Qf Agreement Comr of Police Officer), It was recomme "1' *d to approve a recommended to approve the July 2, 1996 authorizing the execution of the EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 4 Cooperative Agreement with the Minnesota::Department of Public Safety for the project entitled Community Oriented Policing. (COPS) Grant (Hiring . 6f:Police Officer) and authorizing Chief of Police Patrick Geagan to execute such agreements and amendments as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the Eagan Police Department. F. Resolution, Authorizing Execution. of Agreement, Community Oriented Policing (COPS) Grant (Overtime). It was recommended to app"m.".ve a resolution authorizing the execution of the Cooperative Agreement with the Minnesota Departmtht of Public Safety for the project entitled Community Oriented Policing (COPS) Grant (Overtime) and authorizing Chief of Police Patrick Geagan to execute such agreements and amendments as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the Eagan Police Department. G. License Renewals. Amusement Qeviee- MaSSa2%J;SJaDJISnMenJ_ Massage I nCVdWI5J 01 OW V1U'= 3LC2L1U1 1. It was recommended to approve the liciii I h4e reneviat. . s for amusement devices, massage establishments. s , massage therapists and service station:#t attach6d.:in Exhibit A. H. Licenses, Off Sale Beer. Service StjtJdfiA,,.J,60a Jot:tJoliday Stationstore #68. 1065 Diffley Road. It was recommended to approve off-sale:'b*Lb'i'5r,:.servib''6.-*stiition..' id tobacco licenses for Holiday Stationstore #68 at 1065 Diffley Road. I. Tree Contractor License, Scott Konnad. DBA Cardinal Tree Service, It was recommended to approve a tree contractor license for Scott Konnad, dba Cardinal Tree Service. J. Election Judaes. for Proma!)I. September 10, 1996JJ:W"::recommended to approve the list of election judges for the Primary Election on Septemb 'attached in Exhibit B. K. On Sale Non Intoxicating Malt Liqud if .. Li . cCpse for Cra ' i6 Applebaum. DBA Broadway Pizza, 2135 Cliff ....... non -intoxicating malt liquor license for Craig Road. It was recommended to approv6** 6A::)M�S ........ Applebaum, dba Broadway Pizza, 2135 Cliff Road. L. Off -Sale Liauor License, Cellars Wines & Spirits- 2113 Cliff Road. It was recommended to approve an off -sale liquor license for Cellar's Wines & Spirits at 2113 Cliff Road M. Amend. 1996 General Fund Budget It was recommended to approve the 1996 General Fund Budget adjustments. N. ftiect 695, Approve Retainage the retainage agreement with Shafer �6htracting. It was recommended to approve Bank Wisconsin. O. Contract 96-18. South Hills Addn866&mess g-'Q'b' Rd. it was recommended to receive the bids and award Contract 96-18 (South Hills Additi�.It:&.W' ili�e �.':Kwi:Road - Street Rehabilitation) to the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the M6yof tity oe'*'i,'k46';6xecute all related documents. P. Contract 96-16. Biscayne Ave./Hall St. It was recommended to receive the bids, award Contract 96-16 (Biscayne Avenue & Hall Street - Streets & Utilities) to the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related do.q4,1�� Q. Accept Bids and Award Contract for.'7' Coatihq::ftfthview Tennis Courts/Rahn Courts. It was recommended to approve contract 96-17:.foi.-color coating .@Onis courts to Recreational Resurfacers, Inc. in the amount of $35,391. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 5 R. Contract 95-0. Ridgecliff Woods. It -was recommended to acknowledge completion of Contract 95-0 (Ridgecliff Woods - Streets & Utilities) ::arid authorize perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. S. Contract 94-UU. Verdant Acres. It w@"S'VVW't. tQ knowledge completion of Contract 94-UU (Verdant Acres - Streets & Utilities) and. authorize perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. T. Contract 94-13, City Hall Expansion. It was recommended to authorize the 10th and final payment of $8,354.81 to Imperial Developers, Inc., for Contract 94-13 (Municipal Center Expansion - Phase II) and accept for perpetual maintenance subject to warranty provisions. U. Contract 95-05, Blackhawk Hills/Wek6a Hills AAdns, It was recommended to approve the 6th and final payment for Contract 95-05 (Blackhawk Ftiili & W6666ft Hills Additions - Street Rehabilitation) in the amount of $7,235 to Vivant Contracting, Inc., and;;`c' pt th J nprovements for perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. V. Contract 96-20, Yankee Doodle Road $r Eaigati;io:ft was recommended to approve the plans and specifications for Contract 96-20 (Yankee Doodle Road and Eagan Promenade - Streetlights) and authorize the advertisement for a competitive bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m., on Friday, August 30, 1996. W. Contract 96-01, Eagandale Corporate Center Addition. It.was recommended to approve the plans and specifications for Contract 96-01 (Eagandale Corporate -G-6n-te-r:Addition - Streets and Utilities) and authorize advertisement for a bid opening to be held at•.1.0:3A::A:M::::Se6tember 13, 1996. X. Yankee Doodle Reservoir, Access License...lt was recommended to approve a license agreement with West Publishing Company for Outlot C W65t' 1PiMOing.4th Addition providing assignable access rights to the City of Eagan for the Yankee Doodle Reservoir arid::tit#�cize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. Y. Contract 96-11. Yankee Doodle Road. It was recommended to approve Supplemental Agreement/Change Order No. 1 to Contract 96-11 (Yankee Doodle Road - Roadway Improvements) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. Z. Aldrin Drive Street Vacation. It was right-of-way and schedule a public hes Woo a petition to vacate the Aldrin Drive public ept6mber 3, 1996. AA. Final Planned Development - BlocktWAter Video: Eagan Promenade. It was recommended to approve a Final Planned Development for a 1!:-'§1'0 square:: -'foot video rental store for Lot 2, Block 2, Eagan Promenade, at the northeast intersecti6H..,df 1Y:ai *Oi;:Do*oOe:Ripad and Denmark Avenue. BB. Final Subdivision - Robins 2nd Addition. It was recommended to approve a Final Subdivision (Robins 2nd Addition) consisting of four lots on 29 acres of property located on the north side of Blue Gentian Road, west of T.H. 149 in the NE 1/4 of Section 2. CC. Final Subdivision and Final Planned D— t� Y.i?i1>:}ckwe a Final Subdivision (Duckwood Bluff) consis gg'-of one*loi:ipfi 9.8 of I -35E, west of Pilot Knob Road in the; 'I/2 of Section':.) Planned Development to allow athree-story, 104 -unit Fairfield' -Ir 1, Duckwood Bluff. od Bluff. It was recommended to approve acres of property located on the east side It was recommended to approve a Final n Suites hotel on a portion of Lot 1, Block EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 6 DD. Change Order for Contract 96-09 B16c*hawk Park Pavilion, It was recommended to approve change order #2 to Thor Construction for Blackh6w''k Park shelter in the amount of $9,532.29. EE. Authorize Acquisition of Tax FoJ-!o L:�:0U&6:WiIdemess Run 5th Addition, It was recommended to approve the acquisitiorl*':'o'f-'0''i]t-1'0"t"8';"-'Vf errii§ts Run 5th Addition as tax forfeit property for parks purposes. FF. Change Order #3. Eagan Fire Station #1, It was recommended to approve a change order in the amount of $310 for the Eagan Fire Station #1 renovation. GG. Contract 96-11. Yankee Doodle Rd, Irrigrovements, It was recommended to approve extended work hours for Contract 96-11 (Yankee Doodldr'Rbad - Street & Signal Improvements) for the hours of 8:00 p.m. - 4:00 a.m. on selected nights as approved::by by staff. Councilmember Awada moved,:':'.0ounciIm6riber Wachter seconded a motion to approve the consent agenda. Aye., 5 Nay: 0 ......... J PROJECT 709, KENNEBEC DRIVE & TH 13/BLACKHAWK RD. City Administrator Hedges gave on overview on this item. Director of Public Works Colbert gave a staff report. He summarized the primary reason the-*060:.-'fi�ea ring was continued was because the Metropolitan Council has determined, based ht' use of their property, they would not receive any benefit associated with the installat 6hebec';::,Drive as originally designed. He reviewed the ' original design of Kennebec Drive. Cb'bhci.Irnember M . Osin asked if there was a proposal regarding legislation that would change the exemptio'li�:6f.�.t�i.i':'Met.C'ouncil. Colbert stated he was not aware of any legislation, Mayor Egan asked if the Met Council'660.d::b&:assessed, even though they object, and then contest the special benefit under Chapter 429 or are they OcNi6rn.ed by special rules, since they are a public e . domain. Dougherty stated they do have special legislation addrssed specifically to the Met Council which states their determination is conclusive to the City. He added the City's ability to assess is based on the Met Council's determination. Councilmember Awada asked if anyone has ever challenged their legal position. Dougherty stated he was not aware of any challenge, Councilmember Masin noted the City of Eagan does not receive a lot of benefit from having a waste water treatment plant in the City and feels it is unfair for the City to have to bear the ..ass6i.��ents..f.cp.-.:thit::oroject. She added the region should be ............ ­* ........ assessed for this. She requested that a be.4-toft d' 'A b"t1lith1egislators asking them to pursue the issue regarding assessing property owned by: . gional an' ..::state governments, Mayor Egan then opened the public hearing to anyone wishing to speak,., Helen Boyer, Director of the Envir-'6 -48iMws:Qiy-ision of the Metropolitan Council, addressed the Council. She referenced the letter subr i#lefl t :-f*:1hi6:*City Administrator and City Council. She noted that special statutes do apply to the Met Council and if a challenge was brought forth, she feels there would be a motion and dismissal of the case. She stated the Met Council does have an interest in continuing to maintain amicable working relationships with local units of government. She further stated that special benefit needs to be received by the. properties, and if there is none, then by law the Met Council should not agree to any special assasfntAK-:�O�h applies in this case. She added there is no intent in the present or future to develop V00*0 .the only purpose for the property is to serve as a buffer. She noted the Met Counci[:'h.i**': an interest in-i"vorting industry, growth and development, but not at the taxpayers' expense. Mayqr Egan asked if th'6*Met Council anticipates any future benefit. Boyer stated the Met Council has coniid6red it, but there io $.::h present or long-term intent to use this property other than for its current use. :�Pe-:po d . h OUk1l: is willing to take the risk that, if at some EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 7 point in the future they decide to sell the prpperty, the Council may receive a reduced value for the property because of possible assessments assocW6d with the property. Mayor Egan asked Dougherty if the Met Council's finding is conclusive. Dougherty' 'stated that it is conclusive. He noted that a normal assessment is determined by what the highest and best::usi :i5#. Fte:}5tbp. t in order to decide whether or not special benefit has been received. He further noted -:M :thI5 LO--':Qd4rtcfl:#ias special legislation in place that indicates highest and best use cannot be used as a:standard, but rather what the property is actually being used for presently, which in the Met Council's caswjs a buffer zone. Director of Public Works Colbert stated that Kennebec Drive is one element of the public improvements incorporated under Project 709. He added that there are some minor improvements to Yankee Doodle Road, and also added there is the signalization of Blackhawk Road with TH 13 and it is recognized that this does provide benefit-Ap the industrial park as well as to the Seneca Water Treatment Maintenance Facility, but it is more of ari: Kdirect benefit. He further added that the signal portion the Met Council recognizes benefit from is not ptbposed tp::tie assessed and the Kennebec Drive portion they do not recognize benefit from is what is pro ".'..''ed to assessed. Councilmember Awada asked Boyer if the Met Council would be willing to take some risk ori an assessment if the area was developed. Boyer clarified that if the Council decided to sell:tlji :� ` pei- h:f1`*:fLMfe, they would possibly receive a reduced value for the property because of lac{t- of--improeeri Eft::: and potential additional assessments. Councilmember Awada stated assessments could not be levied against the property under the ownership of the Met Council. Councilmember Wachter asked how much land the Met Council owns on either side of Kennebec Drive and the value of the land. Discussion continued regarding the properties on either side of Kennebec Drive. Councilmember Wachter asked if the property on the south side of Kennebec Drive was buildable and saleable. Colbert indicated the property,::was buildable and is presently serviced with sanitary sewer and water, but not street or storm .sewet:;:::,Co6ncilmember Awada noted that if the Met Council sold this property, the City could not:asss:te rievr owner. Boyer stated their intent is not to sell this property. Mayor Egan stated that aptioris 3 and 4 aOpear to be the options to pursue. Boyer stated that when they talked to staff, the Met Counct .-stated it was regrettable they could not work with staff. Chuck Hall, development consultant for Blue Crijss::ltie: Shield, addressed the Council and stated they have not taken a final position on this matter. He further-sfated his recommendation would be for Blue Cross to rework the existing PD. He added that they could go on with the plan as it is, but further added it wouldn't make a lot of sense without an improved public street. He noted that they understand the Met Council's position, but not from a real estate perspective because there are other properties developed between their property and the plant. He stated that Blue Cross could modify their PD and start access from the Yankee Doodle Road side rather thafJrom the Kennebec side and postpone their access over to Blackhawk and also cut back from two::#j. ii�ftiVs tq;:or a ::Fie also stated the parking lot and ponding expansion could be postponed. He added -that a0i6ri:,*icy' Sfu* e Cross would affect the action of the City Council regarding the adjacent land place` that is` -tieing considered at Yankee Place and TH 13, since ponding for that development was being::provided..prr: Blue Cross' property. He further added this action would give the Met Council a chance tt 10ok. at ttiis::property as possible surplus and would allow Blue Cross to proceed without paying the total: tf-0e;:piitilip: provements. There being no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Egan turned the discussion back to the Council. Mayor Egan stated this was a significant revision to the PD and also changed the transportation plan. He asked Colbert what his reaction was to the transportation plan in relation to the elimination of Kennebec Drive. Colbert discussed the transportation ole tJn regard to signalization at TH 13 and Blackhawk Road. He further stated that the City ha¢:l3Fsl::regtte.signalization in 1978 and MnDOT has stated through the years this intersection did npi':-.:. et warrarifs:-1a: justify their participation at that location. He noted they continued to wait until traffic :.-Vowth would alld i.:'4he warrants to be met to justify MnDOT's participation. He said the River Park development, with their..frst phase being on the south edge of the existing buildings, would meet the wait6Kts. He added that:MnDOT does not participate on projected EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 8 warrants, but only on existing warrants. Hd:turther added if the development were to be amended and the phasing were accesses off Yankee Dood#e Road, it would reduce some of the need and justification for proceeding with the signalization on TH .1.3.and..Blackhawk, Road at the present time. He stated if that happened, he would like to pursue effoits::yciftlt:;iwtfiti#;: t:pktain participation from them which would reduce the City's cost for signalization. He''stat C'ifthe:Cty'-i8'able to obtain funding from MnDOT, costs could then be shifted to help finance Keitr�bec Drive to accommodate their second phase. Councilmember Hunter asked if there would be a strict shift in phasing or if there would be significant changes to the drawings. Colbert indicated that the phasing is fairly delineated so that it could easily be reversed. Councilmember Hunter asked Dougherty if the reversal of phasing would require renotification for a public hearing. Dougherty stated the switching of phasing would not require renotification. Mayor Egan asked about:ib6. authorization of the detailed plans and specifications and if the City could enter into an agreement with :510e Crosi: here if they chose to go forward with Kennebec, the City could phase this in on a separate baiiS with plSiijs and specifications for that portion separate from the plans and specs for the remainder of this--project.:::::bougherty stated that could be done, but added the bigger problem would be the signalization,.at:.alackhawk.and. TH 13. He stated that, to the extent that Kennebec is solely a separate project arid6e: os! :Js.:......... funding source, it would not require any hearings. Colbert said signalization would -riot be'fhMc!(led.u.611l'August of 1997 in any event. Councilmember Awada asked how Yankee Doodle Road is proposed to be assessed under this new proposal. Colbert discussed the breakdown of the assessments for Yankee Doodle Road. Ridley stated the term of the PD was preliminarily approved for 15 years, including three phases. He added the phases could be rearranged. Mayor Egan stated he would)-*# to work with phasing and does not want to subsidize the Met Council nor does he want to:etd1tri+3Aiids from one of Eagan's primary corporate residents. Hall asked if this action would.start:ti®:vv#iole process over again in regard to the EAW and ISP, since they have already completed a year'8'w:ork. Ridley. stated phasing would not affect either process. Councilmember Hunter asked if this item sh&ld::be..contiriued until the phasing is worked out or if action should be taken deleting the Kennebec portiori.-Co# ct:tatwmmended the Council approve the portion of the project that pertains to Yankee Doodle Road onl'a rid: tkiat:� separate public hearing could be held at a later date regarding Kennebec Drive. Councilmember Awada-added if Blue Cross decided they needed Kennebec Drive as an access, it would require renotification. Mayor Egan stated they do not want to lose the ability to assess the project. Colbert indicated there has only been three properties identified as being assessable, two of which are the Met Council's property, which cannot be assessed. He stated the one remaining property owner can waive their rights to the public hearing by agreement. Councilmember Awada moved,..:C. dundi mber:k6'ritier seconded a motion to close the public hearing and approve only the Yankee 066dle Road: pdrtion of Project 709 and delete the other portions and authorize the preparation of detailed: plans and"*specifications. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Masin asked abaI t..the::km dht4af:taxe . that would be generated on a yearly basis once the buildings are on the property.::::::::::`:::=?: PROJECT 704, WESCOTT RD. & LEXINGTON AVE. - SIGNAL & OVERLAY City Administrator Hedges agave an overview on this item. Director of Public Works Colbert gave a staff report. Colbert introduced Tom Sohvireide3hort Elliott Hendrickson, who discussed the two improvements being proposed, specifically.. s zafror}:>iincf 1resurfacing. He said that based on the present condition of the street, sealcoating woyld:::riot becost-efftive. He noted that signalization of the intersection would require widening of Wescott Road. He fu4e" r noted the intersection meets warrants for signalization. He stated that the State ddes not do studies for.:Clties regarding control of local intersections, but they do conduct studies re arding :m' d,limits...on.:kqot:streets. He added the State's involvement EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 9 would be to approve the signal justification report for the use of state aid funds. He discussed the proposed configurations of the turn lane$::::i-lie went on to discuss the need for acquisition of temporary and permanent easements. He also talked about .the.ogst.estiinate and revenue sources. He stated that Dakota County would participate in 500/co,oIj8lilidttErtiwq;t. He then outlined the project schedule. Councilmember Awada asked f0--;6larification regarding the option of changing Wescott from a four -lane to a three-way lane with the 1691 tem lane in the center of the road. She asked what happened to that proposal. Sohrweide indicated that this plan is essentially a three -lane scenario at Wescott and Lexington. He stated the proposal is a three -lane with an extra right -tum lane. He further stated another alternative proposed was to go to a three -lane road from Wescott Road from Pilot Knob to its east end. He added that Wescott Road functions well as a four -lane road. Discussion continued regarding the turn lanes. Mayor Egan noted that Dakotanty Commissioner Patrice Bataglia and Dakota County Traffic Engineer Pete Sorenson were present: s. :'4he audi hce for any questions. He then opened the public hearing to anyone wishing to speak. Michael O'Brien, 1095 Wescott Road,-addres.sed.the Council and stated the proposed traffic signal will alter the use of Wescott Road, cri?....:a:: efj+: rt3 :and change the face of the surrounding neighborhoods. He noted that the primary obje* ti4e of the proposed stoplight is to alleviate the congestion on Lexington Avenue. He further noted that Lexington is primarily backed up only two times per day. He stated that there is no back up of traffic on Wescott. He said he is concerned that the proposal has little functional value to those on Wescott. He stated he is also concerned with safety to the three property owners whose driveway is directly off Wescott. He added that drivers tend to take risks at signalized intersections by speeding through them vs. intersections.with fqur-way stop signs. Irven Dahl, 1025 Wescott Road,. rafer0rs�ei� 'a' h'amcle, which he submitted to the Council, from the July 29 edition of the St. Paul Pioneer Press which state traffic signals had more fatalities and crashes vs. stop signs. He also referenced a letter..'00t•:to..the..Director of Public Works by the Dakota County Engineer which stated high accident occurrences#tave:k�uees). experienced at other similar locations and they have been reconstructed to provide left -turn lanes.Hesaid:fi :lies not heard of any complaints and knows of no accidents at this intersection. He added he is concerriecl�that drivers will approach the intersection at high levels of speed. He further added that, with the stop signs, drivers all need to stop and the rate of speed is much slower. He noted that he is also concerned for the neighbors whose land will be taken for the purpose of a temporary easement. Kirk Emmen, 3813 Westbury Drivef:ressed..the::Council. He stated he was concerned about safety at this intersection. He further noted::t#ik:fedis.:t3 Severity of accidents may increase due to the installation of a signal because drivers u�lli: ccess t#i;�:intersection at higher rates of speed. He also noted that it will be difficult for residents to make a left �iui7i from Westbury Drive onto Wescott due to limited visibility to the east. He said it would als6::4e difficult -to make a southbound tum onto Westbury Drive from Wescott because of an increased risk of ::r......stated there does not appear to be any future anticipated growth in traffic because .lt of :#ttiadd tli id ends on both ends of the street. Darryl Nyblom, 1093 Wescott Road, stated he moved into his residence in February of 1996 and prior to that he talked with the City Engineers who told him there were no plans of any kind proposed for this area. He said he also came to the City in May of 1996 and was told that widening of the roadway would not affect his property, but would go in::tti *ift.V' 1g: -right-of-way. He added that his berm and trees will be affected by this plan. He stated he;fi~ele:WeSciltictions well as a four -lane road. He added that the road was improved in 1987 and that.Wi-d-S'supposed to'fi #: food for 20 years. He also added that if the signal is installed, he would like to see tlie" left turn lane ph2ieed in. Margaret Tilley, 1055 Wescott'-R4ad,, addressad.;.tti ;Council and noted that some of the 13 EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 10 documented accidents contained in the fusibility report occurred over a five-year period and that during part of that time there were only two stop:$I&s at the intersection. She added that when the four-way stop was installed, the number of accidents was reduced. She further added that only four of the 12 warranties have been met. She noted that Wescott;:R'vi'.4ecreational area. Vince Bazzachini, 1067 Briar Creek. Road, voiced many of the same concerns already raised and added that there are elementary schools.On the east and west side of Lexington on Wescott and that speed is a concern regarding the safety .of the children. He added that he feels Wescott Road will be turned into a trunk highway because of the speed and the signal. There being no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Egan turned the discussion back to the Council. Councilmember Wachter stated hetas driven the intersection and has not found it to be a problem during peak times. He added he thinks:ttii8 signal:i$.:premature. Councilmember Wachter moved:'Councilriiember Masin seconded a motion to close the public hearing and deny Project 704 (Wescott Road .$. Lei ington Avenue - Signal & Overlay). Mayor Egan concurred with Courr611riie.''Iffibet'W9cKteft:statement. Councilmember Hunter stated he agreed with most of the comments, but added that future growth is anticipated, He also added that the intersection will be signalized at some point in the future. Councilmember Awada concurred with Councilmember Hunter's comment regarding future growth. Sohrweide noted that there are two separate projeetS being proposed and asked about the intent of the Council in regard to resurfacing. Colbert indicatedof the road is quickly deteriorating and will not last another two to five years.::;:.Fte:::stated :.1 a Council should proceed with resurfacing Councilmember Awada commented abowt:the fi)ture widening of the road and stated she thought it should when signalized to avoid disturbing what wo.uld:be.a.fairly rfiew surface. Colbert recommended that at least Wescott Road from Denmark Avenue to Westbirr�'::'Q(tive:.ba.:resurfaced. Councilmember Wachter amended his earlier motio'Kf ai pprove the overlay portion of Project 704, Councilmember Masin agreed to the amendment. Aye: 5 Nay; 0 WESTON.-F.41 LS::DRIVF.::WALKWAY City Administrator Hedges gave.:iih*overview::tiri this item. Director of Public Works Colbert gave a brief staff report. Mayor Egan noted thatthere was no consensus reached at the last meeting in regard to this item. He stated that they tried ii;i .Work out:t':solution and decided the painting of the pedestrian walkway would be the first probationary;st ::::�0010m.. WrAw.. ;Hunter referenced an article that appeared in one of the local papers which criticized:tt*:Cbt nrtl.:fos::i�ttivliing residents to speak on the issue since the point was to put children on the sidewalk. He stated the point was the safe conveyance of children, which could be accomplished through a variety of other ways besides installing a sidewalk. He also stated that the Council does not like to force public improvements on residents. John Ruppert, 4677 Weston Hills D.r.ive::: iriOOed the Council for coming up with an alternate solution to the sidewalk; however, he added:Ah&6' biM:::t a significant decline in traffic volume on Weston Hills Drive due to decreased deirebppment. He n0ii4 that an argument for sidewalks at the last meeting was that Red Pine Elementary, was the only school' without walkways. He cited three other examples of schools without walkways.:.:::.::: EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 11 Denise Sjoberg, 4612 Weston Hills Drive, addressed the Council and stated her concern is the speed on Weston Hills Drive. She said :tfiai the speed needs to be addressed and suggested stop signs be placed at Weston Hills Drive and Bristol Boulevard. Discussion continued and it was noted that Sjoberg and the residents in her neighborhood cfl>jld:.spbfnd:;a::pMiWp...requesting stop signs. Colbert stated that the correct procedure would be to submit;i}: iefiticitj : ufi:a e�ei#:. at he does not think the warrants would be met for the installation of stop signs. .ie; stated that studies have shown stop signs do not slow speeds and that a stop sign placed in the middle:pf a through street is not always observed and can become a safety hazard. Councilmember Wachter stated the painted walkway proposal should be tried and adjustments made later on if needed. Mark McCauley, Weston Hills Ginnie, stated:that speed is the problem and does not feel a painted stripe will do anything to address that Issue. Mayor Egan stated that the Council's interiiivas to try the painted walkway option. He added that he has seen this done in other communities:::::::: EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 12 1. All tenant signs must be reloqmt.,ed to the approved sign band by August 15, 199T Aye: 5 Nay: 0 COMPREHENSIVE GUIDt'0LAWAMtkbVlENT - WOODCREST CHURCH City Administrator Hedges gave :> ::Grief overview on this item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Pastor Jerry Shomar addressed the Council and thanked them for their consideration of this proposal, Mayor Egan noted that the staff report was very comprehensive. Councilmember Awada asked what denomination the church was. Pastor Shomar indicated the church is affiliated with the Baptist Conference, but attracts many denominations. Councilmember Awada movej',':.--':Councifi!60mber Masin seconded a motion to approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendmenf:-frbm D-1:('�ngle Family 0-3 units/acre) to PF (Public Facility) to allow construction of a church on approAhl'ately 12:�dres located at the northeast corner of TH 3 and Cliff Road in the SE quarter of Section 25. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AM DME . NY DAUGHTERS OF PENELOPE City Administrator Hedges gave a brief overview on this item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Dean Dovolis, the project architect, addressed the Council and discussed the background of the group and the purpose of the project. Councilmember Masi.. asked about the capacity of the housing development. Dovolis stated there are 45 units propo.spd:"�*4 proximately one tenant per unit, possibly two tenants per unit in some cases. Councilmemb6t.'-Mi! referenced Judy Stuard's concern that was raised at the July 23, 1996 APC meefinQ:di'' ity. Discussion occurred regarding the past :.reW Ing d .ah' s proposals for this property and it was d6t&rh'iin'ed that tli ..use being proposed was low-density. Councilmember Hunter moved, Coun, dllr"(*:.Wachter seconded a motion to approve an :R amendment to the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan jDadside Business, to D -IV, Multiple Family Residential for the 3.3 acre Lot 3, Block 1, Blackhawk Plaza. 5 Nay: 0 Don Patton, realtor for the project, requested that the Council write a letter of support to HUD to help them obtain HUD 202 funding for this project. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Mayor Egan moved, Councilmember+iter se.qpNegI::0 motion to send a letter to HUD in support of the Daughters of Penelope proposal..,....,.: Councilmember Hunter moved,:wwfte'-fter:.Y.Varhter seconded a motion to set a Council work session for August 26, 1996 at 5:00 City Administrator Hedges noted that in regard to the installation of the four new outdoor warning sirens, only one person called. CONTRACT 95-12, DEERW0­.0­6**:' EGERVOIR LOGO DESIGN Director of Public Works Colbert.��U*ssed the quid .:received from Tight Rope, Inc. in the amount of $11,500, which was substantially less'likin the estimate 6f:%16,000. n I mem. Councilmember Hunter moved,::. `6u­c.l ber.:Aw.00- seconded a motion to approve the quote EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 13 from Tight Rope, Inc. in the amount of $1'1:500 and authorize staff to enter into a contractual agreement for the painting of the Deerwood ReserVc 'I-:';ogo. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 APPROVE MNDOT LIMITED:WOOD DRIVE - TRAILWAY) Councilmember Awada moved, Councilmember Wachter seconded a motion to pass a Resolution approving a Limited Use Permit with MnI3& for Contract 96-12 (Northwood Drive - Trailway) and authorize the Public Works Director and City Clerk 16 execute said permit. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 CONTRACT 96-12, NORTHWOOD DRIVE/LEXINGTON AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION Councilmember Awada moven; :Councilh).ernber Wachter seconded a motion to authorize reimbursement for temporary easement:uisitioh:*fir Parcel 020-75, 040-75, and 050-75 in the amount of the appraised value for Project 694.:: Councilmember Hunter questioi?::if-:tbe:'Oaiuit�if::h.id::�eimbursed property owners in the past. fib Mayor Egan asked why the property ows:: iiitl4e3 :theif previous commitment. Director of Public Works Colbert noted that some property owners changed their mind and wanted compensation for the easement acquisition. City Administrator Hedges noted that amounts have never been readjusted before. He stated that economics and fairness were taken into account, both on the part of the City and the neighbors. Colbert stated the property owners were not aware of the appraised value when they were approached. City Attorney Dougherty added that these property owners:war,0:civic-minded and agreed to giving the City the easement before the acquisition process v�aY:Stzrteii;:which resulted in some of their neighbors receiving reimbursements. Roll call was taken on the motion....:6ye:::::5: Naj.*-:-0 PROJECT 708, RECEIVE FEASIBILITY':Rr# OEtT/ORDER PUBLIC HEARING (WESCOTT ROAD EXTENSION & SIGNAL REVISION AT PILOT KNOB ROAD) Councilmember Wachter moved, Councilmember Hunter seconded a motion to receive the feasibility report for Project 708 (Wescott Road Extension & Pilot Knob Road Signal Revision) and schedule a public hearing to be held on September 3, 1996. Senior Planner Ridley clarified C-Whcilmerrit Masin's concern in regard to Judy Stuard's question about density. He stated that she was aWng if tho::P-1V designation was approved, but this use does not occur, what is the potential density undefAhst.desigr .t0n.•: He added that staff could send the information to the Met Council to get their approvalriif:vitidit fc:tt1.:Ccixrfs final action to coincide with the next step in their development, which is the rezoning and subd'iviSlor 'request. Director of Public Works Colbert gave an update on the Yankee Doodle Road project. He stated a committee has been created to review traffic operations and safety . He noted they will meet on a weekly basis and will include representatives from the• Poke.09partment, Engineering Department, Dakota County, the contractor, consultant and representati ei?:fttsiii�ir<ICpri'Ripq Lights. Mayor Egan added that very few complaints have been received. City gdri#istrator Hecfgs #urther added that he has not received any complaints but only suggestions. City Administrator Hedges refeNi6ced letters and. pl�6he calls the Council may have received in EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; AUGUST 6, 1996 PAGE 14 regard to the Villas of Violet Lane and Po' ppler Lane. He stated that staff is working on both these issues and added the responses have been prepared. Councilmember Masin stated than:l;st ;;latalked about creating Citizen Review Committees and added she would like td-discuist'ti16:or#9tldri'•bf these committees, City Administrator Hedges said that it was originally scheduldd for the May 15 special work session, but the Council decided not to discuss it that evening. He added'thdt Council dockets have been so full lately which is why it has not been rescheduled. Councilmember Masin suggested staff make a list of individuals who would be good candidates for these committees. Councilmember Hunter stated there were a couple of committees that should not be formed and he would like to discuss which task forces the Council wants to create first. Councilmembers concurred to discuss this at the August 20 City Council meeting. Councilmember Masin requested::6, letter *:gent to legislators addressing the issue of the Met Council being exempt from assessments:;:'She addad that the letter should state this is an unfair burden to the communities that have Met CounCti:facilities:a' id legislatively, this exemption should be abolished. Dougherty stated that other instruments of .the.state have the same exemptions. Councilmember Masin moved, Couricilri' '6 ibex Hunter'seconded a motion to send a letter to legislators requesting legislation that would allow property owned by regional and state governments to be considered for special assessments. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Masin brought up the issue of the City's,deer management policy. She stated she was contacted regarding the Lone Oak area. CouncilmemO#c.`:Wachter added that he talked with Police Chief Pat Geagan regarding this area. He further.,added: that Geagan will be discussing this with the DNR. Councilmember Wachter suggested leav,ir#g tlte: honer and::arrow season open until the over of the deer population is reduced. Councilmember Wachter moved, Mayor Egan seconded a motion to approve the check register dated August 1, 1996 in the amount of $2,910,296.72. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 The meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.T.;agan.executive:.session. MLK Date City Clerk If you need these minutes in an alternative form such as large print, braille, audio tape, etc., please contact the City of Eagan, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagat;;:11 ::.$5.122, (612) 681-4600, (TDD phone: (612) 454- 8535). The City of Eagan is committed to the paliiry that all persons:)i3ve equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities and employment witttgvt regard to race,:::Ipplor, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital. -V0 or statp4.,w"41t gard to public assistance. EXHIBIT A 1996 Amusement Device Renewals License Period: July 1, 1996 -June 30, 1997 VENDOR # MACH. Lic # LOCATION Advance Carter Co. 3.00ch. 001 Bulk Mailing Plant -3165 Lexington Ave. American Amusement 3::(ti$Ch. 002 J. Doolittles-2140 Cliff Rd. 850 Decatur Ave. N. Minneapolis, MN 55427 645-6810 Dahlco Music & Vending 16:':mach. 003 Cedarvale Lanes -3883 Beau De Rue 296 N. Pascal St. 15•'•thach. 004 LaFonda's-3665 Sibley Memorial Hwy. St. Paul, MN 55104 7 mach. 005 Valley Lounge -3385 Sibley Memorial Hwy. C/O Alex 1 mach. 006 Richards -4185 So. Robert Tr. 645-1111 5 mach. 007 Cherokee Room -4625 Nicola Rd. Gary Starks lE}=:15 maCZ::; 008 Starks Saloon -3125 Dodd Rd. 3125 Dodd Rd. Eagan, MN 55121 John Vanderaarde >3:5 Grand Slam -3984 Sibley Memorial Hwy. 1417 Frontier Lane Burnsville, MN 55337 Awe Vending & Amusements 4 mach. 010 Diamond T-4889 Pilot Knob Rd. 476 So. Snelling Ave. 1 mach. 013.•::::::::Lost Spur -2750 Sibley Mem. Hwy. Suite #2 2 mach. :0:1 ':::.::::Piccolo's Pizza -4162 Pilot Knob Rd. St. Paul, MN 55105 3 mac 7 ::::: ::::::::....... Splatbal l Indoor -3820 Sibley Mem Hwy Wally Shaver. 614 Cherokee Room -4625 Nicola Rd. 15764 High•iew Dr. Apple Valley, NCV 55124 Mendota Valley Amusement 2 mach. 015 Golden Gloves Card Shop 9177 E. Courthouse Blvd. Ct. 3390 Coachman Rd. #210 Inver Grove Hts, NIDI 55077 451-0420 CDL 12322 Business Park Blvd. N. Champlin, MN 55316 Imach. 016 Davanni's-1980 Cliff Rd 427-6956 American Amusement Inc.::aril ':::::::::::::OS7:::::: Italian Pie Shoppe 1416 Carroll Ave. St. Paul, MN 55104: Attn: Mark _18 Pizza Hut -Town Centre Dr. Theisen Vending 2 �►a. : . :::::::::::::::::., 0 • • 3600 Nicollet Ave. Minneapolis, MN 55409 Lifetime Fitness Mary Lynch 1565 Thomas Center Dr. Eagan, MN 55122 The Tropics Gary Wheeler 3942 Sibley Memorial Eagan, MN 55122 Bodyweilness Massage Center CO3MTE 2121 Cliff Dr. #214 Eagan, MN 55122 P OW-104i"MI) 644fff" IIANW-4 4-1 Patricia Becker 1175 E. County Rd. D #332 Vadnais Heights, MN 55105 Sandra Beyer 1842 St. Clair Ave. #8 St. Paul, MN 55105 Roxanne Carr-Beseman 13623 Elkwood Drive Apple Valley, MN 55124 M. Alix Blick 11433 Valley Ct. Burnsville, MN 55337 Paula Chase 2310 Aldrich Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN 55405 Gigi Decker 980 Bush Ave. E. St. Paul, MN 55106 James Donald DeYoe 9705 Pleasant Ave. S. Bloomington, MN 55420 Claudia Ernst 1090 Ohio St. W. St. Paul, MN 55118 ........ ........ 006 9M ............. .............. ............ # 2 Chad Hauck 023 831 E. County Rd. D #302 0 Vadnais Heights, MN 551 Jenny Gamer 014 678 N. Pascal St. St. Paul, MN 55104 Tina Marie Hengel 1377 Easter Lane Eagan, MN 55122 Lisa Marie Heyerman 020 8234 166th St. W. Lakeville, MN 55044 Cynthia Howell 005 3838 Country Creek Way Eagan, MN 55122 Jessica Lynn Kittleson 909 Lakeview Ave. St. Paul, MN 55117 Jennifer Lambert 4575 139th St. Savage, MN 55378 Mary Lynch 989 Goodrich Ave. St. Paul, MN 55105 Kathleen Navarre -Larson 019 1950 Jade Lane #304 Eagan, MN 55122 Pamela Okeson 008 781 Magnolia Ave. E. St. Paul, MN 55106 Michael John Persing 022 16560 Flagstaff Way Rosemount, MIN 55068 Trevor Richards 4609 Blaisdell #3 Minneapolis, MN 55409 •• Kimberly Sanders 6508 17th Ave. S. Richfield, MN 55423 Susan Sterns 1002 Cross Rd. Eagan, MN 55123 Christine Suihkonen 8238 166th St. West Lakeville, MN 55044 Barbara Ward 3633 Crestridge Ct Eagan, MN 55123 011 ..004. 012 LLc I Namc./Addrcs 1996-1997 Scrvice Station Permits Billing Address UAw W Ammo Schlangen Enterprises. Inc 4600 MAI- 11 Cedar Cliff Amoco Eagan, MN 55122 KV 4600 Slairr MI. KA Eagan, MN 55122 OZS Cidarvale Texaco 300 SlIcy Mmn Hwy Eagan. M11 55122 US Duckwood 66 3575 Idol Knob Rd. Eagan, MN 55122 04S Eagan E- Z Slop 4195 Oak R& Eagan, MAI 551U G5S Amoco 4N5 hums Rd. Eagan, MN 55122 Wis Oasis Markel. 3390 Coachman Ncl'�`51ti 07S Oasis Markel. 3150 Dodd Rd /1576 Oils Oasis Markel ING Lone Oak Rd. x159,1 09S Oasis Mork(A 4250 Lex Ave. S. P590 10S Holiday Slationslore #232 405 NOWS Rd. IIS 8247 3615 Pilol Knob Rd 25S #66 1065 Diffl('Y Rd. 0 Pj)(l #211 4 i Pilol Knob Rd Hwy Eagan, ME! 55122 Phillips Pet.rolcum Co P. 0 Box 109 Baj-11csville, OK 74001 Crown CoCo' Inc Ulysses SI NE Abrapahs. MN 55413 So. France LTD. Inc Twin c1lics slorc';' Inc Alln, NOW Jensen 2020 SflvcrjBvll Rd. #23 EpA11:.:51,:`;,. 55122 �klhollstorvs. Inc X. ilpohs, NIN 55.137 PDQ Qod*SI*orvs of MN. Inc. MN: MU MrMdry 521 - , (0 W. 111111 SI- #260 Moununglon. UN 55437 115 toy, Sinclair VING SWAS Rd. G ra ha In QPUAG NUA N& MIN 55122 KS SA P4049-4200 E Hivy 13 SA i5F y4 i82- 1406 Yankcc Doodic MI iOs y4335-1379 Town Centrc Dr 17S 1;4464- 2250 Cliff Rd 18S Texaco Supri-slorc 1570 MiN Rd Eagan. %IN 55122 K-OrrimpTica Group IlIr. S. Evans P.O. Box 14008 USQ. KY 40512 Group Inc. I. --ikb Johnson Illound"Aton Mil 55431 fox Y.11m Inc o( Rd 20S 21S 22S 23S 24S Tom Thumb 1446 Yankee Doodle Rd. 1815 Diffley Rd. Total -4206 Aicols Tol.al-2000 Rahncliff Cl. Yankee Square Amoco 1424 Yankee Doodle Rd Eagan, MN 55121 Tom Thumb Food Markets Inc. 110 E. 17th St. Attn: Licensing Hastings. MN 55033 Avanti Petroleum. Inc. dba Total 8148 Pillsbury Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN 55420 Co. ::Rd. C Roseville. 'MN 55113 LIST OF ELECTION JUDGES FOR PRIMARY City Council Approval, August 6, 1996 SHARON ASTLEFORD RICHARD BEATTY AL BOLKE CAROL SUE CRUZ KAREN M. DARE GARY DODGE GERIANNE DODGE KAY DODGE MARY HANSEN JAMES DRISCOLL JAN GIEFER MARILYN HOLM FRANK HAMERNIK HELEN JARIR CAROLEE JONES YVONINE KRISNIK PAT LARSON ARLENE LEIBEL ADELAIDE MALONEY FLORENCE MULLEN CLARICE NITTI MARCINE OLSON STEPHEN OLSON THOMAS E. PEDERSEN MARGARET PELLERIN MARTIE RUZICKA ARLENE E. RUZZI JUDY SAIMA SHARM SCHOELLER BONITA TRANBY ANN THOMAS RUTH TWOMEY ANTHONY WILKES BEVERLY ZAINE ROBERT ZIMMERMAN LAURA -::::B PATI:I:::.- ..1 NEAL:.;.BLACK JOAN:::': KOHLIG GLADYS BYRNES JAMES DECH ELAINE FISCHER ETHEL M. GROFF JUDY::�iAWLEY;:.:: GEN, MUNDSW,, ANN bVRADN !k RICkARD IFV9RT PENNY::::a,61# 7SQN:::::::::::::::::::::: JUNE::: K9-Td'k.MI:::::::::::::::::::::::: JEAN KIMBER ALICE KREITZ JEANNE KOEHLER MARIE LANE MARY JANE LAROCK•:-:::: SHARON L I NDHOLM.:. :>: MARC:!:A:::M'1- 'LLER ELEANOR:.::MARSM AUREL �S�N.. BILL PFEIFFE t::::: . WILLIAM SKAR LYLE SEVERSON JACK SWAN NITA SWAN PAUL TESKE CAROL V;TiiOVDE ROSEI:Mt::::::. JEREMY.' YAR 43 fi ......... BARBARA NUT 'TALL MICHELLE SKINDELIEN LUCTA:: JOHN$.ON KAY ::::::+U?I: EXHIBIT B LEO AMUNDSON ADELINE BOUEHLER VICKIE JABBRA NO PREFERENCE LOIS AGRIMSON JANICE BELIVEAU GROVER BELLILE ELEANOR BRUCE VIVIAN DATE KAREN FLOOD DONALD GIBLIN MARTI GUITZLOFF JUDY HANSON JEAN HARMON MICHELLE HUCK PATRICIA KAEDER HELEN KENNEDY JAMES KENNEDY SHIRLEY KLANG SONJA LARSON WALTER LAWRENCE MARILYN LEGLER JEANETTE LEIBBRAND EMILY MEDIN VICTOR NARDANI JANE NELSON VIRGINIA NICOLAY EVILYN OTTERNESS VICKIE PLATT MARILYN PORTER RUTH PRYOR PAT RASK LORRAINE RIEGER DONALD SEKTNAN NANCY SEVERSON CAROLYN THURSTON MARILYN WOOLLEY TINA ZINK ELAINE JONES MARY C. BAEHR LARRY BRUCE SHARON BRUCE ROBERT MECKLEY THORA DECH WILLIAM HODAPP BARBARA HODAPP MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Eagan, Minnesota .........,August 6, 1996 A Special workshop meetiry9pf-the-Eei .,Qity:Gpuncil was held on Tuesday, August 6, 1996, at 5:00 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal.. ` ' Mayor Egan and City Councilmembers Awada, Hunter, Masin and Wachter. Also pre se . nt . were`brect`or'o - f Parks & Recreation Vraa, Senior Planner Freese, Planner Tyree and City Administrator Hedges. VISITORS TO BE HEARD There were no visitors to be heard. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WORK PROGRAM City Administrator Hedgeizistated tt.*':since the Joint City Council/Economic Development Commission meeting held in April, the Corriiiii[ision h6*8*:r*,.`e'viewed its priorities for the upcoming budget year and evaluated the City's -cost and benefits as they perWinto each of the various programs. EDC Chairperson Cathy Clark-Matuszak appeared along with Camths Johnson and presented the work plan. .............. , * ,%%* Chairperson Matuszak stated that a top cbht7iderafrdh,'-grld'"6M011asis by the Commission is for enhanced communications. She stated that an EDC newsletter was tried several years ago and there is a recommendation that a joint newsletter in collaboration with the Chamber of Commerce be considered at $4,000, the cost of four issues at $1,000 each. The Chair also presented a joint brochure/picture book that would be a collaborative effort with the Convention & Visitors Bureau during the next two years. Chairperson Matuszak stated that a sec'661 661 o'n's"ideration is to maintain a healthy business fioK outreach. She commented on a recommendafOi:e is:..our for businesses, realtors and others, similar to the type of bus tours the City sponsored in prk�Ulg �years. She further indicated that the EDC is recommending the enactment of business contacts, whi6'incIudes surveys. There is also a consideration to continue the business reachout meetings that were succe9tfU1:iP::.1.:eR.5.:.-. The total cost for the business outreach program is $1,700. Chairperson Matuszak presented a third budget item which is the cooperative activities with the Dakota County Economic Development Partnership at $6,500 and the Metro East Development Partnership at $500. She stated that the Commission has emphasized the benefit in maintaining the Partnerships. City Councilmember Awada asked if the dues are separate between Metro East and the Dakota Economic Development Partnership. She further asked what type of benefits are provided to the City of Eagan by the Dakota Economic Development Partnershipx:::86Mbr Planneif-:FhLese stated that the Partnership provides a means for trade shows, contact with new bmsktbts a "9:t ­ -impetus for grants and development of the GIS system. Senior Planner Freese further stat that tho-4 has benefitted from three layers of GIS information we would not have received had we not be.en a mem6df. City Councilmember Awada asked questions about the funding of the GIS system. Senior P1R*r!*p'p'*r Freewi�xplained how the GIS is funded. City Councilmember Awada asked if the City were to leave theT.0.dwshi0.::*h&.w.ouJd own the GIS software and hardware. City Administrator Hedges stated that the pul it:po icy -:quo the City Council is whether the City must participate in the Economic Development Partnership in order to continue a relationship with the GIS systems. City Councilmember Wachter stated that he has questioned for several months whether the City should be a member of the Partnership. He further stated that membership in the Economic Development Partnership suggests a faster growth at any expense and questioned whether the City should continue to develop at a fast pace. City Councilmember Wachter stated that-her:$t::ift,-.qypportive of the membership, questioning whether it has validity for the City. City Counclimembor: et-00044hat he agrees with much of the philosophy stated by Councilmember Wachter; however, he Ml*:Aupported the:.-Gi.6 system and would remain a member of the Economic Development Partnership for that:pUrpose alone. He4tited the benefits have been far reaching and are definitely favorable to the City given a:;ost benefit analysis:..... Page 2/EAGAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 6, 1996 City Councilmember Awada:asked if the GIS system and Economic Development Partnership are separate and,. if so, can the City justify. ff 0 $6,500 for membership in the Partnership. She further stated that in her opinion, the Partnership member hip is not necessary. She further commented that the money is better spent for economic development, supn:as;btistms:r-eachouts and bus tours that attract business leads. Mayor Egan stated that he supports the 3 M :f 'dWe�jrr;16:00ned to exclude the Economic Development Partnership as a viable budget consideration,'' further stated that the Mayors and Councils of Apple Valley, Bumsville, Lakeville and Eagan are plannjrigto discuss this issue at a Joint City Council meeting on April 21. Mayor Egan further stated that one outcortit: may be to allocate some of the resources currently paid to the Partnership to Metro East. Chairperson Matuszak stated that the EDC and City Council need the tools offered by Metro East and the Economic Development Partnership if the City is to continue its competitive edge for new development. After further consideratiara:-'and discussion, Mayor Egan thanked Chairperson Cathy Clark- Matuszak for her comments and input. Tfere was: rib action or further direction given; however, the City Administrator did indicate that these itemWill continue to be presented for consideration in the draft 1997 general fund operating budget. SECONQ;IEC: :$ktEf#'/AC :Ak HITECTS City Administrator Hedges stated that City Council action at the June 4 meeting directed the hiring of ACC Architects, Paul Dahlberg, to prepare conceptual drawings to be included in an application for Mighty Ducks funding that could help finance a second ice sheet. Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa noted the design was being designed to be simple, but more importantly, to be financed by limited funding from Mighty Ducks and revenue funds. Mr. Dahlberg presented three:.0 4Wjrlgs fdt:a second sheet of ice. He stated that the facility is very basic, no formal seating or concess.!i dteas like the iY ain civic arena. He further stated that the second arena is an 85 X 200 sheet of ice. A dashed line -reflects ah:Olympic dimension of 100 X 200, which is the case with the existing civic arena. City Councilmen ier VtiecYtter.:rai ed questions about the Moose and how far along the building addition is to provide an equipment robilVcrea. Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa stated that once the Minnesota Moose announced their de p tur:e: to Winnipeg, there has been no additional work performed on the building addition. He stated that the walls and roof are up; however, there has been no progress on the interior. The City Attorney has put the Moose on notice. Mr. Dahlberg noted that design option one would require the City to give itself a variance to the setback, but would provide some limited parking in front. He also noted that six to eight feet of fill would be required on the southeast corner. Option two moves the s6tdiifid ice shiei}tforward and greatly reduces the fill problem and the need for a variance. Parking would be relocated to the rear. In response to a question, Mr. Dahlberg noted that he saw the parking as employee or hib.Cliiey game:#larking for coaches, players and officials. He noted this parking may be an issue for residents onR;cic ky:Lsrte;:: Mer.review of option two, it was noted that relocating restrooms to the front with exterior access:rrxi� ay: :>rpri i><i red, given the wading pool usage. Regarding option three, the arena would extend east, but would require 16 to 18 feet of fill and would be very expensive. Councilmember Wachter questioned if this could be used as a basement for much needed storage. Following further presentatioi}:::aratt:::ifisi:t5sion regarding the three proposals, City Councilmember Awada questioned whetherr:ai}'Outdoor poll tJld be located on this site. City Councilmember Wachter stated that he would like the staff:atd Council to take.:.:serious look at the Municipal Center site for an outdoor pool. City Councilmember Hueter stated that he was -doubtful that a swimming pool facility would Page VEAGAN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 6, 1996 work on the site; however, he agreed with CPmncilmember Wachter that the City should look at all alternatives. There was some discussion regarding con:'si Aeration of the Dakota County Library site and whether a portion of that property could be used for addition -if -recreational facilities at the Municipal site. Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa stated that parking is obvio' M-MY:arr: After further discussion, Magor Egan stated that option two, or a combination of two and one, as presented by Paul Dahlberg, ACC Archis, for a second ice sheet appears to be the most desirable of the three ice sheets. OTHER BUSINESS There were no further business items. ::�:::;:ADJOI#R�VMENT The meeting adjourned at:& 30 p.m.`.*.'.: Date Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting The following items referred to as consent items require one (1) motion by the City Council. If the City Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further detail, those items should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Old or New Business unless the discussion required is brief. Item 1. Temporary Part-time Clerical Worker/Finance-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of a Tina Zink as a temporary part-time clerical worker to assist with election and front counter/receptionist duties through the November 5 election. FACTS: The Finance!City Clerk Department currently has in its budget a half-time clerical position which has not been filled after the last employee in it resigned. The department is working with City Administrator Hedges to determine if the half-time position is necessary on an ongoing basis. A recommendation will be brought to the Council in the future. However, because of the extra work load caused by the elections, both primary and general, additional help is needed at this time. Therefore, the City contacted an ex -employee who is familiar with the operations of the division and she has agreed to help the City on a temporary basis. Item 2. Temporary Seasonal Basketball Referee -- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Rick Griffon and Richard Adams as temporary seasonal basketball referees. Item 3. Temporary Part-time Seasonal Time/Scorekeeper-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Kerry Foster, Jr., as a seasonal part-time Time/Scorekeeper for summer basketball. Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting Item 4. Clerical Tech II/Receptionist/Central Services Maintenance -- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: No action is required on this item. It is for the Council's information. In official action at the July 16 City Council meeting, the Council approved the hiring of a person to be recommended as the Clerical Technician II/Receptionist for Central Services Maintenance. For the Council's information, that person is Julie Kaufman -Boom. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a tobacco sales license for Byerly's in the Promenade. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached without page number is a copy of the license application. 0 Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting C. FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - KOOL TYME. INC., EAGAN PROMENADE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: ► To approve or deny a Final Planned Development to allow construction of a 2660 s.f. class H restaurant (Dairy Queen) on Lot 1, Block 1, Eagan Promenade, located on the north side of Yankee Doodle Road, west of Denmark Ave. in the SW 1/4 of Section 10. FACTS: ► The City Council approved the Preliminary Planned Development for Eagan Promenade in December 1995 which called for a class II restaurant on this lot. ► The plans submitted by Kool Tyme are consistent with the approved master plans for the Preliminary Planned Development. ► The Final Planned Development Agreement is signed and in order for execution at the regular City Council meeting on August 6, 1996. ATTACHMENTS: ► Site Plan and Building Elevations, pages L through S . 3 I U) 74 m ?I fl p usptMl 77 414ok "Ve CC. cr-) co SIT@ PLAN Wo I 17DAIRY QUEEN @ EAGAN PROMENADE A-1 1110100 IA "PTDP0600 By: KOOL TYNE. INC. LLC 1 001 Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting D. FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - CATTLE COMPANY EAGAN PROMENADE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve or deny a Final Planned Development to allow construction of a 6650 s.f. class I restaurant (Stuart Anderson's Cattle Company) with a seating capacity of 260, on Lot 4, Block 2, Eagan Promenade. FACTS: The City Council approved the Preliminary Planned Development for Eagan Promenade in December 1995 which called for a class I restaurant on this lot. The City Council approved an Amendment to the Preliminary Planned Development Agreement for Lot 4, Block 2, Eagan Promenade on July 2, 1996. The plans submitted by Stuart Anderson's Cattle Company are consistent with the Development Agreement and master plans as approved and amended. The Final Planned Development Agreement is signed and in order for execution at the regular City Council meeting on August 20, 1996. ATTACHMENTS: P. Site Plan and Building elevations, pages through V: s �- 4 TI-- -- I";I F I !I I !Z "J'.i IF I rt Iwo Cc€i ' 1 .11 .1 Cal ,I I I I c .0o I s C; Int R � ;�� t I ec _�>• Iii Ifi Ee �I 1 17 { Ff -- II II m II - II T `-, I I At Ail I ' fb i I :.;; :a cart°a° euv.tgn ,'� DAIRY OUEEN ® EAGAN PROMENADE .,.. W"o Val. man ICIMA .9129 4 I z 0 0 rm Oil I L- . A I I i STUART ANDERSON'S CATTLE COMPANY EACrW PROAAENADE ..i " EACAK MN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS F7 - W m X 1 [1° i q j { I a� mi ,!(! t 1 ' I 1 1 I 1 � I. ,, R 'y- I I�� , 1 I 1 � I u, I ,I 1 i STUART ANDERSON'S CATTLE COMPANY EACrW PROAAENADE ..i " EACAK MN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS F7 - W m X 1 10 LF I Ij � j 1 � 1 s 1' i J 1 1 Nva j I � 1 i 1 i 1 1 Il1 1 ; 1 � 1 i, d STUART ANDERSON'S CATTLE COMPANY li EK.MI PRC MDODf l MN 1 �• .}u{ EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS r �� Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting E. EXECUTION QF REVISED DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT - GALAXIE CLIFF ADDITION NO. 1 (KINDERCARE) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: ► To execute the revised development contract for Galaxie Cliff Addition No. 1 (KinderCare) FACTS: ► The property owner (KinderCare) requested an amendment to the development contract for Galaxie Cliff Addition No. 1 to extend the developer improvement completion dates by one year and to postpone payment of water quality fees until issuance of a building permit. ► The City Council approved an amendment to the development contract and extension of recording for Galaxie Cliff Addition No. 1 at its regular meeting on July 16, 1996. ► The Development Contract has been revised accordingly and is in order and ready for execution. ATTACHMENTS: Plat map, page -- — IO 3 � F e•a �_ _ � i ! INI i : e p i !- i �� ' � � Vi• jEt ' !�• �•�= i i� F i:ia j IL i !s Iiia _ 7S.s i !02 yY z'. i>s i A ilu E� �2 EEi wa E.'i 3 � e•a �_ _ � es'p : e p i !02 yY :e -• I = f •q 3 t�l �� t ; ! •uE 't i s i i 3 � e•a �_ _ � es'p e p i Agenda Information Memo August 20,1996 Eagan City Council Meeting ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve or deny a Waiver of Subdivision to formally separate a portion of Government Lot 7 located west of Trunk Highway 13 and Silver Bell Road in the SE Quarter of Section 18. FACTS: In 1975, Silver Bell Addition was subdivided and platted. At that time, property was dedicated for Silver Bell Road and Kennebec Drive. In 1977, MNDot realigned Silver Bell Road and Kennebec Drive as part of the Cedar Avenue/Highway 13 improvement project. The realignment resulted in the separation of a sliver of Government Lot 7, but the separation was never formalized by a Waiver of Subdivision. At its workshop on August 8, 1996, the Planning Commission recommended approval of this Waiver of Subdivision. BACKGROUND/ATTACHMENTS: (2) Area Map, page I -S ./ Waiver of Subdivision Application Attachment, pages � through �. (a C I T Y LINE _. CP.G M1L4TAR., RE DL • •• `�v ,,� 64- 85 �•��' ' A I090 34'.6" S''• h R Y 624.36= R 326.48' C ' p C 533.47' C A2 800 36' v4.1 `OGf' t pc;C 471.38. 80' �\\� �0Fj ol / R_ A I 623- 824: A 109° 34' 16" 82-83= h�O R 246.48 A 47° 51� 41" �� a0 C 402.75. R 246.48` 2 '••ti"• C A2 260036'04 ° C 199.96' � N C Ar 49044'47" C gpI- �`, ' `y 825-b36+ m/. ►� A 350 34 4C" N0 1� QpQ`G I , i 326.48' ARC N C 199.49' ro�rO� QO 69.49' 90° 03'12" ' a B2S C A2 223036'17" �'� 6b NOT TANGENT TO CURVE % '� . i 831 0 m% 2 t ..-ARC 202.73 , 'may 221 \ 3' --- ui-N--- 829 50' 0 v W---512.63' 270°03' 12:" W -4a--- O - ---589.45' 270003 3' f: 14, C - 73' ' i -221.90' 530 28' 09" a N ARC 95.58' m m 66;,3 TO 0604 67.24' 27000.3' 12" ADJOINS "IL t7 19-6 NOT TANGENT TO CURVE' 1326-827; (PLAT NO /9-61 / A 165046'27" R 326.48' F; C 95.24' C A2 24'-46' 51" I CO ATTACHMENT TO CITY OF EAGAN WAIVER OF SUBDM ION APPLICATION Richard T. Curtin Silver Bell Addition The owner of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Silver Bell Addition, Richard T. Curtin, seeks a waiver of the requirements of the City of Eagan's Subdivision Ordinance to permit the recording of a Quit Claim Deed. The background of this request is set forth below: In 1975 Silver Bell Addition was subdivided and platted. (See Exhibit 1) The property was subdivided into five lots and two outlots. A fifty foot strip along the south edge was dedicated for Silver Bell Road and a 60 foot strip along the easterly edge was dedicated for Kennebec Drive. In 1977, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) realigned Silver Bell Road and Kennebec Drive as shown on MNDOT Right of Way Plat No. 19-8. The realignment shifted the right of way of Kennebec Drive to the east, encroaching into Government Lot 7. The realignment resulted in portions of Kennebec Drive dedicated in the plat of Silver Bell Addition being unnecessary for right of way. The realignment also resulted in a severance of a sliver of Government Lot 7, the severed parcel lying between the old right of way of Kennebec Drive and the new realigned right of way of Silver Bell Road. In 1986, Government Lot 7 (lying east of new Silver Bell Road) was platted as Dallas Development 1st Addition. In 1988, the City of Eagan, by Council Resolution dated July 19, 1988 and recorded as Document No. 206249, vacated those portions of right of way dedicated as Kennebec Drive in the Silver Bell Addition plat and no longer needed for realigned Silver Bell Road. Since all of original Kennebec Drive was dedicated from the Silver Bell plat, upon vacation of the right of way by the City, the unencumbered title reverted to the adjacent property owners of Silver Bell Addition. The owner of Lots 1 and 2 thus had access to the new street alignment and extended the driveway over old Kennebec Drive to the new street. However, the one small sliver of property that was originally part of the property platted as Dallas Development 1st Addition is between the old Kennebec Drive right of way and the new Silver Bell Road right of way. (See Exhibit 3) For that portion of the new street, the owner of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Silver Bell Addition does not have direct access. The access issue came to light in 1990. Upon discovering the issue, the owner of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Silver Bell Addition, in exchange for granting an easement over his property to the adjacent landowner, obtained a quit claim deed from the owner of the sliver of property. The deed is for only the sliver of property and places the property in ownership with the same person who owns Lots 1 and 2. However, the deed could not be recorded because the conveyance of the sliver fell within the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The owner now seeks a waiver of the application of the Subdivision Ordinance to this property conveyance so that the deed can be recorded. The access issue has now arisen again because the owner is refinancing the project and the title insurance company has raised the issue of access over that small portion of property. Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting r ,� � J � ul � ':� 1 �►M :� cul' � JI e: l) ta 01 la.1 Mime# I ma'" I u l ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To acknowledge completion of Contract 95-21 (Schwan Lake Water Quality Improvements) and authorize final contract payment. FACTS: • This project included storm sewer piping, pond excavation, and berm construction for improvement of water quality improvement in Schwan Lake as part of the Schawnz Lake Water Quality Improvement Phase II project. • The work performed under this contract has been inspected by authorized representatives of the City of Eagan. • The contractor has completed the work and substantially complied with the plans and specifications as prepared for the contract. • Authorization to make the final payment in the amount of $16,374.33 is requested • The bid proposal amount was $101,007.42 and the final contract amount is $99,798.82, approximately 1.2% under the bid proposal amount. • This project concludes the final phase of capital improvements for the Schwanz Lake Phase II project. ATTACHMENTS: Final project report for the above referenced project r- I(� JABonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects August 12, 1996 City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Attn: Mike Foertsch 13 1—wroo,rcJ4r— ,Pi r. -A I0. 'I' "cip.ds Ot!'' G Son, st— , ,E 101, ph C Ander I: k PE - V,irvm L So E R'O'Af') F %Ilel. RE Glvw, f. —ok. PE - Thomas E Noyes. PE - Robert G, $' L' c ntcl�.t. -E Bourdon PE Rober; 'k r?osene. PE ind Sus.in M Ererlin. C :'A Semo'r con>U:i'lnr: A SSoc+ate 0r­Cjp.q,5 H0w,urf A Sanford. PE Keith A Gurd�r. PF - Robert R Pfeffe,je PE 1"CriAra W Foster. PE - O.rvid 0 Lzjskotd. ?E Robert C. Ru!sek, A !.A - -M,Irk. A Hanson PE Michael T Rautni,4r, IE - ted K, - -Peld PE - KPrne.-h .1 Anderson. PE. - Mark R 1701fS, nE Sidney P W111'e"I'SOn PE . L S - Robert F Ko:sm,:n Or! -'5' St Paul Rocneste, JV and St Cloud %A.% * Mequon Wt Re: Final Contract Report Schwanz Lake Water Quality Improvements City Project No. 697 Contract No. 95-21 Our File No. 49557 Dear Mike: -a— �--fo'6 X-1 Alp > Enclosed for your review is the Final Contract Report for the above referenced project. If you need any additional information, please let me know. Very truly yours, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. �raig W. mg W CWL:gs Enclosure 2335 West Highway 36 z St. Paul, MN 55113-3898 n 612-636-4600 FINAL CONTRACT REPORT FOR SCHWANZ LAKE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT NO. 697 CITY CONTRACT NO. 95-21 FILE NO. 49557 FINAL CONTRACT REPORT AUGUST 12,1996 PROJECT DESCR_iP'_i'_TON This project provided for water quality improvements to Schwanz Lake (Pond LP -32) located in the southeast part of Eagan. Work included storm sewer piping, pond excavation and berm construction. PROJECT INFORMATION AND STATUS The bid opening for this project was held on Friday, December 1, 1995, and the contract was awarded to the low bidder, Minger Construction, Inc. on December 5, 1995. The Preconstruction Conference was held on December 15, 1995, and the contractor began working on the project on December 26, 1995. The project specifications required that the contractor complete the pond grading and storm sewer installation by March 22, 1996, with final restoration being completed by May 31, 1996. The interim completion date was met, while an extremely wet spring prevented the completion by the May 31 completion date. The contractor requested a change order for a time extension and was granted by the City Council. The contractor was able to complete the work within the time extension. The work has been completed and is ready for acceptance at this time. CONSTRUCTION COST DATA SUMMARY As illustrated in Appendix A, the Final Contract Amount underran the Bid Proposal Amount. The underrun was the result of conservative estimating in the Bid Proposal Amounts. There was also one Change Order to the project requesting a time extension on the final completion date. Prepared by: 4raison Schwan Lake Water Quality Improvements Project 697 APPENDIX A CONSTRUCTION COST DATA SUMMARY SCHWANZ LAKE WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS CITY CONTRACTS 697 CITY PROJECT NO. 95-21 FILE NO. 49557 Bid Final %Deviation of final Amt. From: Proposal Contract Bid Proposal Category Amount Amount Amount Storm Sewer Improvements Pond Improvements Earthen Berm Construction Total 87,101.38 85,222.32 7,151.54 6.754.50 6,837.06 7.738.82 101,007.42 99,798.82 l7 Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 H. CONTRACT 95-08. TIMBERLINE ADDITION ACTION FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: To approve the final payment for Contract 95- 08 (Oslund Timberline Addition - Street Reconstruction) in the amount of $5,140 to Master Asphalt and authorize perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. FACTS: The reconstruction of residential streets within the Timberline and neighboring subdivisions as approved at a public hearing held on June 20, 1995, has been completed and satisfactory compliance with City approved plans and specifications and contract documents. All inspections have been performed by City representatives and found to be in order for favorable Council action of final payment and acceptance for perpetual maintenance subject to the warranty provisions. Eagan City Council Meeting August 20, 1996 CONSENT AGENDA To approve the amended Civic Arena budget for 1996 and the establishment of an equipment repair and replacement set aside. BACKGROUND Summer programs at the Civic Arena were not part of the 1996 Civic Arena budget. The expense and revenue from these and other activities are reflected in the amended budget. (See Attachments for more information) * The arena income has been adjusted upwards by $50,000, reflecting dry ice floor and skating school income. * Expenses have been adjusted by $67,030. * $26,750 has been designated from the operational budget to be set aside for future repairs and replacement of major equipment items in lieu of depreciation. * The contingency account has been reduced from $15,500 to $4,714 to help fund the "Repairs and Replacement" and to allow for $8,000 in capital acquisition. ATTACHMENTS Cover Memo Amended Income for 1996 P' '2 2 Amended Expense Budget for 1996 dp C MEMO — city of eagan TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION TODD BURKART, CIVIC ARENA MANAGER DATE: AUGUST 16, 1996 RE: AMENDED 1996 CIVIC ARENA BUDGET ISSUE: Amend the 1996 Civic Arena budget to (1) reflect the additional revenues and expenses associated with the non -ice activities at the Civic Arena and (2) to establish a repair and replacement account to amortize the cost of repair and replacement of major equipment items within the Civic Arena. BACKGROUND: While it would be possible to wait until year end to amend the operational budget, staff feels it would be more appropriate to complete the update at this time. Given the high community profile and interest in the self sufficient nature of the arena, completely up to date financial information is important. When the 1996 Civic Arena budget was adopted, there were no provisions for non -ice activities. Given that the facility has hosted both a craft fair and the Home, Garden and Recreation Show, along with in-line skating activities, it would be appropriate to amend the budget to reflect these and other additions relating to the skating season, i.e. the larger then expected skating school enrollment. Revenues from these activities have also been adjusted. BUDGET ADIUSTMENM A detail of revenues which reflect an income increase of $50,000 is identified as Attachment A. Of this amount, $18,000 is from the dry floor activities. General admission from skating and open hockey/figure skating has been increased by $10,000, arena programs by $15,000 ( learn to skate school) and skate rental/sharpening by $5,000. Additional expenses include part time and seasonal staff, increasing from $157,400 to $176,426 (see Attachment B for expenses) The largest share is for skating instructors(more skaters, more classes, more instructors) and additional staffing needs for concessions and summer ice. Operating supplies are increased by $4,000. Other increases are for utilities, which are increased by a total of $20,000. As presented in an earlier memo to the Council regarding the rate increase for rental ice, utilities are substantially more than had been projected by the electrical engineers/refrigeration contractors. Arena staff has been working with Dakota Electric staff to analyze the operations of the building to determine if there is a reason for this higher then expected usage. Part of the problem is the "demand charges" and the power factor being at less than 90%. There was a noticeable decrease in the electrical bills toward the end of the skating season, which reflects the building mass coming to a colder temperature and the staff learning more about how to reduce electrical consumption through building management. Staff is also pursuing the installation of electrical capacitors which would correct the power factor and reduce the electrical usage. Estimated cost for this is about $3,000. BUDGET CONTINGENCY: The proposed 1996 budget reflected $15,500 for contingency. This number has been changed to $4,714. Approximately $2,800 will be used to off set the funding needs for the Repair and Replacement account. Another $8,000 will be used to cover additional Arena (capital) improvements, such as the installation of electrical capacitors. Other necessary improvements include modifications to the hot water supply to include water softening for the ice resurfacer, purchase of a floor scrubber, and installation of a timer control for the dehumidification system. These items all reflect in Capital outlay, account #4530 in the amount of $8,000. CAPITAL REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT SET ASIDE: Staff is recommending the Council consider the establishment of a "capital repair and replacement" account within the Arena Enterprise fund. The purpose would be to set aside funds from each year's operating budget to be used for major repairs and replacement. For example, the battery life for the ice resurfacer is seven years. Replacement cost is about $15,000. Under the repair and replacement account, the arena would set aside $2,000 in each of the next seven years to be able to purchase new batteries. The intent would be to avoid wild gyrations in the operating budget caused by a major one time expense. "Banking" of funds each year to meet this expense and other expenses would also ensure that charges for the use of the Civic Arena are reflected properly in the rate structure. Use of these funds would be budgeted separately from normal operations. Staff has, with the assistance of suppliers and vendors, reviewed the major components of the Civic Arena to estimate both replacement cost and life expectancy. Again, these are the major building components and those that are likely to be expensive to repair in case of a breakdown or if total replacement becomes necessary before the typical life expectancy. Minor repairs would be covered within the operating portion of the budget. Another example is the refrigeration compressors. The unit has four individual compressors. In the ice arena business, the blowing of a compressor isnot that unusual and is fairly common. Cost to replace is about $7,500. Setting aside funds for an unexpected possibility is also the purpose of this program as much as it is for "planned replacements" as in the example of the batteries for the ice resurfacer. With the establishment of the account within the enterprise fund, costs incurred for major repairs as a result of breakdowns would be charged to this set aside reserve. One final point of clarification. The set aside should not be confused with new capital needs. It is recognized that there are still a significant number of items that the Civic Arena needs that were eliminated in the construction budget. The set aside should not be used for this purpose. Capital needs should be reflected in the Operational Budget. Based on the assumptions of cost and life expectancy or breakdown possibilities, staff is suggesting that $26,750 be charged to each operational year. This amount is reflected in the operational budget, but separate from normal operations. CHARGES FOR DEPRECIATION As was pointed out with the December 31, 1995 financial report and with other statements showing results of operations, the Civic Arena is not generating enough cash flow to fully fund depreciation. For the year ending December 31, 1995, the Arena had operating expenses of $134,477 and income of $132,924. The 1995 depreciation a 3 charge was $35,300 which was primarily responsible for an operating loss of $36,853. This result is not unexpected and should not necessarily be viewed as a problem. A full year's depreciation will amount to approximately $96,800. Even though accounting regulations are going to require showing depreciation, it is staff's recommendation that the City Council adopt a formal policy stating that the Capital Repair and Replacement Account will be funded in lieu of funding full depreciation. This policy would be consistent with what has been done in both water and sewer activities. BudgeGCivic.96 CIVIC ARENA ENTERPRISE FUND Attachment A Detail of Revenues Budgeuc:v,c 96 Budget 1996 Budget 1996 Revised Increase 3560-61 Ice Rental $156,000 $156,000 0 3562 General Admission 15,000 25,000 10,000 3563 Arena Programs 38,500 53,500 15,000 3564 Arena Merchandise Sales 46,000 46,000 0 3565 Skate Rental 1,000 3,000 2,000 3566 Skate Sharpening 3,000 6,000 3,000 3567 H.S. Game Receipts 7,500 7,500 0 3568 Arena Advertising 15,000 17,000 2,000 3500 Men's Adult Hockey 11,200 11,200 0 3561 Dry Floor Events 018,000 18.000 TOTAL REVENUES $293,200 $343,200 $50,000 Budgeuc:v,c 96 221 Civic Arena Enterprise Salaries & Wages Regular Attachment B $67,400 - 4130 d et 1996 an Operating Expenses Budget 1996 Revised Increase ecr s Personal Services $157,400 $176,426 $19,026 Parts & Supplies 22,700 26,700 4,000 Services & Other Charges 57,100 77,100 20,000 Contingency 15,500 4,714 (10, 746) Capital Outlay/Merchandise for Resale 23,500 31,500 8,000 Capital Repair & Replacement 0 2,6.750 26.750 Total Excluding Depreciation $276,200 $343,190 $67,030 TOTAL EXPENSES $276,200 $343,190 $67,030 Grand Total Civic Arena $276,200 $343,190 -- Total Increase $26,700 $4,000 $77,776 Total Decrease (10.746) Net Increase Postage $1,600 $67,030 Personal Servic 4110 Salaries & Wages Regular $67,400 $67,400 - 4130 Salaries & Wages Temporary 65,500 81,500 $16,000 4142 PERA Coordinated 3,400 4,116 716 4144 FICA 10,200 11,856 1,656 4151 Hospitalization 8,100 8,100 -- 4155 Workers Compensation 2.800 3.454 04 4235 TOTAL PERSONAL EXPENSES $157,400 $176,426 $19,026 .M 4210 Office Supplies $2,100 $2,100 4220 Operating Supplies - General 9,700 13,700 $4,000 4222 Medical/Rescue/Safety Supply 500 500 4223 Building Cleaning Supplies 3,500 3,500 4224 Clothing/Personal Equipment 1,500 1,500 4233 Building Repair Supply 2,000 2,000 4235 Fuel, Lubricants, Additives 700 700 4244 Chemicals & Chemical Products 2,000 2,000 4270 Computer Software 700 L 0 TOTAL PARTS & SUPPLIES $22,700 $26,700 $4,000 Services & Other Charges 4330 Postage $1,600 $1,600 4331 Telephone Service & Line Charge 1,000 1,000 4337 Personal Auto Parking 500 500 4350 General Printing and Binding 1,500 1,500 4360 Insurance 8,500 8,500 4371 Electricity 31,100 43,100 12,000 4376 Natural Gas Service 4,900 12,900 8,000 4397 Machinery and Equipment 600 600 4411 Conferences and Schools 1,100 1,100 4414 Dues and Subscriptions 500 500 4450 Other Contractual Services 3,300 3,300 4454 Waste Removal/Sanitation 2.500 2.500 _ 0 TOTAL SERVICES & CHARGES $57,100 $77,100 $20,000 4715 Contingency $15.500 $4,714 746 Capital Outlak/Merchandise for Resale 4530 Other Improvements 0 $8,000 $8,000 4570 Other Equipment $1,500 1,500 4840 Merchandise for Resale 22.000 22.000 Total $23,500 $31,500 $8,000 Budgeticlvlc.96 a� Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve an exemption from gambling license for Ducks Unlimited, Eagan Chapter. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached on page is a copy of the resolution for exemption from lawful gambling license. • Attached without page number is a copy of the gambling license exemption application. n CIX RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE WHEREAS, Ducks Unlimited - Eagan Chapter has applied for an exemption from Lawful Gambling License; and WHEREAS, the Eagan Police Department has reviewed the application and has not identified any reason to deny; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby approves the Exemption from Lawful Gambling License for Ducks Unlimited - Eagan Chapter. CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: Its Mayor Attest: Its Clerk Motion made by: Seconded by: Those in favor: Those against: Dated: I, E. J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 20th day of August, 1996. E. J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk City of Eagan Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a tobacco license for the Green Mill Restaurant at Rahn Cliff Court. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached without page number is a copy of the license application. a� Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve an exemption from gambling license for Valley Viewers 4-H Club. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached on page 5—( is a copy of the resolution for exemption from lawful gambling license. • Attached without page number is a copy of the gambling license exemption application. 3� RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE WHEREAS, the Valley Viewers 4-11 Club has applied for an exemption from Lawful Gambling License; and WHEREAS, the Eagan Police Department has reviewed the application and has not identified any reason to deny; and WHEREAS, the Valley Viewers 4-H Club has operated bingo games in conjunction with the Fourth of July celebration since 1988; and WHEREAS, the Valley Viewers 4-H Club will operate bingo games in the Eagan Community Room in conjunction with Lone Oak Days, September 21-22, 1996; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby approves the Exemption from Lawful Gambling License for Valley Viewers 4-H Club and waives the 30 -day period to issue the exemption. Motion made by: Seconded by: Those in favor: Those against: CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: Its Mayor Attest: Its Clerk CERTIFICATION I, E. J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 20nd day of August, 1996. E. J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk City of Eagan 002 Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 k .. LSC �EAa IWC1 S A. PROJECT 638R, FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING YANKEE DOODLE ROAD ACTION FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: To close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for Project 6388, Yankee Doodle Road (Lexington Avenue - TH 149) and authorize its certification to Dakota County. FACTS: • Project 638R providing for the upgrade of County Road 28 (Yankee Doodle Road) from Lexington Avenue through TH 149 was approved at a public hearing held on April 19, 1994. This public improvement was performed by Dakota County through a Cost Participation Agreement with the City of Eagan. • All work has been completed, costs tabulated and a final assessment roll prepared which was presented to the City Council on July 16 with a public hearing being scheduled for August 20. • All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of their proposed assessments. Any objections received to date are included with this packet for Council's information. • An informational meeting was held with interested property owners to review the final assessments on August 8, 1996. ATTACHMENTS: Final assessment roll, page Written objection, page WPM FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NUMBER: 638R ASSESSMENT HEARING DATE: Aunst 20, 1996 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Yankee Doodle Road/Lexington Ave to T.H. 149 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Aril 19. 1994 IMPROVEMENT INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F.R. = Feasibility Report SANITARY FINAL F.R. STORM FINAL F.R. SEWER RATES RATES SEWER RATES RATES D Trunk ,5to Laterals 0 $14 630.00/L.S. 0 Service D Lat. Benefit/Trunk WATER 0 Trunk $3,to664.54/8" Stub ® Laterals S8,434.81/12" Stub $7.570.00/Stub D Service WAC _ Lat. Benefit/Trunk SERVICES ❑ Water & San. Sewer CONTRACT NQ - 28 -12 & 28-17 COMMENTS: ASSESSM 0 nWCWFAHA%CB 1:1 Trunk ❑ Laterals 1:1 Lat. Benefit/Trunk 01 X%Mr.1 J 13 Gravel Base ❑ Surfacing 0 Res. Equivalent ® Multi Equivalent $84.25/f.f. $84.25/f.f. ® C/I Equivalent S 106.96/f.f $113.00/f.f. ® Trail Not Assessed $12.60/f.f. STREET LIGHTS 13 Installation 1:1 Energy Charge # OF INTEREST AMOUNT CITY PARCELS TERMS RATE ASSESSED FINANCED $1,475,204.35 F.R. $1,193,521.00F.R 244 15 vears 7% $1.311,974.92 $ 866.369.38 �)3 GOPNEB BfSOBCE oAo0wA, 1 ax August 05, 1996 Eugene J. VanOverbeke City Clerk City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Proposed Special Assessments for Projected 638R -- Yankee Doodle Road Street and Storm Sewer Reconstruction Gopher Resource Corporation (formerly known as Gopher Smelting & Refining), is the owner of the following parcels of property, which the City has proposed to assess in the following amounts: Parcel (P.I.D. No.) 10-30601-090-00 10-30601-080-00 10-30601-070-00 10-30601-060-00 10-30601-010-02 10-01300-012-26 Proposed Assessment $ 74,968.24 $ 61,533.00 $ 88,024.87 $ 28,528.37 $ 93,843.44 $124,221.15 I understand that the proposed assessments are in connection with the Yankee Doodle Road street and storm sewer reconstruction, including water stubs, which is variously identified as Project 638R and Project #10P638. I am writing to object to the proposed assessments on the following grounds: (1) the properties do not receive a special benefit from the project, (2) the proposed assessment is not Lu1�iU�m u:i L`.iic sa[iie class of properly, and 1 � ) z he prO�JUSEI:: assessment exceeds the special benefit to the property. Please regard this letter as our formal objection to the proposed assessments under the applicable Minnesota Statutes. Yours very truly, Gam( ✓)d �„VJV61 3 3385 SOUTH HWY 1.49 , EAGAN MINNESOTA 55121 , 612 451.33,10 - GAX 612.454.7926 - 800 351 7451 Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting OED BUSINESS A CAPONI, PURCHASE PROPOSAL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve or deny a purchase agreement to purchase approximately 25 acres of land owned by Mr. and Mrs. Anthony Caponi south of Diffley Road for City park land. FACTS: ► For a number of years, Mr. and Mrs. Anthony Caponi have been discussing with the City Council the possibility of the City purchasing some or all of their land for park land, specifically to be part of the Caponi Art Park. ► Up to 30 acres of their land south of Difflev Road is currently under consideration for purchase along with 19 other parcels throughout the City as a part of the upcoming September 10 Park Bond Referendum. ► The Caponis have received an offer to purchase 19 acres of this land for a single family housing project. ► The Caponis would rather sell their land to the City for park land. ► The Caponis have requested that the City Council consider a purchase agreement for approximately 25 acres of land subject to four conditions at the August 20, 1996 City Council meeting. ISSUES: ► The Caponis are requesting this action three weeks prior to the bond referendum. ► If the Council wishes to approve the purchase, a specific funding source would need to be identified. Possibilities include the Park Site Fund or the Community Investment Fund. ► The Caponis have four conditions: (1) The sale price would be $25,000 per acre; (2) The parcel to be purchased would be approximately 25 acres, the exact size and boundaries to be determined by survey at the purchaser's expense; and the portion of land excluded from the original 30 would remain under the Caponis' ownership and would be used for a new entrance and parking lot, built in consultation with the City's engineering division; (3) The land purchased by the City would be identified as art park in the park classification system and share the name of Caponi Art Park with the rest of the art park; and (4) The Council "express its intention to include these conditions as part of a purchase agreement at the next Council meeting, before the referendum." ATTACHMENTS: ► A memo giving background on pages through p ► The proposal given to the City by the Caponis on pages 0 through r city of .. TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES FROM: ASSISTANT TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR DUFFY DATE: AUGUST 16, 1996 SUBJECT: CAPONI PURCHASE PROPOSAL MEMO As the Council is aware, the possibility of the City of Eagan purchasing some or all of the land currently owned by Mr. and Mrs. Anthony Caponi and currently designated art park has been under discussion for a number of years. In that time, the Caponis have presented a number of informal proposals to the City Council regarding different scenarios for purchasing the land and the proposed operations for the "Caponi Art Park," ranging from the purchase of all 60 acres (20 north of Diffley and 40 south) plus the five acres owned by Remo Caponi to the last proposal reviewed in the spring of 1996 for approximately 30 acres south of Diffley only. At the special City Council workshop on July 30, the Council reviewed a list of sites which were to be considered for purchase if the Park Bond Referendum was passed on September 10. The Council narrowed the list to twenty, one of which was the Caponi site south of Diffley. However, the Council acknowledged that not all sites would be able to be purchased and that there might be additional sites added to the list. Final decisions would be made following the bond referendum if the referendum passed. On Wednesday, August 7, City Councilmember Awada was contacted by Mr. Caponi and met with him at his request. Mr. Caponi told City Councilmember Awada that he had received an offer for 19 acres south of Diffley from a developer who is proposing to build a single family housing project, but that he would prefer to sell the land to the City for park land. Mr. Caponi wanted to know if the City would, in fact, agree to what he considers a fair purchase price in advance of the referendum. Therefore, he requested that the City Council consider a purchase agreement for approximately 25 acres south of Diffley at the August 20, 1996 regular City Council meeting. City Councilmember Awada contacted City Administrator Hedges and directed that this item be placed on the agenda. Staff then contacted Mr. Caponi and requested that he and his attorney draw up the purchase agreement for submission to the City Council. In that proposal, Mr. Caponi is requesting four conditions: 1. That the sale price would be $25,000 per acre. 2. That the parcel to be purchased would be approximately 25 acres, the exact size and boundaries to be determined by survey at the purchaser's expense; and that the portion of land excluded from the original 30 acres would be retained by 3 (0 the Caponis and would be used for a new entrance and parking lot, to be built in consultation with the City's engineering division; 3. That the land purchased by the City as open space be designated as Art Park in the park classification system and share the name of Caponi Art Park with the rest of the art park; and 4. That the "Council express its intention to include these conditions as part of a purchase agreement at the next Council meeting, before the referendum." On August 11, City Administrator Hedges received a call from a Councilmember asking, if the Council should approve the purchase of the Caponi land prior to the park referendum, where the funding could come from. After staff research, the following are possibilities: The purchase could be contingent upon the successful passage of the bond referendum. 2. Park Site Fund - the money in this fund is used for park site acquisition and development. The current fund balance as of July 31, 1996 is $1,560,205.10. A portion of these funds is committed to work in progress. Possible future uses of this money include the development of Walden Heights Neighborhood Park, North Park and other construction and replacement projects. 3. Community Investment Fund - the money in this fund is used for community wide needs such as the construction of the new Police facility, the renovation of the existing City Hall facility, part of the funding for the Civic Arena and the renovation of Fire Station #1. The current fund balance as of July 31, 1996 is $7,478,772.09. A portion of these funds is also committed to work in progress. Possible future uses of the money in this fund include additional Fire Department construction. If the Council decides not to agree to purchase the Caponi land prior to the Park Bond Referendum, other options include: Continuing the purchase agreement agenda item until after the bond referendum. (However, please note that one of Mr. Caponi's stated conditions is that the Council make the decision at the August 20, 1996 City Council meeting.) 2. Deciding not to purchase the land at all. If the Council wishes any further information on this item prior to Tuesday evening, please ask them to contact me. Assistant to the City Administrator :57 CAPONI ART PARK 1215 Diff ley Road • Eagan, MN 55123 0 612 454-4338 August 15, 1996 Mayor Tom Egan and City Council Members City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Dear Mayor and Council Members, According to City Council instructions, Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and Recreation, informed me of the value the City Council has discussed for my 30 - acre parcel on the south side of Diffley Road, as part of the up -coming bond referendum. In response I make the following counter offer: 1. That the sale price be $25,000 per acre. 2. That the parcel to be purchased be approximately 25 acres, as shown on the attached map, the exact size and boundaries to be determined by survey at the purchasers expense. The portion of land I excluded from the original 30 acres encompasses the new entrance and parking lot of the Art Park which I intend to build in consultation with the City's engineering department. 3. That the land purchased by the City as open space be designated as ART PARK in the City's Park System Classification and that it share name identification with the rest of the Art Park. 4. That the Council express its intention to include these conditions as part of a purchase agreement at the next Council meeting, before the referendum. These conditions represent a significant compromise on my part to facilitate the culmination of our mutual efforts in protecting open space in our city and achieving a cultural center for which the citizens of Eagan have expressed enthusiastic support. Sincerely, s nthony Caponi cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and Recreatio 3 1 1 IN \\\- ' I ! IIfill l 1 I J I 11111/ - 1 1 1111 / 1111 4 e l I 1 I fllll N\\����°� ��♦ `� '/ // /////I / ! I f/ 1 1 1 I Is I/! // //, \ \ ` `\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 F\ \ _ _`sem =`� / I i c,� I 1 / ft/ti\-'/� 111 1 I 1111111//i/!i/ T'�"y \\ 11j:11 ! 1 r) 111+1 rr Ilrj1 Illllll�Ii%/ . `'\\ \ll�ll' 10 \ \ \ \ 111 r\\ \\\\".-! ��-i r'77 \ �\\ \\\\��� "� _�', - 1 — 1 11!11Ft lift L!111� 44 1/1Z All // rJ 1 1 el f 11 d ._� \.;�♦\\ l 1\ \I 1 1 Il f fit/lt� r vr'-( ♦\\ d __ I (1 / / j/i IJlI rroflll7 /r i;t, I1/ IE/r y a ��elflll► f1J /J//// �1 ! 1 NN \\`1 1\\\\\ rii// /ll'Jlli�dtllflll IJJ//u!r i�7 / \\ \\ \ 1 / ! 1 I•' I 11 / // r /�\ \I 1// I ! r/r // .\.. \ \\1 t I I 1 / / It/ 1 'M♦\� \ \\ \1 ! ' // / l flf 1 \`fl lII\ \\\ J 1 \\ 1n1 / -- \\\\l!1�\!� \\\���/Ild�� \�\\`!l�\\1!lr.a 1 I�I/JI / ///J !e -r/ ��\\��\Ill ll\\\l\\�� + \\\\ \I l 1111\!l\\1\\\� \ I + )`)J)1!) I 1 !I \\\\♦\ 1 N/JI/'�/�'�„ '/��� 11\\\\\\\\\�.: o \ \\\\l\II l I /Jrll\°+\\111\!11\\`/�!%I�lJ/Ilii !\\\ 1 lllilt fy %!/I JP I IIIIIw1-r� �J� �+-A�� il1 I ll,IId%I\\,i// /' / �� f 1 1 \\11 ! \\\ \\1 �_�� \1 Q �i $Z1 l{ I\``iii'%%'/// //ti;\\\`\jA!h:` �'�i +ill/Il/llillli� till/dlrlli}`\\\\\\\\`\1\\\\\���`������/'��%y'i�iii�\ ui All ,1' \` \`!\\\•\\\\;� \, \ (tl J // j,� N\!\\�\:=�•:�'/;ilr== --/ 1uu11i11111;1;11111jItI i8`�`\\\\l\1!\\\ \ -===-=i "!/i/�" :" ,/i�` \\ \i\f_1C1`\�\`�\�•IiljJ/!! rltllflllIlll�l;;it%;�� � N �� itllilllfI Atilt 1 11 +��\\\ \ !_�"S l 11\\ lir'%ri='�\� J\`Jii/ii <<\�\�J\`\ii//�i/ri�tll �tt11111t 1111 111►`\� /r 1 \ . IlirrTTll f ! �� / / /1.\`�\\ // 1 1 l \ \ 1 {111 0001111111111\ i 1\\ 1 t f•JY r��%!j'// / :`��\\\\i�Ae1111 i// \N\\`� 11111\1!1111111 !i \ �11111�IIIf1/r'��i.' ///:�r�.�: \�\f7• 1 t1r ♦\�J \\\1111111 11 l! �i \ ♦ ♦ �NI1"�'\\1' !( �•_-%// i1. 1 \ 1�1 III \ 1171!\\\\\`\1\ 117 ,/'!// \\``\\\\.��' i J�// R�\��.� //////MN/!�//1)\\'1 \\� 11'G i�/i�J�\��`�3t��iJ//f/r- y� �\ \�� ; n111IIJI% %�\��\` / `- rd \\\ \\./ 11 1.� \\\ \ \\\\ .i `\\;i♦\_- �1\.ii\\J�)�\l 1\l� Itlllll��/// �// Wit- __ '/ y =moi%ice / �r--- - 11 'll�J! %J/Jhylll.lJ /•� � 1 l ` •e+ ���� `/i�±�i///// !� // / �/r +�� �i _I\ ♦\;////Ie//JU4(��%��=��\\ \ mow- --/i�'�i / r''/ // �- /•/ _ ii jam//ilk=-ter- "' ;`\\.�♦\ \-_ �� �_� _-// ! / /!'- _„/ ! --- /// -r- \ A ter/r"'I����\\\\\\111j1 �. 1 \ /r, If/ !/ /}�y�•\\.-- ` +�\\\ 11\111111111 /5111 1 ♦ e ♦ 1 1 111iiJN/// r _.\ i-- /mhI /!///Jfh }_mac"I. IYS x.M VE��lY=`�����_� -/fes/ ! / �- i _-- --/ / %-- illi- 1/ 1 1111 ' i -,;i; 11 J I 'JCC / i► 1 1111of411 , Alii 'Ji ii I , �/ ! 11 it Val All Ill ♦ �1 I 1\ 1 11�,� Il I r 1 1 All 11 J /I I l 11 1111 1 _ 1 ( ffil� I/r1 11111fit "Y!i ilfillli// /I/1i11�rf rl /' -' ----_----_— �r� 1 11111//!1/1 r Jil t // �-� _•��-- -� \ .i 7 1 1 l�rlltlllll 1lr:l til / _ ` - Mx! 1 I-IflI f III f/1 Ifs // /x / /'/�� r� \_� ♦�`�� fl 1 1,\1.111!i�l `' /_•'/r'L //_L LJ��OOo•��i\\\\ � 3� Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 B. CONTRACT 96-13 WOODGATE 2ND & MALLARD PARK 2ND ST RECONSTRUCTION SLATER RD (SIDEWALK) ACTION FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: To receive the bids and award Contract 96-13 to the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: Contract 96-13 combined Projects 702 (Woodgate 2nd Addition) and 703 (Mallard Park 2nd Addition) which were approved as a result of a public hearing held on May 20 and July 2, respectively, along with the paving of an access road to Wellhouse #1 (public water filling station) and the installation of a park system sidewalk along Slaters Road from Burnsville to James Street. At 10:00 a.m. on August 13, formal bids were received and a bid tabulation is provided showing the relationship of the low bidder to the public hearing feasibility report and/or engineer's estimate. All bids are substantially below previous estimates and will be checked for accuracy and compliance with specification documents. Any irregularities will be addressed at the August 20 meeting. An informational neighborhood meeting was held on August 1 to review the proposed sidewalk construction with all interested/affected residents. ISSUES: At the time of the public hearing, the residents of the Woodgate 2nd Addition questioned the City's maintenance history in this subdivision. Reconstruction of City records indicate that the Woodgate 2nd Addition was constructed in 1975 and Mallard Park 2nd in 1978. Woodgate 2nd was sealcoated twice (`81, `87) and Mallard Park 2nd was sealcoated twice (84, `87). Both subdivisions received a thorough pavement reconditioning in 1986 with crack sealing and pavement repair. The installation of the sidewalk along Slaters Road was a condition of final plat approval for the Whispering Woods 10th Addition to be constructed along the west side from the Burnsville border to Wall Street. The City's Trail System Plan shows an off-road sidewalk/trailway to be constructed along the entire west side of Slaters Road from Burnsville to Cliff Road. The Parks Department determined that the first phase should be extended to north James Street to provide access to Slaters Park. While the entire cost of this sidewalk construction was proposed to be funded by the City's Trail Fund, there is still some concerns by affected property owners regarding the impact of construction. The Coachman Road water filling station access road will be financed by the Utility Division under its annual operating budget. ATTACHMENTS: Bid tabulation, page a/ Sidewalk informational meeting minutes, pages through. Site plan, page'. 4 V E©'d til"Di �_ LO O 1LO LO rl- V) N .� m, Wi m GO ti N N r f+ p O p F' to� co O ao f- 1 m N_ O � r O en- i 00qT O�� O C V a Ix C y, ►LO � O d M p CV rC6 cc; C) CO ao = V; � r �t cr) MI C O to tA� O O� V Vi v. Q O Y T" i4 O D O 2 ;C tij o O c O C o Y+ Q) co _o CDco o v cm o �r aO r L oo w r gyri cv �0 Q orn ° v co X32 .�a. e—o ZO hoc o9 M *4 C a o V � �i ti UJ0 Q a Aa DOQ r Qui M a � ¢ � Q cr) a Ci ;° e; �°-' r CD cr W (� CLI r r r t r o ~ g LL 0 � U N Q LO LO ti d eOn ~*0: to Q m cm co 00000 CO CO rCO Q) Gil r M (M O iL1 •� 1n Ul) � ti O 0 co W O r O r.. Ri yc �C) U l0 E c C1Q O EL 0 s H� o U -I }r LU �. EE 0. r m n > d � •E V O • = o •Q� 0 I Z mm z > a w AUG -16-1996 10:04 MINUTES OF INFORMATIONAL MEETING SLATER ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT CITY OF EAGAN MSA PROJECT NO. 112-048-20 P. 02/06 A meeting was held in the Community Room at City Hall at 5:00 p.m. on August 1, 1996, with residents potentially affected by the proposed construction of the Slater Road sidewalk. Present at this meeting were: Ken Vraa, City of Eagan Parks and Recreation Department John Gorder, City of Eagan Engineering Department Stan Lexvold, City of Eagan Engineering Department Greg Stonehouse, MSA Consulting Engineers The meeting began with introductions by John Gorder at 5:07 p.m. Ken Vraa then explained the City's Comprehensive Trail Improvement Plan and the interlintra- City connections the plan was designed to accommodate. A brief explanation of the Slater Road leg of this plan was then summarized as a connection of the City of Burnsville with Cliff Road in the City of Eagan. This current proposed segment would connect the City of Burnsville to James, and a future extension would connect James to Cliff Road. John Gorder explained that the project would be funded by the City's trail fund and none of the costs would be assessed to abutting property owners. The project would be bid as a part of a larger project on August 13, 1996, with consideration for project award on August 20, 1996, and possible construction by the first of September. Anticipated project completion would be late fall of 1996. Following the project description, the floor was opened for questions from the 12 to 16 residents present at the meeting. ■ What is the project cost? Stonehouse: Approximately $50,000 What is the existing right of way width? Gorder: Varies, but mostly 100 feet, 50 each side of centerline. ■ Is there additional easement needed? Stonehouse: No additional easement will be required. t 12/Oa8-oao3.3ug Page 2 AUG -16-1996 10:04 P.03/06 g Was an EIS (environmental impact statement) prepared? Vraa: No, the plan was completed in accordance with City standards and an EIS was not required. ■ Is the trail proposed for the specific purpose of serving Slater Park? Gorder: Partially; however, it will also connect Cliff Road to Burnsville. Vraa: Went on to explain the trail serves both a transportation and a recreational purpose. ■ Were there requests for the trail? Vraa: There were resident calls; however, no formal petitions. ■ How many homes exist within Whispering Woods development? Staff did not have that information available. However, a resident stated that there were approximately 100. ■ Do you have pedestrian demand projections? Vraa; No, the trail corridors are selected based more upon "vehicular traffic" than pedestrian projections. ■ What are the'traffic counts? Gorder: Slater at Tames had 2,800 to 3,000 VPD on July 24. This number could certainly increase with the construction of the last leg to Burnsville in May. a Does this connection drive the sidewalk construction? Vraa: No, the park plan and transportation needs are the main drivers. However, the connection does have an impact. ■ What is the main reason for the sidewalk? Vraa: The plan was developed as a "community -wide" process with public meetings and input to assist in locating trail segments. Based upon the input received, the priorities were: 1) to make connections; 2) based upon volumes. 3) to get lids to parks; and 4) to get pedestrians to pedestrian collectors. 112/048-0803.aug Page 3 AUG -16-1996 10:04 P.04i06 ■ It is illogical that one resident request out of 190 residents drives the sidewalk construction. Vraa: We do not feel it is based upon one resident, but that more are represented by a few. Additionally, this walk was planned as part of the Whispering Woods 10th Addition. ■ Why is the walk not on the east side of Slater Road? Lexvold: The west side allows connection to Burnsville, and we would like to avoid numerous streets crossings with the trail, if possible. ■ What is the number of trees and shrubs lost due to construction? Stonehouse: Possibly one large spruce tree would be too big to transplant. The remaining landscaping would be relocated. ■ Where are the utilities located? Gorder: Outside of the curb on both sides of the roadway. However, with the shallow construction required for a sidewalk. the impact on utilities should be minimized. ■ What about lawn sprinklers? Lexvold: The City has historically required the homeowner to relocate sprinklers within the right-of-way. The City would provide notice and assistance to residents in the relocation of sprinklers to assure they are outside of the construction limits. ! How much has been spent on this project to date? Stonehouse: At the time of the meeting, we could not provide an accurate response; however, as of August 2, 1996, the amount expended for engineering, surveying, drafting, etc., is $2,887. Many questions were then asked without providing the opportunity for staff to respond. ■ What if the residents oppose the project or have a better plan? ■ Is this the first time this has been done? ■ Why did we not hear about this project earlier than 7/23/94? ■ R'ho made the decision on the trail location? Vraa: The project was part of the Master Trail Plan. ■ It appears you are ready to shovel with no notification. Why has the east side of Slater Road received no notice? 1121048-0803.aug Page 4 AUG -16-1996 10:05 P.05/06 0 Is there any upgrade to Slater Park proposed? Vraa: No. ■ Why are you proposing an 8 -foot boulevard? Stonehouse: The primary reason for this is snow storage. However, this width is narrowed in some areas to limit the impact on landscaping. Lexvold: The 8 -foot boulevard is also the City standard. ■ In Burnsville, the boulevard is only 4 feet wide in some areas. a What about maintenance of the sidewalk? Vraa: The City currently has a three season trail maintenance and upkeep policy and does not maintain or clean walks in the winter. The City does not require residents to clean trails and walks in the winter, either. ■ What about possible future changes in that policy? The City could later require us to clean our walks. Vraa: That is correct, the City could change its policy. How many driveway crossings are. there on either side of Slater Road. Have you considered this? Gorder: There is an approximately equal number of potential driveway crossings between Burnsville and Cliff Road, on either side of the roadway. We do not have the exact number through this segment of road. ■ A resident stated that there were potentiaAy IS on the west side and 8 on the east side; however, this was from James to the south and driveways to the north were not accounted for in his analysis. ■ Driveway safety is certainly a concern. Stonehouse: That is a valid concern. We must also try to minimize the street crossings with the trail. As the meeting began to wrap up at approximately 6:05, the primary speaker for the group of residents summarized the group's four major concerns as follows: 1. Would hope the City would follow appropriate procedures in accordance with state, local, and other governmental unit requirements. 112/04x-0903.aug Page 5 AUG -16-1996 10:0= P.06/06 2. Safety. 3. Cost. 4. Environmental Impact The residents voiced their appreciation for the opportunity to be heard, and asked what process to follow to convince the City to consider other options. Staff explained that the project was proposed to go to Council for consideration for award on August 20, 1996, and they should have representation at that meeting to voice their concerns. Gorder also stated that minutes of the public informational meeting would be provided to the Council prior to the meeting. At approximately 6:12 p.m., the meeting was adjourned and staff members addressed individual concerns with residents until approximately 6:20. We anticipate this memorandum will sufficiently outline the discussions that took place at the August 1, 1996, informational meeting. Please contact our office if our notes regarding the meeting differ from the City's and we will make the appropriate corrections. Gregory J. Stonehouse, P.E. Project Engineer GJS:tw Page 6 112/08-0803.rugL� co TOTAL P.06 i 3 ++` 5 C 'M♦t+IC AW µ 012-51\ L 1 (� C .00 2 OMOT AIWVE ry^ 6 Q �Osbji /S 20DW 946.4 �— Oo /�/ S ss� 2 Q u OO COk 6 y 135 3 4e� N L5 9 C RW 7 �� d s e\` QVQ LL It CL Q C OUROT b z .� U 0 �. s tY2.9� N V y � ��•�'� �, aunoT C C 3L e+act +nee 1S I�HM STORLAND RD. JAMES ST. 197r — 1 4 194.36 3 V, s 4 n foo.99 r i M-4% )IN 120.90 I o I ovnor �C c T n Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 A. STOP SIGN PETITION - SLATERS RD & JAMES ST ACTION FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: To receive the petition for a stop sign on Slaters Road @ James Street north and approve/deny the installation of requested stop signs. FACTS: On June 19, 1996, the City staff received a petition from 8 property owners requesting the installation of stop signs on Slaters Road at the north intersection of James Street. In response to this petition, City staff performed a traffic study with related research to determine if any of the warrants of the Minnesota Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD) were warranted. An evaluation of the information indicates that none of the warrants are met. All residents have been so informed of the results of this study and the Council's consideration of their petition on August 20. ATTACHMENTS: • Letter & petition, pages 4/,,? and _. • Letter acknowledging r etition, page • Traffic study, pages 1—through • Result notification letter, page 5% Ll i RECEIVE; JUN 19 1996 June 16, 1996 Mr. Michael Foertsch Assistant City Engineer City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mike: The attached petition is signed by those people who would like a 3 -way stop sign installed at the intersection of Slater Road and the cross street of James Street. All of the signed have property that is in some way in contact with Slater Road and are concerned about the excessive speed that has been an ongoing problem on Slater. The placement of the stop sign at the intersection of Slater Road and James Street will put a "break" in the straight -a -way that enables people to build speed on Slater. Please contact the Eagan Police Department for additional data that will support our concern regarding excessive speed on Slater. If you would like to call me concerning this petition, I can be reached at (612) 894-2456. Sincerely, uce M. Edwards q 9 AV of eagan PETITION STOP SIGN FOR CITY USE ONLY DATE RECEiVEgECEIVED J U N 19 law- -DATE PRESENTED Ave-, TO COUNCIL APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ I /we, the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of the City of Eagan to install stop signs on Z l, --lc(- 'F�d at the intersection with 9�'We, request this installation for the following reasons: 1. c)cccss,\/e Steed c7� �Sic�-t�r 1'?d 2. Prc s r cam. CW- � C I-); I d v'ern J•r, -Hnc. c�-Te a- 3. 3. stream. -i- t��d 4. bbl rlumcrpuS t�ct,Iltcr 5- )o9cjcr.s, b1 }ic r' dein ..! C -t'c %Ne, request that the City Council take this petition request under consideration at its earliest ;pportunity and that we be informed as to when it is scheduled so that we may appear in person ifi ve so choose. NAME (Please.p rit and Initial) ADDRE S ruC� AA . LPME 41? �3 Sla r -r SSIZ � J J*�- -56� u, L� I :r,,, CS T-3) . L J �. f� �- , f t i (LLE , � 71 g 6�K C� 1FF k _� C1�� SSI Z &x , SKoc�i -9a 10na., MAI s. , i n PA� x`60 51 cl� 5c� city of eagan July 8, 1996 THOMAS EGAN Mayor MR BRUCE EDWARDS PATRICIA AWADA 4778 SLATER RD SHAWN HUNTER EAGAN MN 55122 SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER Council Members Re: Stop Sign Installation - Slater Road & James Street THOMAS HEDGES City Administrator Deal Mr. Edwards: E. J. VAN OVERBEKE City Clerk On June 16, 1996, we received your letter and attached petition requesting stop sign installations at the intersection of Slater Road and James Street. The City Council has directed the Engineering Division to respond to petitions for stop signs by performing a stop sign warrant study. This study consists of four basic elements: I. Traffic volume count 2. Speed study I Restrictive sight distance survey 4. Accident history Upon completion of this staff research report, if any of the warrants identified in the Minnesota Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NIl�TCD) are met, the Council has authorized the City Engineer to install the requested stop signs. The M!Vf TCD has been adopted by the City Council as the guideline for installation of all traffic control devices to ensure uniformity within our community and enforceability that can be sustained through any subsequent legal challenges. It is anticipated that we will be able to complete this study within the next 4-6 weeks. At that time, you will be informed of the results of the speed study and the status of your request. If you have any questions regarding this study, please feel free to contract me at 681-4646. We look forward to being able to respond to your request in the near future. Sincerely, cc: Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works Mike Foertsch, Assistant City Engineer Arnie Erhart, Superintendent of Streets/Equipment Rick Swanson, Police Department Stan Lexvold Construction Supervisor SL/jj Enclosure: Petition MUNICIPAL CENTER PILOT KNOB ROAD THE LONE OAK TREE MAINTENANCE FACILITY EAG THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122.1897 EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: (612) 681-4600 PHONE: (612) 681.4300 FAX: (612) 681-4612 Equal Opportunity/Attirmative Action Employer FAX: (612) 681.4360 TDD: (612) 454.8535 TDD: (612) 454-8535 fl- _city of eagan TO: MIKE FOERTSCH, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER FROM: STAN LEXVOLD, CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISOR DATE: AUGUST 14, 1996 SUBJECT: STOP SIGN PETITION - SLATERS RD & JAMES ST THAT ABUTS SLATERS RD FROM THE WEST MEMO Attached for Council consideration is a stop sign petition signed by 8 property owners requesting the installation of stop signs on Slaters Road that abuts James Street to the west. Also attached is a map showing the petitioning property owners in relation to the above -referenced intersection. In response to this petition, the following issues were investigated to determine if the stop signs are warranted in accordance with the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) criteria: 1. An accident analysis was performed and the results were that no accidents have occurred within the last 2 years. 2. A speed study was performed on July 17 and 18, 1996, between the hours of 6:00 - 8:00 a.m., and 4:00 - 6:00 p.m. Results of the speed study indicate that of the 1,232 vehicles observed at the 2 different times, 631 exceeded the 35 mph posted speed limit. The highest recorded speed was 56 mph. All vehicles checked for speed limit were traveling either north or south on Slaters Road. The 85th percentile speed was calculated at 41 mph. 3. On July 17 and 18, 1996, 48-hour traffic counts were taken at the intersection of Slaters Road and James Street abutting from the west. The traffic volumes (reduced to 24-hour ADT) for the above -referenced intersection and days are as follows: Slaters Road north of James Street - 3,019 vehicles Slaters Road south of James Street - 2,854 vehicles James Street west of Slaters Road - 393 vehicles 4. A visual inspection of the above -referenced intersection was performed to determine the extent of the clear -sight distance. When stopped on James Street, the clear -sight distance to the north is 775 ft. Also, when you stop on James Street, the clear sight distance to the south is 840 ft. A stop sign presently exists on James Street at the intersection of James and Slaters Road. If the proposed sidewalk is installed on the west side of Slaters Road from the Burnsville limits under City Contract 96-13, a better location for these requested stop signs would be at James Street that abuts Slaters Road from the east. The reason for this is that a crosswalk would be installed across Slaters Road just to the north of this intersection. If you nee a additional information, please advise. r Construction Supervisor SUjj Attachments: Petition Map Showing Petitioning Residents Traffic Counts Sight Distance Speed Study ��_ 13 WILDWooD ST ! �,• 3 a s s a 3 = � LNJ� Y r , 2 3 ,Q � 3 ���V� 1514 l` J Im' iQ r r r 17 5 r I 3 ' 13 10 I \ \ 1 1 0 i I z I r ,z 4 7 \ 8 I I 9 I SLATER ACRES PARK — JAMES Sf I — _ — J—AMIES S� — 4 I / 43 3 6 1 I z N ,s 14 13 Al 4 rel 47t rz. ,r of A �R RES z „ a- I wi o = EXISTING STOP SIGN = PETITIONING RESIDENTS DATE: AUGUST 12, 199E 5 3 )STOP SIGN PETITION SL ROAD AND JAMES STREE i c0lrf OF ALAN PETTIONING RESIDENTS ,3 I A = 3019 B = 393 C = 2854 JAMLI D S'1. I _ — — JAMES ST_ — S 4 I / I ` 3 z s I ' 2 3 I , z R+tN ` Wp 45 F z I I � G •-- --- I c a!4 C� !v/ l a 111 I !c„1 s Q - o = EXISTIP -SOP SIGN 1,11 DATE: AUGUST 12, 19�-- 5 STOP SIGN PETITION SLA77R ROAD AND JAMES STREE- TRAFFIC COUNTS I 3 2 1 2 / � 9 � 4 / MANO'GANY- - a / 0 15 16 14 17 t 2 s 2 1 10 1 12 � 9 1 S I I SLATER ACRES PARK 1 2 '0Qrl JA`Fvi�S`Sf 4 3 1 — _ _ _ JAM -ES ST. — — — — w — — — — — 4 3 2 S C%% , 2 3 3 � 1 46 F 14 / 7 13 12 10 1 2 O 2 1 ! 7 /, 3 Z A 1 1 6 �R RFS !a 1 1 �'1 L 2 1 1�1 g z .1 o = EXISTING STOP SIGN DATE: AUGUST 12, 199f �� STOP SIGN PETITION <; 5 SL ROAD AND JAMES STREET c r TY of L+-GArr SIGHT DISTANCE Slaters Road/ James Street Stop Sign Petition Speed Distribution Profile 6:00-8:00AM&4:00-6:00PM July 17& 18, 1996 MPH - Frequency 56 - 1 52 -3 51 -1 50 - 1 49 -4 48 -4 47 -8 46 - 11 45 -22 44 -30 43 -23 42 -45 41 - 46 - 85th Percentile 40 -80 39 -69 38 -83 37 -84 36 -116 35 - 135 - Posted Speed Limit 34 -80 33 -66 32 -71 31 -48 30 -55 29 -35 28 -21 27 - 15 26 -21 25 - 18 24 -7 23 -7 22 -3 21 -3 20 -4 19-1 Total: 1231 51.2% Over 35 MPH 569 no VI)C c _ kn= VI) =C1V)C ee v rV W) N r V•i V•� N V1 6- w w r y -- N N r^, Q Q V) �D r DC O v C v I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 G Cf= Ln v, v,v,CC�^�-n y N N'1 ^ N r N N N U•1 N C N N V,) wn V' cc i C' 1— 00 C pp „ r�nr�rr:n—xooCC � ��Dv-�xr^,N—nrsQC .�QCTQ—OCVrnM(N Q L C6 — -,---Nr'^,r')IT' V) 'V r -W co C � O W xrrrOC�N—O�r'^ CJ r4M fn L. C C U aj r^�nxnl�.—rr;—xx u N N M Q Q Le) O r,v r 4r', CN V1ti:Cr� C C O ^ren—,r,—QC ---NfV Mr'':!r U a� � C C v. i� 6-t :J Pt — ----NNNN I I I I I cr x U r1 r xNrfl- — —— C3 —r' a) — — — — N (N .. L✓ ` Y y %J L U L Vi N'7 V'1 1n Vl V•7 WI) to N V'i .� vN N N N N N N N N N N h O :u ti y N N r" i en Q Q h V•1 %Z V' r y r`J �. N N N r'1 rte, Q Q Q V 1 V1 h y 1 < U m V = � U c.. S7 2B-6 Muldway Stop Signs The "Multiway Stop" installation is useful as a safety measure at some locations. It should ordinarily be used only where the volume of traffic on the intersecting roads is approximately equal. A traffic control signal is more satisfactory for an intersection with a heavy volume of traffic. Any of the following conditions may warrant a multiway STOP sign installation (sec. 2B-4): 1. Where traffic signals are warranted and urgently needed, the �ultiway stop is an interim measure that can be installed quickly to - ontrol traffic while arrangements are being made for the signal installation. 2. An accident problem, as indicated by five or more reported accidents of a type susceptible of correction by a multiway stop installation in a 12 -month period. Such accidents include right- and left -turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions. 3. Minimum traffic volumes: (a) The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day, -and (b) The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour, but (c) When the 85 -percentile approach speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 miles per hour, the minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70 percent of the above requirements. August 15, 1996 Re: All -Way Stop Sign Installation - Slater Road & James Street Dear Property Owner: On June 19, 1996, a Stop Sign Petition was received by the City of Eagan for the installation of an all -way stop at the intersection of Slater Road and James Street. Your name was one of eight on this petition. The City has completed an analysis of the warrants necessary for the stop sign installation as requested. This warrant criteria has not been satisfied and staff does not have the authority to install an all -way stop sign at this location. For your information, the City Council will be considering your request on August 20, 1996, at approximately 7:00 p.m., at Eagan City Hall. You are welcome to attend this meeting. If you should have any questions, please contact us at 681-4646. Sincerely, -- ? Michael P. Foertsch, F£S. Assistant City Engineer MPF/jj cc: Mayor and City Council c/o Tom Hedges, City Administrator 5% Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 B. PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT, HEALY RAMME COMPANY O TLOT B EAGAN PROMENADE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: ► To approve/deny an Amendment to the Preliminary Planned Development by Healy Ramme Company for Outlot B, Eagan Promenade consisting of 284 dwelling units in six building subject to conditions recommended by the Advisory Planning Commission. FACTS: ► Healy Ramme Company is requesting approval of an amendment to the Preliminary Planned Development for Eagan Promenade Development. When the Preliminary Planned Development for Eagan Promenade was approved in December, the City Council did not approved the landscaping and design details. The Agreement requires that the developer submit several revised master plan exhibits in the form of a Plan Amendment. The required amendment for the commercial portion of the development was approved in February 1996. ► The original approval was for 294 units in five buildings. The revised proposal is for 282 units in six buildings. The proposal consists of 86 1 -bedroom units, 110 2 - bedroom units, and 86 3 -bedroom units. Although the number of units have been reduced by 12 from the original proposal, the building footprints are larger than the previous proposal because the unit sizes have been increased. ► Except for building 3 (southeast), all buildings meet required setbacks. Building 3 has been relocated from the original plan and requires a 20' variance from the required 50' setback from Lexington Ave. Conditions relating to noise mitigation and landscaping have been recommended by the APC related to this setback deviation. ► The increased building footprint for buildings I and 2 resulted in serious concerns regarding emergency access on the south side of the building. Prior to the APC meeting, Healy Ramme modified the site plan to include an access to the rear through the center of the two buildings. The revision was considered acceptable by the Fire Department in lieu of the rear access road recommended in the Planning Report. ► The APC held a hearing regarding the amendment at the July 23, 1996 regular meeting. Several neighbors expressed concern about the impact of the proposal on their property values. Issues presented included concerns with rental housing (rents and occupancy), impact of grading and construction of the site on the natural landscape and vegetation, and improvements to Lexington Avenue related to the project. The APC continued the hearing until the August APC workshop on August 8 so that the developer could address the neighbors concerns further and to revise plans regarding access. ► At the APC workshop, the developer addressed issues of the neighboring property owners and the remaining staff concerns. The APC voted 4-2 to recommend approval of the Preliminary Planned Development amendment, subject to the staff conditions as revised in the Staff Memo dated 8/6/96 and amending Condition 29 to a 24' wide drive instead of 26' for the portion shown as 22' on the plans. 1 P1311 ► The proposal meets the code required parking of 546 parking stalls with 585 stalls provided, 443 of which are underground, 29 are detached garage spaces and 113 are surface parking. An additional 31 surface spaces have been identified as proof of parking for a total of 616 potential parking stalls. Based on past experience at the Waterford Apartments, staff has concerns about the on-site parking provided even though the proposal slightly exceeds the code required two spaces per unit. ► The drive aisle width required for this development based on code standards is 28' wide. A portion of the drive serving buildings 2, 3 and 4 is only proposed to be 22' wide. Staff had recommended a 26' wide drive be provided throughout the development and allow a 2' deviation from the required standard because no parking is to be allowed along the drive aisles. The APC decided that a comprise was in order regarding the staff recommendation for a 26' wide drive aisle for buildings 2, 3 and 4. The APC believed a 24' width was adequate because of the no parking requirement along the drive way (Condition 30) . The APC modified Condition 29 to a 24' wide drive rather than a 26' width. ATTACHMENTS: Minutes from 8/8/96 APC Workshop, Page Minutes from 7/16/96 APC Workshop, Pages W thr ugh . Staff Memo to APC dated 8/6/96, Page through Planning Report dated July 19, 1996, Pages �3 through MINUTES OF THE ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP Eagan, Minnesota August 8, 1996 A workshop of the Advisory Planning Commission was held on Thursday, August 8, 1996 at 5:30 p.m. Members present were Mark Miller, Steve Burdorf, Larry Frank, Carla Heyl, Gunnar Isberg, and Don Schindle. Absent were Dee Richards and Jerry Segal. Also present were Senior Planners Mike Ridley and Lisa Freese. The agenda was approved as presented. AGENDA MINUTES The June 25 regular Planning Commission meeting minutes were adopted with Commissioners Miller and Isberg abstaining. The July 11 APC workshop minutes were also adopted with Commissioners Frank and Schindle abstaining. BUSINESS ITEMS Eagan Promenade 2nd Addition (Healy Ramme) Senior Planner Ridley gave a brief overview of the request and the revisions made since the July 23 Planning Commission meeting. Tom Healy then gave a brief presentation to the commission and audience. He addressed issues raised in the July 30, 1996 letter to the Planning Commission submitted jointly by the five neighbors in the Lexington Avenue/Yankee Doodle Road area. These issues had to do with traffic, lighting, drive aisle width, building height, building elevation, and building distances from the existing single-family dwellings. Senior Planner Freese explained the extent of the original approval and the necessity for an amendment to the master plan portion of the Planned Development. The APC discussion primarily centered on the drive aisle width and the impact to the existing single-family residential property. Discussion ensued regarding the possibility of Healy Ramme acquiring adjacent properties and incorporating those sites into this overall plan. Tom Healy responded that they have looked at adding those additional properties to the development but they have determined that there would be no physical or financial benefit to their development. Commissioner Heyl stated that the Planning Commission is often presented with issues regarding the conflicts that are present when new development enters an area with existing development and that this situation is not unique. Commissioner Heyl recommended a compromise between the 22 -foot -wide drive aisle proposed by the developer and the 26 -foot -wide drive aisle suggested by staff: She stated that a compromise of twenty-four feet appears adequate due to the condition requiring the drive aisles to be posted "No Parking." Commissioner Heyl moved approval of the Planned Development amendment and it was seconded by Commissioner Frank subject to the conditions as revised in the staff memo to the APC dated August 6, 1996. Commissioner Schindle stated that he views a high-end residential project such as the Healy-Ramme multi- family proposal as a win/win situation for the City and the residents in that area. The vote was called and the motion passed 4-2. Those in favor were Commissioners Schindle, Frank, Isberg, and Heyl. Those who voted nay were Commissioners Burdorf and Miller. Commissioner Burdorf noted that his nay vote had to do with the residual single-family parcels and was not an indictment of the Healy Ramme proposal. Page 12 July 23. 1996 ADVISORY PLANNING COMNIISSION PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT HENLEY RANIME COMPANY Chairman Miller opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding a Preliminary Planned Development Amendment to consider site plan modifications to construct a multi -family residential development consisting of 282 dwelling units on property legally described as Outlot B. Eagan Promenade located north of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Lexington Avenue in the SEI/:z of Section 10. Planner Dudziak introduced this item. Ms. Dudziak highlighted the information presented in the City staffs planning report dated July 19, 1996. Ms. Dudziak noted the background and history, the existing conditions and the surrounding uses of the subject property. Ms. Dudziak further summarized the description of the applicant's proposal and the modifications which have been made from the prior application. Tom Healev, with Healey Ramme Company was present and highlighted the history and background of the Healev Ramme Company. Mr. Healey described the structures proposed in how the structures were designed to incorporate grade chanties and maintain the natural amenities of the site. Mr. Healey further described the unit plans and unit amenities. Mr. Healey discussed the issue of why the tot lot is not included on the proposed plan, by indicating that the site is unusual, however Healey Ramme will commit with the City to place a tot lot where it is best suited. Mr. Healey then addressed the lighting plan and indicated that he felt a lighting plan had previously been submitted to the City but may have been misplaced. Mr. Healey then reviewed market research conducted by Healey Ramme Company and how the buildings would address what Healey Ramme Company believed to be a market need. Mr. Healey indicated Healey Ramme's approval of the conditions set forth in the City staffs planning report of July 19, 1996, with the exception of Condition Nos. 6, 10, 11, 12, 21, 22, 28, 29 and 32. Mr. Healey requested that Item Nos. 6 and 10 incorporate requirements dealing with "lawn and associated landscape." With respect to Condition No. 11, Mr. Healey commented that he felt that the 45 dBA interior sound level should not be required as the subject development is outside of Metropolitan Airport Commission's mitigation area and would request that Condition No. 11 be deleted. Mr. Healey noted that Healey Ramme Company felt that Condition No. 12 is unnecessary and indicated to the Commission that this type of development typically results in a high mortgage turnover, approximately every seven years and that lenders frequently object or become very cautious upon seeing any notation concerning aircraft noise recorded on deeds. ( 3 Page 13 July 33. 1996 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. Healey then addressed the grading and access road conditions as described in Condition Nos. 21, 22, 28 and 29 and indicated that the applicant hoped to have settled these conditions with level sidewalks and pedestrian access yet would consider accepting the City's condition to put an access road in. Mr. Healey addressed a possible emergency vehicle access between Buildings 1 and 2 with a pad on the south side of the buildings with a width of 16 feet and 20 feet additional on either side as discussed with staff. Mr. Healey further indicated Healey Ramme's desire to allow minimum driveway width to be 22 feet. Mr. Healey indicated to the Commission that for financial reasons, the developer needs to start construction now or else it may be forced to incur substantial costs associated with winter construction. A resident of the area, Ellen Costello, was present and indicated her opposition to the proposed preliminary planned development amendment and her general dissatisfaction with Mr. Healey's presentation. Ms. Costello stated that the local residents were concerned that the impact on their neighborhood has not been addressed by the developer or the City. Ms. Costello further stated that she did not believe that surrounding property owners had received notice of the hearings in this matter. Chairman Miller requested City staff to ensure that all property owners affected by this proposal receive notice particularly the five property owners directly behind the proposed buildings. Member Frank expressed surprise that the surrounding residents felt they had not been informed in light of the development in the Promenade area. Member Frank further indicated that he saw no objection to deleting Condition Nos. 11 and 12. Member Burdorf asked City staff for explanation as to why Condition Nos. 11 and 12 were included in the planning report. Senior Planner Freese indicated her understanding that as a result of a recommendation from the Airport Relations Committee, this area is considered on the fringe of current and potential airport development and the anticipated expansion of flight plans should be considered by the City. Senior Planner Freese further indicated that it is City staffs understanding that this is currently only a recommendation for the City to be aware of. Member Isberg stated his belief that Condition No. 11 may be necessary because of the expanding contours of the Metropolitan Airport. Member Segal indicated that he believed that Condition No. 12 applied in several other communities. In response to a request by Member Burdorf, City staff explained their understandinL, of the 45 dBA requirement and how it differed from Condition No. 13 re()arding the need to construct buildings and employ other noise mitigation elements to meet Minnesota noise standards. Planner Freese indicated City staffs belief that Condition No. 11 and 13 differed in that Condition No. 13 is a Minnesota Pollution Control Agencv standard which typically deals with traffic noise mitigation and Page 14 July 23. 1996 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION Condition No. 11 often times relates to interior ceiling noise mitigation to address air traffic. Member Heyl questioned the applicant regarding possible rents to be charged to prospective tenants and to address the question of traffic and landscaping in the rear of the proposed buildings. The applicant described rent structures and indicated that no exterior exits would be located in the rear of the buildings and that the area was heavily wooded. The applicant believed it met all setback requirements. In response to a question from Member Heyl, City staff explained driveway standards and Planner Freese explained the relationship between the standards and the City Code together with a sliding scale for width depending on the level of traffic, parking issues and functionality which led City staff to believe 26 feet would be appropriate. Member Burdorf inquired of the applicant to explain the future for total development on the site and why residents with adjoining property have not been included in the development plans. The applicant responded by indicating that lot elevations and grades would require complete demolition of the residents' lots and would materially disrupt the natural amenities on the site. Member Frank indicated his belief that a good buffer existed considering the depth of the lots and the existing vegetation between the development and the neighboring residents. Residents of the area expressed a concern with exiting their driveways and making a left-hand turn onto Lexington Avenue. Chairman Miller noted that it has long been the City's desire to have the Promenade development be a special place and in his opinion, the proposed development by the applicant appears very normal, very dense, does not adequately address fire and safety issues and is being rushed by the applicant. Member Burdorf further addressed the issue of notice being provided to affected property owners of any future hearings in this matter. Senior Planner Freese felt that City staff believed that notices went out for the July, 1995 meeting and January, 1996 meeting and that notification is often times based on abstract lists which City staff required the developer to update. Senior Planner Freese further indicated that several notices relating to the Central Area Plan had been issued. Member Segal moved, Member Richards seconded a motion to recommend this item be referred to a workshop session and to continue the hearing to be held on August 8, 1996, provided the applicant consented to the continuance. The applicant expressed his consent to have the matter continued for hearing at the workshop session regarding a Preliminary Planned Development Amendment to consider site plan modifications to Page 15 July 23, 1996 ADVISORY PLANNING CONfrvIISSION construct a multi -family residential development consisting of 282 dwelling units on property legally described as Outlot B, Eagan Promenade located north of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Lexington Avenue in the SEI/2 of Section 10. All approved in favor. 1 —city of eagan TO: Chair Mark Miller and Members of the Advisory Planning Commission FROM: Pamela Dudziak, Associate Planner DATE: August 6, 1996 SUBJECT: Preliminary Planned Development Amendment - Healey Ramme Company MEMO This proposal for a Preliminary Planned Development Amendment for the residential portion of the Eagan Promenade development was considered by the Advisory Planning Commission at its regular meeting on July 23, 1996. The developer presented some revisions that would be made to the plans, and also suggested some modifications to the conditions of approval presented in the staff report. The action of the Advisory Planning Commission was to continue the public hearing to their next regular workshop meeting on August 8, 1996, to allow the developer to incorporate the changes to their plans, and address the conditions more clearly. Staff has received a revised site, grading, and utility plans, as well as a revised floor plan for Building 2. In addition, the developer has provided additional documentation regarding some of the issues such as noise mitigation. To the extent that the revisions to these plans satisfy conditions presented in the staff report, those conditions can be eliminated. This memo summarizes changes to the conditions, and the developer's comments regarding the conditions is attached for your information. Although many of the issues raised at the public hearing on July 23, 1996 have been addressed, a few issues remain unresolved. First, the revised landscape plan does not address all of the issues raised at the first public hearing and the landscape details have not been submitted. However, the developer has agreed to the conditions presented in the staff report regarding the landscaping. Second, the driveway width of 26 feet versus 22 feet is unresolved. The developer is still requesting approval for a 22 foot driveway width as shown on the plans by Buildings 2 and 3. Third, the trail alignment for connection to the commercial portion of the Promenade development has not been finalized. The condition presented in the staff report calls for the alignment to be finalized prior to Final Planned Development approval for the Healey Ramme Memo - Healey Ramme Company APC Workshop 8/8/96 Page 2 proposal, the developer is asking that this condition be eliminated and the trail alignment evaluated when the commercial development proposal is considered. The property shall be platted. (No change.) 2. All standard building setbacks shall be met except for Building 3 which is approved with a 30 foot setback from the east property line. (No change.) 3. The developer shall provide information about construction techniques and landscaping to mitigate traffic noise on site, particularly for Building 3. (No change, the developer has submitted the information.) 4. All parking stalls required by the City Code for each respective building Sheuld shall be constructed priot to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for such respective building. 5. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted prior to Final Planned Development approval. Decorative light fixtures in teh residential component of Eagan Promenade shall matche the style of those installed in the commercial component and on Promenade Avenue. (A site lighting plan has been submitted, and developer agrees to install decorative lighting to match those installed in the commercial component on Promenade Avenue, but no light standard elevations have been specified on the plans.) 6. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, the developer shall submit to the City a revised landscape plan and landscape details prepared by a registered landscape architect. All plant materials shall be identified and labeled, and provide for irrigation of all sedded, seeded and landseaped aFeas all lawn and associated landscaped areas. Landscape details should be shown at a scale of 1" = 20'. 7. Additional landscaping should be installed east of Building 3 to screen and buffer the building from Lexington Avenue. This landscaping shall be designed to mitigate noise from the Lexington Avenue roadway. (No change, the developer is preparing a revised landscape plan.) Memo - Healey Ramme Company APC Workshop - 8/8/96 Page 3 8. The area west of Building 6 should be landscaped to screen the building and serve to stabilize the slope after grading. (No change, the developer is preparing a revised landscape plan.) 9. Landscape detail should be provided for the area around the activities center and around the gateway, monument, and pylon signs. In addition, landscape detail for typical building foundation plantings and typical courtyard plantings should be provided. The landscape plan should be prepared by a registered landscape architect, and landscape details should be shown at a scale of 1" = 20'. (No change, the developer is preparing a revised landscape plan.) 10. The landscape plan shall identify and label all plant materials, show all easement on the property and provide for irrigation of all sedded, areas lawn and associated landscaped areas. 11. Architectural designs and construction methods for new construction within the development shall incorporate sound attenuation standards sufficient to achieve an interior sound level of 45 dBA for airport noise mitigation. (No change, the developer has provided information showing the noise levels will be reduced to 28 and 39 dBA.) 12. A netiee be e , filed +we deed fi .. ea-Reh let . &er ..a,.fRin:.... ;;4 indieatiag tha4 it is kkeb, te--be-expesed-teair-er-Aft ;;ei.-;p— I3. The developer shall construct buildings and employ other noise mitigation elements to meet Minnesota noise standards. (No change.) 14. The developer shall submit samples of exterior building materials with the application for Final Planned Development. (No change, sample building materials have been submitted and will be provided for review at the APC meeting on August 8, 1996.) 15. All trash and recyclable materials containers shall be located within the buildings. (No change.) 09 Memo - Healey Ramme Company APC Workshop - 8/8/96 Page 4 Sigriage 16. Detailed signage plans shall be submitted prior to Final Planned Development approval. (No change.) 17. All signs shall meet the required 10 foot setback from property lines. The monument signs -;I;AWd shall be no more than 7 feet in height. (No change, the developer has submitted revised plans for the monument sign.) 18. The residential monument sign on the corner of Yankee Doodle Raod and Lexington Avenue shall conform to the City intersection monumentation concept for Yankee Doodle Raod. (No change, additional comments regarding the consistency of the revised sign plans with the City intersection monumentation concept for Yankee Doodle Road will be provided at the APC meeting.) 19. The monument sign in the south center of the site along Yankee Doodle Road is permitted as a temporary sign. The sign may remain in place after the first building permit is issued until six months after the last building's Certificate of Occupancy is issued. (No change.) FTU The gateway monument signs at the north entrance to the site shall not be permitted on public right of way. (The city will be acquiring right of way over the property between Northwood Drive and the development. The developer had proposed gateway monument signs on both sides of the driveway entrance from Northwood Drive. However, since state statutes do not allow structures to be placed in public right of way, these signs must either be removed, or the developer must acquire sufficient property on either side of the driveway in which to locate the signs.) 21. The gr -ad: -,g pla shall be - sea +,..,h,.w the &II : et e f the r-equifed _ adbed „staetie en the slepe W e f Buildings , and 2. A 16 foot paved driveway with a 13'-6" clearance between Buildings 1 and 2 shall be provided with a landing pad south of the buildings having a minimum 20 foot access on each side of the driveway. (The change to this condition reflects the alternative emergency access proposed by the developer and agreed to by the City.) 22. All retaining walls built aleng- the -seuthrslope -e� Buildings 1 Md 2 in the area of the landing pad south of Buildings 1 and 2 shall be designed and constructed to accommodate the potential loads of emergency vehicles. �' D Memo - Healey Ramme Company APC Workshop - 8/8/96 Page 5 23. The developer shall obtain all necessary permits from Dakota County for grading work within Lexington Avenue (Dakota County Road 43) right of way. (No change.) 24. The storm sewer outlet pipe from Pond DP -6.1 to Pond DP -5.1 shall restrict outflow to 2 cubic feet per second as identified in the City Storm Water Management Plan adopted in 1990. (No change.) 25. Pond DP -5.1 is required to have a minimum wet volume and mean depth at normal water level of one acre-foot and three feet, respectively. (No change.) 26. The wetland replacement plan should be revised to show a totla wetland impact of .52 acres associate with the project. The wetland area to be created for mitigation purposes will remain at 1.08 acres as per the original approved wetland replacement plan. (No change.) 27. , 040 75 and 059 75 4ffeugh 41j:is deNtejepfnefit. (Revised plans satisfied this condition.) 28. The plans shall be mvised 4e iaeer-per-a4e a faiipemkffn 14 Abet ;Aide efaer-geney ,.aging ated ;+w nstf:.etie-, of the aeeess ad. (Alternative emergency access is provided.) 29. All driveways shall be a minimum of 26 feet in width. (No change, the developer contends that the site constraints prevent further widening of the driveway and that the 22 foot driveway width near Buildings 2 and 3 increases safety and reduces traffic noise by slowing vehicles and cause no decrease in function. Staff continues to find that the 26 foot driveway width should be provided for all driveways.) 30. Signs indicating "no parking" shall be placed along all driveways. (No change.) 31. A tot lot play area shall be provided and the location identified onthe final site plan. A bituminous trail connection to the tot lot play area shall also be provided. (No change.) Memo - Healey Ramme Company APC Workshop - 8/8/96 Page 6 32. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, a pedestrian connection to the commercial development west of the site shall be finalized. (No change, the developer believes that the trail connection to the small commercial center should be provided when the commercial development plan is considered. Opus has indicated to staff that they are preparing the plans for the small commercial center. Staff is confident that the trail connections can be finalized prior to Final Planned Development approval for Healey Ramme.) 33. A barrier such as a bench or some other feature identifying the trail terminus shall be installed and identified on the final plans at the northern trail terminus adjacent to Lexington Addition. (No change.) 34. The p ed a4igw eat oft the s;ea tAle+ between Pends „D 6.1 an (Convent: Staff determined that the plans satisfied this condition). 35. The developer shall submit a revised Landscape Plan indicating the species and location of required mitigation for significant tree removal in excess of the amount previously approved during preliminary plat approval. This mitigation amounts to nine Category A trees or 18 Category B trees or 36 Category C trees. (No change.) 36. The developer shall install tree protective measures (i.e. four foot polyethylene laminate safety netting at the drip line or at the perimeter of the critical root zone, whichever is greater, or significant trees and woodlands. (No change.) 37. The developer shall contact the City Forestry Division at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan. (No change.) 38. -.-,..e develepe. shat, e.,,, ust all akeFaa4ives to i fts .,,liag twee e read in OF -def s€3�the—emer-genet' aseess and fire sa€e45, r -eq» -fire safety --a dthe -Fedes gn shad! be--eviewed again bye- arks Gefrmissio &F: 4ee . (Alternative emergency access is provided.) 39. Parks dedication shall be fulfilled through a cash dedication. (No change.) Memo - Healey Ramme Company APC Workshop - 8/8/96 Page 7 40. In lieu of a cash trails dedication, the developer shall install public sidewalks and trails throughout the development. (No change.) HEALEY RAMME COMPANY Date: August 3, 1996 To: Pam Dudziak City of Eagan From: Thomas H. Healey Healey Ramme Company Subject: Eagan Promenade 2nd Addition: Eagan Planning Report Dated July 19th, 1996 We have reviewed the Conditions of Approval set forth in the Planning Report Dated July 19, 1996, which were submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration. We have revised the plans to incorporate most of the conditions and have transmitted plan revisions to you by separate cover. The following summarizes the plan revisions and our comments relative to each of the Conditions of Approval under consideration: Standard Conditions The property shall be platted. Comment: Agreed. Setbacks 2. All standard building setbacks shall be met except for Building 3 which is approved with a 30 foot setback from the east property line. Comment: Agreed. 3. The developer shall provide information about construction techniques and landscaping to mitigate traffic noise on site, particularly for Building 3. Comment: Agreed. Appendix A memorandum, page 2, from BRW Elness, Architect, (with attached supporting Lexington Avenue noise level information from Lisa Freese) uses the "worst case scenario" day time level of 68 dbA and night time level of 66 dbA. Composite STC wall rating reduces traffic noise levels to 37 and 35 dbA day and night respectively which is well within the prescribed noise limits. y RECEI Y--1996 HEALEY RAMME COMPANY 10601 Smetana Road • Suite 122 • Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 a (612) 931-2220 • FAX # 931-0015 Pam Dudziak Page 2 Parkin 4. All parking stalls required by the City Code for each respective building should be constructed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for such respective building. Comment: Agreed. One lift of asphalt will be installed prior to Certificates of Occupancy with the final lift installed at the end of construction traffic and after any construction traffic damage is repaired. Lighting 5. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted prior to Final Planned Development approval. Decorative light fixtures in the residential component of Eagan Promenade shall match the style of those installed in the commercial component and on Promenade Avenue. n Comment: Agreed. The revised Site lighting Plan has been submitted and includes �b matching decorative light fixtures. Landscaping 6. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, the developer shall submit to the City a revised landscape plan and landscape details prepared by a registered landscape architect. All plant materials shall be identified and labeled, and provide for irrigation of all sodded, seeded and landscaped areas. Landscape details should be shown at a scale of V = 20'. Comment: Agreed. The revised Landscape Plan with details has been submitted and irrigation is provided for all lawn and related plantings (note that "return to nature" areas will be watered by hand until established). 7. Additional landscaping should be installed east of Building 3 to screen and buffer the building from Lexington Avenue. This landscaping shall be designed to mitigate noise from the Lexington Avenue roadway. Comment: Agreed. See the revised Landscape Plan. Lexington Avenue noise is well mitigated by building construction (see Comment 3 above). 8. The area west of Building 6 should be landscaped to screen the building and serve to stabilize the slope after grading. Comment: Agreed. See revised Landscape Plan. 10601 Smetana Road 9 Suite 122 • Minnetonka. Minnesota 55343 • (612)931-2220 Pam Dudziak Page 3 9. Landscape detail should be provided for the area around the activities center and around the gateway, monument, and pylon signs. In addition, landscape detail for typical building foundation plantings and typical courtyard plantings should be provided. The landscape plan should be prepared by a registered landscape architect, and landscape details should be shown at a scale of 1 " = 20'. Comment: Agreed. See revised Landscape Plan. 10. The landscape plan shall identify and label all plant materials, show all easements on the property, and provide for irrigation of all sodded, seeded and landscaped areas. The amount of plant materials provided shall be sufficient to satisfy the minimum City Code requirement of three percent of the value of the buildings. Comment: Agreed. See Landscape Plan. Irrigation is provided for all lawns and related plantings (note that "return to nature" areas will be watered by hand until established). Noise 11. Architectural designs and construction methods for new construction within the development shall incorporate sound attenuation standards sufficient to achieve an interior sound level of 45 dbA for airport noise mitigation. Comment: Agreed. Appendix A memorandum, page 1, from BRW Elness, Architect, (with attached supporting Metropolitan Council Builder's Guide to Aircraft Noise Compatibility Guidelines) uses (as requested by John Hohenstein) the level 4 noise contour of 65 - 70 dbA although the edge of the level 4 noise area is north of the site at Lone Oak Road. Ceiling and composite wall STC rating reduce the noise level to 28 and 39 dbA respectively which is well below the recommended limit of 45 dbA. 12. A notice shall be recorded on the deed for each lot and/or condominium unit indicating that it is likely to be exposed to aircraft noise. Comment: A notice on the deed of any property will adversely impact the marketability and value of the property. Further, it may restrict financing availability by adversely impacting underwriters not familiar with the area and not accustomed to seeing a deed notice of any type. 10601 Smetana Road 9Suite 122 •Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 • (612)937-2220 Pam Dudziak Page 4 I3. The developer shall construct buildings and employ other noise mitigation elements to meet vlinnesota noise standards. Comment: Agreed. See Comments 3 and 11 above. Architecture 14. The developer shall submit samples of exterior building materials with the application for Final Planned Development. Comment: Agreed. Shingle and siding samples have been provided. TrasivRecvclables Containers 15. All trash and recyclable materials containers shall be located within the buildings. Comment: Agreed. Garage Floor Plans for all buildings (Building 2 submitted this day, other buildings previously submitted) include trash and recyclables rooms within the building garages. Signage 16. Detailed signage plans shall be submitted prior to Final Planned Development approval. _4��`� Comment: Detailed Signage Plans have been submitted. 17. All signs shall meet the required 10 foot setback from property lines. The monument signs should be no more than 7 feet in height. Comment: All signs meet the required 10' setback except the gateway sign at Northwood Avenue which will be located on City property; we understand that an easement will be required and available and that a maintenance contract will be required. Decorative lighting on the monument sign is in excess of Tin height. 18. The residential monument sign on the corner of Yankee Doodle Road and Lexington Avenue shall conform to the City intersection monumentatibn concept for Yankee Doodle Road. Continent: Agreed. Detailed Signage Plans have been submitted. 77 10601 Smetana Road • Suite 122 • Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 • (612)931-2220 Pam Dudziak Page 5 19. The monument sign in the south center of the site along Yankee Doodle Road is permitted as a temporary sign. The sign may remain in place after the first building permit is issued until six months after the last building's Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Comment: Agreed. 20. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, the developer should submit to the City a copy of the executed easement allowing the gateway signs at the north entrance to be located on the adjacent property. Comment: Agreed. Gradin 21. The grading plan shall be revised to show the full impact of the required roadbed construction on the slope south of Buildings 1 and 2. Continent: Not applicable. In lieu of a fire access road south of Buildings 1 and 2, the Fire Marshall has approved a 16' paved driveway with 13'6" of clearance between Buildings 1 and 2 to a landing pad south of the buildings with a minimum of 20' access on each side of the driveway. The driveway and landing pad are both on the revised Site Plan, Grading Plan and Building 2 Floor Plans. 22. All retaining walls built along the south slope of Buildings 1 and 2 shall be designed and constructed to accommodate the potential loads of emergency buildings. Comment: Not applicable. See 21 above. 23. The developer shall obtain all necessary permits from Dakota County for grading work within Lexington Avenue (Dakota County Road 43) right of way. Comment: Agreed. In addition to Dakota County permit for grading, developer will obtain a Dakota County permit for the installation of landscaping materials east of Building 3 on the Lexington Avenue right-of-way. Storm Drainag 24. The storm sewer outlet pipe from Pond DP -6.1 to Pond DP -5.1 shall restrict outflow to 2 cubic feet per second as identified in the City Storm Water Management Plan adopted in 1990. 10601 Smetana Road • Suite 122 • Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 • (612) 931-2220 9 FAX a 931-0015 Pam Dudziak Page 6 Comment: Agreed. The procedure for restricting outflow is agreed upon by John Gorier and detailed in McCombs Frank memo (Appendix B). Wate�Quality/Wet Ian ds 25. Pond DP -5.1 is required to have a minimum wet volume and mean depth at normal water level of one acre-foot and three feet, respectively. Comment: Agreed. Revised Pond DP -5.1 is shown on the revised Grading Plan and detailed in McCombs Frank memo (Appendix B). 26. The wetland replacement plan should be revised to show a total wetland impact of .52 acres associated with the project. The wetland area to be created for mitigation purposes will remain at 1.08 acres as per the original approved wetland replacement plan. Comment: Agreed. The revised Wetland Replacement Plan has been approved by the Army Corps of Engineers (Appendix Q. tilities 27. Sanitary sewer service of sufficient size, depth and capacity shall be provided to Parcels 040-75 and 050-75 through this development. Comment: Agreed. The additional sanitary service is included in the revised Utility Plan. 'r %,%. '.ssc+ " b% C?`� Access/Street Design 28. The plans shall be revised to incorporate a minimum 14 foot wide emergency access road around Buildings 1 and 2 and show the additional tree mitigation and grading impacts associated with construction of the access road. Comment: Not applicable. See 21 above. 29. All driveways shall be a minimum of 26 feet in width. Comment: All driveways are 26' in width with the exception of the driveway to Building 3 which was previously increased from 20' to 22' in width. The 22' driveway in this area will cause no decrease in function and, further, will increase safety and reduce traffic noise by slowing vehicles. Site constraints prevent further widening of the driveway. rte; 10601 Smetana Road • Suite 122 • Minnetonka. Minnesota 55343 • (612)931-2220 Pam Dudziak Page 7 30. Signs indicating "no parking" shall be placed along all driveways. Comment: Agreed. Signs are included on the revised Site Plan.QQ Site_AmeWties/Trails 31. A tot lot play area shall be provided and the location identified on the final site plan. A bituminous trail connection to the tot lot play area shall also be provided. Comment: Agreed. The tot lot is located and identified on the revised Landscape —� Plan. 32. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, a pedestrian connection to the commercial development west of the site shall be finalized. Comment: A pedestrian trail to the commercial development is provided from Building 1 on the south side of the driveway. An additional connection can be provided from the trailway on the south of Pond DP -6.1 to the small commercial center when its development plan is considered. 33. A barrier such as a bench or some other feature identifying the trail terminus shall be installed and identified on the final plans at the northern trail terminus adjacent to Lexington Addition. Comment: Agreed. Bench will be installed. Easememts/Riahts of Wav 34. The proposed alignment of the storm sewer pipe outlet between Ponds DP -6.1 and DP - 5.1 shall be revised to provide for sufficient easement between the pipe and Building 1 at its northwest corner. Comment: Not applicable. After further discussions with McCombs Frank, John Gorter approved the proposed easement without realignment (see Appendix B). 10601 Smetana Road • Suite 122 • Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343 0 (612) 931-2220 • FAX # 931-0015 Pam Dudziak Page 8 Tree Preservation 35. The developer shall submit a revised Landscape Plan indicating the species and location of required mitigation for significant tree removal in excess of the amount previously approved during preliminary plat approval. This mitigation amounts to nine Category A trees or 18 Category B trees or 36 Category C trees. Commen�Agreed. INIitigation trees are identified on the Landscape Plan. 36. The developer shall install tree protective measures (i.e. four foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) at the drip line or at the perimeter of the critical root zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees and woodlands. Comment: Agreed. Tree protective measures are set forth on the Landscape Plan. 37. The developer shall contact the City Forestry Division at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan. Comment: Agreed. Parks and Recreation 38. The developer shall exhaust all alternatives to installing the access road in order to satisfy the emergency access and fire safety requirements. If fire safety requirements cannot be met without installing an access road south of Buildings 1 and 2, the redesign shall be reviewed again by the Parks Commission for tree preservation, water quality and wetland issues. Comment: Not applicable. See 21 above. 39. Parks dedication shall be fulfilled through a cash dedication. Comment: Agreed. 40. In lieu of a cash trails dedication, the developer shall install public sidewalks and trails throughout the development. Comment: Agreed. 10601 Smetana Road • Suite 122 • Minnetonka. Minnesota 55343 • (612) 931-2220 • FAX 9 931-0015 July 30, 1996 Mr. Mark Miller, Chair and Members of The Advisory Planning Commission City of Eagan Eagan, MN Dear Mr. Miller and Members, This letter addresses concerns about the Healey Ramme Company's planned development of 282 rental dwelling units in our residential neighborhood. The City of Eagan describes the development as: Outlot B, Eagan Promenade located north of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Lexington Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 10. After attending the Advisory Planning Commission Meeting on July 23, 1996 these questions and concerns are being presented by the residents adjacent to this proposed development: 1. Townhomes or Rental Property? For as long as we have been aware of this project, it has been our understanding that this was a development of townhomes. Have we been mis- informed? One of the undersigned residents called Mr. Healey in January of 1996. He said that the proposed development was "upscale townhomes". In each of our contacts with the City of Eagan on this project, it has been called a townhome development. When recently signing easement rights to the City of Eagan for the construction of the road to access the project, we were shown maps that indicated townhomes. When did the project change from townhomes to rental? A rental project has the potential to affect us and our community much differently than a townhouse project. 1 qFCEiVF0 JUL 3 IPQF 2. Neighborhood Concept Do rental units lend themselves to the neighborhood and community idea? The developer is promoting this project as a "neighborhood" idea, with a real "community feel" to it. We feel that renting tends to lend itself to a disconnection from the community, because of its temporary nature. Some of us have been renters before owning our homes. We all agree that living in a rental complex does not have the feel of neighborhood and community. Renters don't typically bond to the community. Rental complexes are transient, the population is in constant change. 3. Impact on Traffic How will 282 rental units impact traffic on Lexington Ave. and the new road that intersects with Lexington Ave.? Most households own two or more cars. This means possibly another 600 plus vehicles traveling through our neighborhood daily. Lexington Ave. is already a busy road. This will further complicate traffic congestion and create more noise for our neighborhood. There will be constant traffic between the two homes of the residents on either side of the road accessing the rental project, meaning more noise and less privacy. 4. Rental Costs We learned at the July 23 meeting of the Planning Commission that the cost of renting one of these units will range up to $1,400 a month. Mr. Healey said that he knows for a fact that this is desired by certain renters. Has anyone seen his research for the desirability of such high cost rent? Will units sit unrented if the rents are too high? What will happen to the project if the units are in reality too expensive to rent? Will the project become economically obsolete? We feel that the high rents cause more uncertainty about this project 2 and its long term viability. 5. Trees and Wildlife This area of Eagan has beautiful trees, and fascinating wildlife. We have had the opportunity to observe this and to be delighted by this daily in our yards. This project will strip the land of 200 year oaks and the habitat of deer, fox, and other small mammals and birds, including a variety of types owls and other birds of prey. Once this area of Eagan loses these precious natural resources, it loses something special and irreplaceable. 6. Property Values What will this large rental project, with it's high density population do to the value of our properties? How will this project look next to our properties, pleasing and integrated, or the opposite? Does the transient nature of this development become a factor in the value of our properties? When and if the time comes, will we have difficulty selling our properties? One of the undersigned residents has recently tried to sell her property. Prospective buyers consistently became disinterested when her realtor disclosed the development plans adjacent to the project. In frustration, she has currently taken her property off of the market. There are many reasons to believe that our property values will decrease. This has the potential for hardship on residents having their financial futures tied up in their properties. 7. Something Special for Eagan? The developer has presented this project to the Planning Commission as something "wonderful, special and unique" for Eagan. Does the developer live in Eagan? Is he a committed community member? Are his concerns for Eagan or for financial gains? We feel that the residents have -the community's best interests as a priority in regards to this project. Residents that we have talked 3 to (outside of our neighborhood) are bothered by the idea of more high density housing in Eagan. The Lexington Ave. and Yankee Doodle Rd. area of Eagan is already populated densely from rental housing. 8. Developer's Insensitivity to Residents Why have the neighbors adjacent to this project not been contacted by the developer? The project was presented to the Planning Commission with no mention of the existing neighborhood. We were shocked and disheartened at Mr. Healey's presentation of this project to the Planning Commission, without any recognition of or concern about its impact on the residents. How does our neighborhood fit into this? 9. Eagan Promenade... Unique and Special Will a rental complex this large enhance the Eagan Promenade idea? As residents we have been watching closely the Promenade project. The local news releases have been promoting the Promenade as something exceptional and special to Eagan. We feel that high density population in this area does not enhance the unique and special qualities that we understand the Promenade is intended to have. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, in your remarks at the meeting you pointed out that this would be our last opportunity to develop a pristine piece of property and make the Promenade not only a showcase for Eagan, but the greater metropolitan area. You commented that the Promenade would be a place people would want to visit. In this we concur. We feel that the approval of 282 high density rental units would irreparably destroy the integrity of the entire project, and one of Eagan's most valued assets, the giant oaks, which were seedlings when George Washington was completing his term as president. Eagan would be left with just another apartment complex and shopping �J mall. We suggest strongly that every member of the Planning Commission visit our neighborhood and view the project site before making any further decisions about this development. The view from the established neighborhood is much different than looking at the developer's plans. We ask that the Planning Commission consider our questions and concerns and act in the best interests of the citizens of Eagan. Respectfully, Don and Pat Michaletz 3255 S. Lexington Ave. Robert and Shirley Widman 3265 S. Lexington Ave. Ellen K. Costello 3305 S. Lexington Ave. MarceliAio Salvie'o-Riva 3325 S. Lexington Ave. June and Stn tc,�h 3345 S. Lexington A -77 _! 5 7L, To: The Advisory Planning Commission City of Eagan Eagan, MN While listening to Mr. Healey's remarks at the July 23rd Planning Commission meeting it became quite clear that no previous thought had been given to the impact this development would have on the residents. Unless of course we were (wrongly) considered as elderly, compliant people who would accept the status quo quietly. A little background. We purchased an acre of Mr. Sell's farm in 1954. We built our house and moved here in 1956. There was a gentle slope to the street (a dirt road really). After a few years the County found it necessary to improve the road and we lost a considerable piece of Lexington Ave. frontage. Our slope disappeared and we had a hill covered with weeds and rocks. A few years later they needed more upgrading and another piece disappeared. Now the hill was even steeper. In place of the grass we has so laboriously grown we once again had rocks. They compensated us for the loss of our grass with a heavy dose of ANNUAL RYE GRASS SEED. I have spent years coaxing a ground cover to grow on this hill but I am no longer physically able to continue. We have grown many trees and bushes along this edge of our property to try to eliminate some of the dirt and noise emanating from the heavy traffic. So many trucks! Now they want 17 feet more which will bring the street practically up to the house. Goodbye shrubbery. Now we are asked to sign an easement to make a right turn lane possible for the benefit of the developers. This will be a terribly hazardous left turn onto Lexington Ave. When the Dakota County Engineer was asked how we could do this safely with five lanes of traffic his answer was not to make left turns! If the developers would buy our house we would be willing to move which would eliminate a good deal of friction now existing. Putting our property up for sale is not an option. The information we have from a realtor is that this property would be very difficult to move. Stan and I would appreciate your taking our situation into consideration when conducting your deliberations. From: Stan and June Ketcham 3345 S. Lexington Ave. (1st house north of Yankee Doodle on Lexington Ave.) - ' RECEIVED JUL 3 r�F ------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- Wiz: SITE PLAN ,� soft �. L D F v U T� qy� 1 0 _ 1 1 T G � 1 1 1 � , e 1 ; 1 1 : - 1 1 1 � ' , II _ 1 - ru, .7; 'fid 1: ■..1.. 1, 11'A 1 rrl III � YI 1 ii ------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- Wiz: SITE PLAN ,� soft �. Rif M . wil AMIII E A � ", lc�� No 91 D r t p '.' ,•;;"'! ♦f'�'` !` cam-- - - -------------------------- -- ---=------- z]PZ-ay k U fill, 01 -pp G; it r L ----------- i :r.M.t 111:1 PRELIMINARY LIGHTING Np� 'f Iia } �i _ tis I t�• � \ � � � ill :� 1 - sir (3i=• ',:: � ! �i � ''{'tii): .. � � q{iE.` _1 I ..1 I'���' �;� •rtir!�,s of :'s �_;; f{!ff�3t ._ • ��� { 1 ��' = �K' I's'/;7 1 i=����• of i i,•'+�/� its (��� \ "� �"� _�-� j r �� .,1 � ♦ _ � Ifo a I � tel'• `, � �\�\ • %: �'� �'� i f: i � � - { I .` 111 WE '✓"+•,.`i��_ � i ° i I—� �., q • •f i T� � i� 11 Ems' ����\ . � \ ���� �R .r: ' "�- .� ,. =' I of ,�,_ •� - � �. 1 , _ +•. �,:•+i ^'` 1 ?Is1, ' I I I l 11 7 Le I l -1 -- ) t� •Y ... 9 e .`�.—=.rte•.' . I 1 ' i I I I — __ � _-.._,-.--:..._ : — :_ r•EOFo�E� LANDSCAPE ;,-02 ?96 FR] 15..09 FAA 613395362 3R%' EL`•ESS K � 3Zia N ..:� e..,z ? c Z00 al SIGN ELEVATION PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: July 19, 1996 CASE #: 10-RZ-15-6-96 APPLICANT: Healey Ramme Company HEARING DATE: July 23, 1996 PROPERTY OWNER: Opus Northwest, L.L.C. PREPARED BY: Pam Dudziak REQUEST: Preliminary Planned Development Amendment LOCATION: Outlot B, Eagan Promenade COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: CA - Central Area ZONING: PD - Planned Development 50:-111- 1 Healey Ramme Company is requesting a Preliminary Planned Development Amendment for the residential portion of the Eagan Promenade Development. The proposal consists of 282 multifamily dwelling units in six buildings on the 28.74 acre Outlot B of Eagan Promenade. The property is located northeast of the intersection of Lexington Avenue and Yankee Doodle Road in the southeast quarter of Section 10. 61' ot I9 rI.eIIZM.���� Chapter 11.20, Subd. 8, B., Determination. states: "In considering any petition for such district, the Planning Commission and the Council in the interests of carrying out the intent and purpose of this Subdivision, shall determine whether or not such planned development will: (1) better adapt itself to its physical and aesthetic setting and that of surrounding lands than does development of the underlying zoning district; (2) be feasible for the owner and developer economically to complete according to proposed plans; (3) benefit the community at large to a greater degree than would development of the underlying zoning district." ,::: �J/? Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 page 2 an a g m ew In December I995, the City Council approved a Preliminary Planned Development for Opus Corporation for 120 acres north of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Lexington Avenue. The Preliminary Planned Development included both commercial and residential components, and approved up to 294 multifamily dwelling units in five buildings for the residential portion of the development. The Preliminary Planned Development Agreement as approved establishes the development's uses, setbacks, maximum building square footages, internal site circulation and parking requirements. When the Preliminary Planned Development was approved in December, the City Council did not approve the landscaping and design details. The Agreement requires that the developer submit several revised master plan exhibits in the form of a Plan Amendment. The required Amendment for the commercial portion of the development was approved in February 1996. Healey Ramme Company is now requesting approval of a Preliminary Planned Development Amendment for the residential portion of the Eagan Promenade Development. 6 e► Topographic changes throughout the site are very significant with general elevation declining over 60 feet from the northeast and southwest corners to the southeast corner. The site has scattered wooded areas and significant trees characterized by mature hardwoods, steep slopes and wetlands. These physical conditions present significant constraints to site design for the development of the property. The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Vacant land, zoned Limited Industrial, guided Central Area South - Proposed medical office building, zoned Limited Business, guided Central Area; auto service facility and Blue Cross/Blue Shield office building, zoned Planned Development, guided Central Area East - Vacant land, zoned Limited Industrial, guided Industrial; three single family residences, zoned Agricultural, guided Central Area West - Eagan Promenade Commercial Planned Development, zoned Planned Development, guided Central Area II_ Ili _' e l 't.e'M The proposal consists of 282 multifamily dwelling units in six buildings on the 28.74 acre Outlot B of Eagan Promenade. The buildings have one, two and three story elements and are designed Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 3 with landscaped courtyards over underground garages. A centrally located outdoor swimming pool and activity center with a party room is provided. The developer has indicated a tot lot play area will also be installed, but a location for this facility has not been determined and is not shown on the plans. A bituminous trail connection to the tot lot should be provided. Trails are proposed in the southwest part of the site providing pedestrian access to Promenade Avenue, and in the northwest part of the site to take advantage of the pond amenity and provide pedestrian access to the activity center. The buildings were designed and located to take up grade change, and preserve and take advantage of the natural amenities of the site. The original Planned Development showed the buildings in the same general locations as the Amendment, however, the proposed Amendment consists of a different composition of types of units provided, has fewer units than in the original proposal, and has increased the building footprints of several of the buildings. The combined effect of these design changes has resulted in tradeoffs. For example, fewer units are provided but the buildings are larger, the natural amenities are preserved, but health and safety concerns are not satisfied. The changes from the original proposal are detailed below. First, the original proposal which approved a density of 294 units included 9 studio units, 43 one bedroom units, 26 two bedroom units, 112 two bedroom townhomes and 104 three bedroom townhomes. The proposed Amendment provides 86 one bedroom units, 110 two bedroom units, and 86 three bedroom units. Because the unit composition has changed, and density calculations are based on the unit composition with larger units requiring more lot area per unit, the density of the proposed Amendment is evaluated in detail later in this report. Second, the design of Building 3 has been modified so that the building is adjacent to the east property line, with the driveway on the west side of the building. In the original Preliminary Planned Development, Building 3 was located on the interior of the site, with the driveway and parking east of the building adjacent to Lexington Avenue. Building 3 is also larger than shown on the original proposal. The redesign of Building 3 has resulted in a deviation from the setback on the east side. Finally, Buildings 1, 4 and 5 have been enlarged. Building 1 has been extended to the west, and Buildings 4 and 5 have been enlarged to the south. The redesign of Building 5 now preserves several mature hardwood trees on the northeast corner of the site. In some instances, however, the design changes present additional difficulties or exacerbate issues previously identified with the development of this site. Additionally, because of the length Building 1, emergency access to the south side is required and consequently, raises issues of natural resource protection south of the building. Without shifting the building to the north or other redesign, there is competition between health safety and natural resource concerns. To accommodate both health safety needs and natural resource protection, a revised development plan is necessary that will likely result in a reduction in the total number of units. �J r Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 4 Performance Standards - The subject site is zoned PD (Planned Development). The purpose of a PD is to encourage a more creative, varied and efficient use of the land. Therefore, flexibility from typical zoning performance standards can be determined to be acceptable to allow the development to better adapt itself to the area and provides a greater benefit to the community than would development of the site with strict application of zoning performance standards. Performance standards can include such things as setbacks, building coverage, building height, parking, landscaping, exterior building finishes, etc. Compatibility with Surrounding Area - In October 1995, the City adopted the Central Area Plan as an amendment to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The Central Area Plan called for mixed commercial and residential development in the northeast quadrant of the Central Area. The residential component was to be a medium to high density housing development of six or more units per acre. The Preliminary Planned Development for Eagan Promenade was evaluated with this in mind. During the Preliminary Planned Development process, it was determined that the higher density multifamily residential use is compatible with the surrounding area and the established goals and policies of the City. Density - The proposal is for 282 multifamily dwelling units on 28.74 acres and a gross density of 9.8 units per acre. Ponding areas comprise approximately 33% of the site area, so the developable area of the site is approximately 19.22 acres, and a density of 14.67 units per acre. However, 10% of the ponding area can be added to the actual developable area as a credit for ponding areas for the purpose of density calculation. The resulting developable area with this 10% credit is 20.18 acres and a net density of 14 units per acre. The minimum lot area requirements are based on the number of bedrooms in each unit, with 3 - bedroom units requiring more lot area than 1 -bedroom units. In addition, these lot areas can be reduced by 300 square feet per unit to account for underground garage spaces. At least one underground parking stall is being provided for each dwelling unit. Based on the proposed mix of 1, 2 and 3 -bedroom units, the required average lot area is 3,162 square feet per unit. The average lot area provided per unit is 3,120 square feet. Although the building design consists of both two and three story elements, this calculation for required lot area was based on the standards for a three story building which requires less lot area per unit than for a two story building. A more precise calculation of the required lot area allocated for both the two story and three story elements has not been prepared, but would result in a larger amount of lot area required. qze'1:57 Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 5 REQUIRED LOT AREA PER UNIT 86 1 -BR units @ 2,600 s.f./unit = 223,600 s.f. 110 2 -BR units @ 2,900 s.f./unit = 319,000 s.f. 86 3 -BR units @ 4,060 s.f./unit = 349,160 s.f. 891,760 s.f. AVERAGE LOT AREA PER UNIT Required = 891,760 s.f. / 282 units = 3,162 s.f per unit Provided = 878,860 s.f. / 282 units = 3,116 s.f per unit In addition to lot area, building coverage cannot exceed 20 percent of the site area. Building coverage for this development is approximately 18 percent. Setbacks - Required building setbacks at the perimeter of the site are 50 feet from a public right of way, and 30 feet for side and rear yards. Except for Building 3 which is proposed at a 30 foot setback from the Lexington Avenue right of way, these setbacks are satisfied. Building 3 was redesigned from the Preliminary Planned Development. The plan approved in the Preliminary Planned Development showed the building on the interior of the site with the driveway and garage area located east of the building adjacent to Lexington Avenue. The Amendment has the driveway on the interior of the site and Building 3 located adjacent to Lexington Avenue, and the building does not satisfy the setback requirements on the east side. Minimum setback distances of 30 feet between structures are maintained throughout the site. In consideration of the proposed setback deviation, noise mitigation measures should be employed. Correspondence from Dakota County states that traffic volumes indicate that current Minnesota noise standards for residential units could be exceeded for the proposed Eagan Promenade Second Addition. The County is requiring that in order for noise levels from the highway to meet acceptable levels for adjacent residential units, substantial building setbacks, buffer areas and other noise mitigation elements must be incorporated into this development. The developer is aware of these requirements and has indicated that the development will comply. The developer should provide information about construction techniques and landscaping to mitigate traffic noise on site, particularly for Building 3. Perking - The. City Code requires that two parking stalls be provided for each multifamily dwelling unit, one of which must be enclosed or underground, resulting in a minimum of 564 required parking stalls, 282 of which must be enclosed. All parking stalls provided are nine feet wide, consistent with what was approved in the Preliminary Planned Development. Total parking provided is 585 stalls, 443 of which are underground garage spaces, 29 are detached garage spaces and 113 are surface parking. An additional 31 surface parking spaces have been identified as proof of parking for a total of 616 parking stalls. Because most of the Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 6 units have more than one bedroom, and 86 have three bedrooms, the developer is providing parking in the amount of two enclosed stalls for each three bedroom unit, and 104 of the 110 two bedroom units. One enclosed stall is provided for each one bedroom unit, and six of the two bedroom units. The balance of the parking stalls are provided in surface parking. Although the minimum Code requirements for parking are met, the Police Department has expressed concern that the minimum amount of parking required is insufficient. Insufficient parking can lead to illegal overflow parking on this private street which is not designed to accommodate on -street parking and will be signed with "no parking" signs. Past experience has led the Police Department to recommend a standard of two stalls for the first bedroom, and one additional stall for each additional bedroom. Applying this standard would result in a total parking requirement of 846 parking stalls. The developer is providing 21 stalls more than the City Code requires, and has shown proof of parking for an additional 31 stalls. Due to the significant site constraints, the developer believes it is not practical to provide additional parking. The Police Department has also expressed a concern with security in the underground parking areas. To address the security issue, the Police Department also recommends that adequate lighting with no shadows be provided, walls and ceilings be painted white to reflect light and security cameras with a videotape system be installed. As stipulated in the Preliminary Planned Development Agreement, all parking stalls required by the City Code for each respective building should be constructed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for such respective building. Light~ - A lighting plan was not submitted as required with this application. However, the developer has indicated that driveway and parking lighting and fixtures will be coordinated with the public and commercial elements of the Planned Development. Recessed soffit lighting or globe lighting is proposed to be provided at each unit entry to illuminate patios and sidewalks. Additional sidewalk lighting is proposed with fixtures mounted on three foot poles directing light down only to the walking surface and driveway below. A detailed lighting plan should be submitted showing compliance with the Preliminary Planned Development which stipulates that decorative light fixtures in the residential component of Eagan Promenade shall match the style of those installed in the commercial component and on Promenade Avenue. Landscaping - The site plan has been revised since the landscape plan was submitted. The changes to the site plan were some shifting of buildings and altering of driveway widths. The analysis of proposed landscaping is based on the earlier plan since a revised landscape plan was not prepared. The landscape plan shows trees along the drive areas, landscaped courtyards and sidewalks and foundation plantings. Only the courtyard areas are shown to be irrigated. Staff identifies several areas where the proposed landscaping appears to be insufficient. First, along Lexington Avenue east of Building 3. In this area, the developer is requesting a deviation of 20 feet from the 17f Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 7 required 50 foot building setback. If the setback deviation is approved, additional landscaping should be installed east of Building 3 to screen and buffer the building from Lexington Avenue. This landscaping should be designed to mitigate noise from the Lexington Avenue roadway. Also, in the northwest corner of the site, west of Building 6, the plans show this area will be disturbed for grading, but the landscape plan does not show that this area will be landscaped. The area west of Building 6 should be landscaped to screen the building and serve to stabilize the slope after grading. Landscape detail should be provided for the areas around the activities center and around the gateway, monument, and pylon signs. In addition, landscape detail for typical building foundation plantings and typical courtyard plantings should be provided. The landscape plan should be prepared by a registered landscape architect, and landscape details should be shown at a scale of 1 " = 20'. All plant materials should be identified and labeled, all easements on the property shown, and irrigation provided for all sodded, seeded and landscaped areas. The landscape plan should provide for plant materials sufficient to satisfy the minimum City Code requirement of three percent of the value of the buildings. Amort Noise - The City's Airport Relations Commission is generally recommending that the City continue to limit new residential development north of Yankee Doodle Road east of I -35E and that noise conditions be applied in circumstances where residential development is approved in the context of a larger plan. Until a broader review of the City's land use policies associated with airport noise is completed, the City should consider whether to apply the notice and noise attenuation construction requirements typically applied within the Metropolitan Council's Noise Policy Contours in the case of Eagan Promenade Second Addition. Because the Promenade residential component is an integral part of a larger development and was considered as a part of the overall Promenade Master Plan, such conditions may be an appropriate means of protecting the developer's investment and that of future owners of the property. Architecture - The buildings are designed with landscaped courtyards over the underground garage. They have one, two, and three story elements with gables breaking up roof lines and covered entries breaking up the face of the buildings. Buildings will be of low maintenance vinyl lap siding in gray with black/green roofs. The majority of the 2 and 3 bedroom units will be two-level townhomes. Trash/Recyclable Materials - All trash and recyclable materials containers will be located in the underground garage areas of each building. Signage - Gateway signs are proposed at the entrances to the development from Promenade Avenue on the west side of the site and Northwood Drive north of the site. The gateway sign at the north entrance are shown on the adjacent property, so an easement will need to be acquired from the adjacent property owner to allow the signs to be located on that property. In addition, Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 8 a pylon sign is proposed at the southwest corner of the site at the intersection of Promenade Avenue and Yankee Doodle Road. Monument signs are proposed at the southeast corner of the site at the intersection of Lexington Avenue and Yankee Doodle Road and in the south center of the site on Yankee Doodle Road. The monument sign in the south center of the site onYankee Doodle Road is permitted as a temporary sign under the Preliminary Planned Development Agreement. This sign may remain in place after the first building permit is issued until six months after the last building's Certificate of Occupancy is issued. The gateway signs are proposed to be brick with individual painted wood letters, and the monument signs will have brick supports with a painted wood message area. Details of the pylon sign have not been submitted. All signs should meet the required 10 foot setback from property lines, the monument signs should be no more than 7 feet in height, and the pylon sign no more than 25 feet in height. Detailed signage plans should be submitted prior to Final Planned Development approval. Also prior to Final Planned Development approval, the developer should submit to the city a copy of the executed easement allowing the gateway signs at the north entrance to be located on the adjacent property. ,Access/Street Design - Access is provided to the site via a private road from Promenade Avenue to the west. Healey Ramme is proposing the private road be 26 feet in width, and the portion in front of Building 2 and leading to Building 3 is proposed to be only 22 feet in width. This deviates from what City Code requires and was stipulated in the Preliminary Planned Development Agreement which is a width of 28 feet. In reviewing this deviation, staff has determined a 26 foot width will function adequately and minimize site impacts, however, a 26 foot width standard should be the minimum width on all driveways. The 28 foot width requirement is based on the number of units served by the roadway and does not allow for on - street parking. Additionally, signs indicating "no parking" should be placed along all driveways. Staff has identified access to the south side of Buildings 1 and 2 as a safety issue. In most instances, time is of the essence when responding to medical or rescue calls and access to the buildings from both the front and rear sides is crucial. The Uniform Fire Code requires a 20 foot wide roadway be installed around the buildings to provide access to all units md that the buildings be completely sprinklered. Installation of the emergency access road is complicated by site constraints with steep grades and numerous trees on the south sides of Buildings 1 and 2. The emergency access road is required, however, the Fire Department has agreed to some modification by accepting an access road around the buildings with a minimum 14 foot bituminous or cement surface to handle the weight of a 36,000 to 38,000 pound fire apparatus. The estimated impact of this emergency access roadway on the south side of the building will be significant. These issues area evaluated in other sections of this report. Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 9 Grading - With the exception of the following comments, the grading plan is acceptable and generally consistent with the grading plan approved with the preliminary subdivision. If the emergency access road is installed as required with the building staying in its present location and configuration, it is estimated that the area of disturbance would extend 40 to 50 feet south of the buildings. However, the full impact is unknown at this time since detailed plans of the emergency access road have not been prepared. The grading plan should be revised to reflect the full impact of this roadbed construction on the north slope of Pond DP -5. All proposed and additional retaining walls needed along this slope should be designed and constructed to accommodated the potential loads of emergency vehicles. The grading plan shows grading along the east edge of the site behind Building 4 that creates a low area which will pond water during large storm events. This low area should be filled or pipe outlet installed to provide drainage away from the low area created by the proposed grading. The grading plan shows grading off site and within Dakota County right of way along Lexington Avenue (Dakota County Road 43). The developer will be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits and easements to cover this grading. Storm Drainage - With the exception of the following, the storm drainage plan is acceptable and generally consistent with the storm drainage plan approved with the preliminary subdivision. The proposed storm sewer between Ponds DP -6.1 and DP -5.1 does not restrict the outflow from Pond DP -6.1 as required by the City's Storm Water Management Plan. The storm sewer outlet should restrict outflow to two cubic feet per second (cfs) as indicated in the City's Storm Water Management Plan adopted in 1990. Water Quality - This 29 acre multifamily development will generate runoff that will eventually reach LeMay Lake, a Class I direct contact recreation water body located just west of Interstate 35E. This portion of the LeMay Lake drainage basin has been subject to heavy development pressures, and the existing conditions for the planned development as well as past review by the Commission has indicated a preference for on-site ponding to mitigate downstream impacts on LeMay Lake to minimize future restoration costs for the lake. In order to protect LeMay Lake from the impact of this development, on-site ponding should be required. Current conditions of the Planned Development call for the excavation of .3 acre-feet of sediment from the southern portion of Pond DP -6 to improve treatment from the northern portion of the site. This condition is reflected in the grading plan dated July 3, 1996. A second condition also requires the creation of a second detention basin, Pond DP -5.1, to treat runoff from the remainder of the site. This condition should be modified to reduce the required wet pond volume and mean depth at normal water level to one acre-foot and three feet respectively. The reduction in required volume reflects a decrease in the impervious coverage and drainage area of the pond compared to that assumed during the initial analyses conducted in April and August 1995. Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 10 Wetlands - The wetland replacement plan approved by the City for Eagan Promenade authorized filling of up to .47 acres of wetland, .046 acres of which is associated with the multifamily residential portion of the project. The replacement plan proposed creation of a total 1.08 acres of wetland. The most recent review of wetland related impacts for the Eagan Promenade Second Addition showed that there is a small Type 3 wetland just over the northern border of this phase of the development that will be impacted by the access road extending south from Northwood Drive to serve this development. This wetland and its impact were not identified in the original survey. Installation of the road will result in filling of .05 acres of this wetland, and the replacement obligation for this impact will be .1 acres. The amount of replacement wetland for the Eagan Promenade project under the plan previously approved by the city will result in the creation of .14 acres of wetland in excess of that needed to meet the 2:1 mitigation requirement for the original impact. Thus, the developer has submitted a request to apply this excess mitigation to compensate for the additional wetland impact. Staff recommends that the request be approved, and that the conditions associated with the Planned Development Agreement covering both phases of the Eagan Promenade project be revised to show a total wetland impact of .52 acres, a minimum mitigation requirement of 1.04 acres of wetland creation, and an actual proposed mitigation of 1.08 acres. Utilities - With the exception of the following, the sanitary sewer plan is acceptable and generally consistent with the utility plan approved with the preliminary subdivision. The proposed sanitary sewer layout does not provide for sanitary sewer stubs to Parcels 040-75 and 050-75 as conditioned with preliminary plat approval. Sanitary sewer should be provided to these parcels through this development. The proposed water main plan is consistent with the plan approved at the time of the preliminary subdivision. Pedestrian Access/Trails - All trails within this development are private trails and are being constructed by the developer in lieu of a cash trails dedication. Pedestrian access to the exterior doors of all units is provided by a system of sidewalks. These sidewalks also provide an internal pedestrian connection to the central activity center building. A five foot bituminous trail is provided from Building 1 to Promenade Avenue and from Building 5 to Northwood Drive. The trail extending to Promenade Avenue provides a pedestrian connection to the commercial portion of Eagan Promenade, which is west of Promenade Avenue. A six foot aggregate trail extends around the east side of the pond located on the adjacent lot to the west, and to the parking lot by the activity center. A trail connection to the sidewalks and Building 6 should be provided. Easements/Rights of Way/Permits - The proposed alignment of the storm sewer pipe outlet between Ponds DP -6.1 and DP -5.1 does not provide for sufficient easement between the pipe and Building 1 at its northwest comer. The alignment should be revised to provide for sufficient easement at this location. Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 11 Tree Preservation - The preliminary plat approval for this development provided for the condition that any additional significant tree removal would require mitigation. The proposed development plan submitted (dated July 3, 1996) shows a difference in the amount of trees being removed because of revised grade limits and a redesign of building locations. The following table illustrates significant tree removal for both July 1995 plans and July 1995 revised plans. Existing Significant Trees Trees To Be Removed Percent Of Total Trees Removed July _1995 825 July 1996 825 235 255 28.5% 30.9% During 1995 meeting regarding this project, staff requested that Healey Ramme redesign Building 4 (shown as Building 5 on the current plans) in the northeast corner of the property to preserve as many of the existing specimen oak trees as possible. The revised plan reflects this redesign. The overall effect of this redesign has resulted in the preservation of more large specimen oak trees at the expense of smaller oak and other hardwood trees. Additional significant tree removal on the revised plan totals 45 trees; additional significant preservation on the revised plan totals 25 trees resulting in a net loss of 20 additional trees. The redesign has resulted in the preservation of nine large oak trees with diameters ranging from 21 to 36 inches. The remaining preserved trees are smaller oak, black cherry, cedar and cottonwood. Only four oaks greater than 20" diameter are being removed as a result of the redesign, with the remainder of these removals being smaller oak, black cherry, elm, cedar and cottonwood. Mitigation for the additional removal was calculated related to the diameter inch of trees preserved versus removed. The goal of the redesign was to preserve larger specimen oaks. The developer will be required to mitigate the net impact of design changes which calculate to the installation of nine Category A trees (minimum 4" diameter for deciduous trees and 12' height for coniferous trees) or 18 Category B trees (2-1/5" and 6') or 36 Category C trees (1-1/2" and 4'). This additional mitigation is in addition to any landscape requirement. A revised landscape plan should be submitted indicating the species and location of this additional mitigation. Staff finds the Tree Preservation Plan acceptable as proposed with the following modifications. First, the developer should submit a revised landscape plan indicating the species and location of required mitigation for significant tree removal in excess of the amount previously approved during preliminary plat approval. This mitigation amounts to nine Category A trees or 18 Category B trees or 36 Category C trees. Second, the developer should install Tree Protective Measures (i.e. four foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) be installed at the drip line or at the perimeter of the critical root zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees and woodlands to be preserved. Finally, the developer should contact the City Forestry Division at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan. Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 12 To provide the required emergency access drive on the south side of Buildings 1 and 2, the area of disturbance is estimated to extend about 50 feet from the building, an additional 30 feet from the grading limits shown on the plans. The retaining wall necessary to support the roadway is estimated to range from six to 20 feet in height and therefore, would probably be a two-tiered wall. Additional trees would need to be removed, including 37 significant trees of which four are specimen hardwoods (oaks exceeding 30" diameter) and two oaks over 20" in diameter. One of the specimen trees, a 44" oak, is one of the largest Red Oaks in the City. In addition to these 37 significant trees there would also be the removal of hundreds of smaller diameter trees which serve as a visual buffer and erosion control on the hillside north of Pond DP -5. The estimated mitigation of 92 category B trees for the additional removal associated with construction of the emergency access road would be in addition to any landscape requirements. Because of the limited planting space on this site following completion of the landscape plan, staff would be recommending a cash mitigation. If the access road is installed and tree removal occurs as estimated, the cash mitigation calculates to $27,600. Although the City Code allows for a cash mitigation for the additional tree loss, the installation of the emergency access road around Buildings 1 and 2 in the present location would negate attempts to preserve the natural amenity. This site was originally designed with Buildings 1 and 2 high enough on the hill to allow the hillside vegetation to remain as a buffer, and the Preliminary Planned Development Agreement stipulated that there be no grade disturbance south of Buildings 1 and 2. Because an access road is required to be installed, the developer should provide a tree mitigation plan. As an alternative, the developer should consider a redesign of the buildings to provide emergency access and minimize environmental impacts. A redesign will most likely reduce the site density. The Parks Commission, at their regular meeting on July 15, 1996, recommended that the developer exhaust all alternatives to installing the access road in order to satisfy the emergency access and fire safety requirements. If fire safety requirements cannot be met without installing an access road south of Buildings 1 and 2, the redesign should come back to the Parks Commission for review of tree preservation, water quality and wetland issues. Parks and Recreation - In earlier concepts of this development, a public park component was considered. However, in the Preliminary Planned Development which was approved, the open space component was to be private, but the developer was required install a private trail around the pond located on the adjacent lot to the west. Consistent with this, Healey Ramme Company is proposing a six foot aggregate trail along the west portion of the site (east of the pond) to take advantage of the pond amenity and provide a pedestrian connection between the residential and commercial portions of the development. Staff has been working with Healey Ramme and Opus Corporation (which owns the adjacent property to the west) to coordinate the trail connections between the two properties and to reevaluate the feasibility of installing the trail completely around the pond due to steep grades and woodlands on the west side of the pond. Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 13 Parks dedication will be provided through a cash dedication, consistent with the Preliminary Planned Development. The developer is installing public sidewalks and trails system throughout the development in lieu of a cash trails dedication. The proposed Amendment is consistent with the city's Central Area Plan and is compatible with the surrounding area and the city's goals and policies. The development is designed to tie in to the commercial portion of the Eagan Promenade Planned Development through the lighting scheme and trail connections. However, there remain unresolved issues with the development as proposed. The primary issue is balancing the public health and safety with preservation of the natural resources and amenities of the site. Other unresolved issues include landscaping, lighting, mitigation for highway noise, and trail alignment to satisfy the requirements of the Preliminary Planned Development. KIM MR -13 31i OF1 To approve or deny an Amendment to the Preliminary Planned Development for 282 multifamily dwelling units in six buildings for Outlot B, Eagan Promenade. 1. The property shall be platted. 2. All standard building setbacks shall be met except for Building 3 which is approved with a 30 foot setback from the east property line. 3. The developer shall provide information about construction techniques and landscaping to mitigate traffic noise on site, particularly for Building 3. 4. All parking stalls required by the City Code for each respective building should be constructed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for such respective building. 5. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted prior to Final Planned Development approval. Decorative light fixtures in the residential component of Eagan Promenade shall match the style of those installed in the commercial component and on Promenade Avenue. o� Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 14 Landscaping 6. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, the developer shall submit to the City a revised landscape plan and landscape details prepared by a registered landscape architect. All plant materials shall be identified and labeled, and provide for irrigation of all sodded, seeded and landscaped areas. Landscape details should be shown at a scale of 1" = 20'. 7. Additional landscaping should be installed east of Building 3 to screen and buffer the building from Lexington Avenue. This landscaping shall be designed to mitigate noise from the Lexington Avenue roadway. The area west of Building 6 should be landscaped to screen the building and serve to stabilize the slope after grading. 9. Landscape detail should be provided for the area around the activities center and around the gateway, monument, and pylon signs. In addition, landscape detail for typical building foundation plantings and typical courtyard plantings should be provided. The landscape plan should be prepared by a registered landscape architect, and landscape details should be shown at a scale of 1" = 20'. I0. The Iandscape plan shall identify and label all plant materials, show all easements on the property, and provide for irrigation of all sodded, seeded and landscaped areas. The amount of plant materials provided shall be sufficient to satisfy the minimum City Code requirement of three percent of the value of the buildings. 11. Architectural designs and construction methods for new construction within the development shall incorporate sound attenuation standards sufficient to achieve an interior sound level of 45 dBA for airport noise mitigation. 12. A notice shall be recorded on the deed for each lot and/or condominium unit indicating that it is likely to be exposed to aircraft noise. 13. The developer shall construct buildings and employ other noise mitigation elements to meet Minnesota noise standards. 14. The developer shall submit samples of exterior building materials with the application for Final Planned Development. o� Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 15 15. All trash and recyclable materials containers shall be located within the buildings. 16. Detailed signage plans shall be submitted prior to Final Planned Development approval. 17. All signs shall meet the required 10 foot setback from property lines. The monument signs should be no more than 7 feet in height. 18. The residential monument sign on the corner of Yankee Doodle Road and Lexington Avenue shall conform to the City intersection monumentation concept for Yankee Doodle Road. 19. The monument sign in the south center of the site along Yankee Doodle Road is permitted as a temporary sign. The sign may remain in place after the first building permit is issued until six months after the last building's Certificate of Occupancy is issued. 20. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, the developer should submit to the city a copy of the executed easement allowing the gateway signs at the north entrance to be located on the adjacent property. Gradin 21. The grading plan shall be revised to show the full impact of the required roadbed construction on the slope south of Buildings 1 and 2. 22. All retaining walls built along the south slope of Buildings 1 and 2 shall be designed and constructed to accommodate the potential loads of emergency vehicles. 23. The developer shall obtain all necessary permits from Dakota County for grading work within Lexington Avenue (Dakota County Road 43) right of way. 24. The storm sewer outlet pipe from Pond DP -6.1 to Pond DP -5.1 shall restrict outflow to 2 cubic feet per second as identified in the City Storm Water Management Plan adopted in 1990. Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 16 ki �_OIM�. 25. Pond DP -5.1 is required to have a minimum wet volume and mean depth at normal water level of one acre-foot and three feet, respectively. 26. The wetland replacement plan should be revised to show a total wetland impact of .52 acres associated with the project. The wetland area to be created for mitigation purposes will remain at 1.08 acres as per. the original approved wetland replacement plan. 27. Sanitary sewer service of sufficient size, depth and capacity shall be provided to Parcels 040-75 and 050-75 through this development. ITNG 28. The plans shall be revised to incorporate a minimum 14 foot wide emergency access road around Buildings 1 and 2 and show the additional tree mitigation and grading impacts associated with construction of the access road. 29. All driveways shall be a minimum of 26 feet in width. 30. Signs indicating "no parking" shall be placed along all driveways. Site Amenities/Trail 31. A tot lot play area shall be provided and the location identified on the final site plan. A bituminous trail connection to the tot lot play area shall also be provided. 32. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, a pedestrian connection to the commercial development west of the site shall be finalized. 33. A barrier such as a bench or some other feature identifying the trail terminus shall be installed and identified on the final plans at the northern trail terminus adjacent to Lexington Addition. 34. The proposed alignment of the storm sewer pipe outlet between Ponds DP -6.1 and DP -5.1 shall be revised to provide for sufficient easement between the pipe and Building 1 at its northwest corner. j OG Planning Report - Healey Ramme Company July 23, 1996 Page 17 35. The developer shall submit a revised Landscape Plan indicating the species and location of required mitigation for significant tree removal in excess of the amount previously approved during preliminary plat approval. This mitigation amounts to nine Category A trees or 18 Category B trees or 36 Category C trees. 36. The developer shall install tree protective measures (i.e. four foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) at the drip line or at the perimeter of the critical root zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees and woodlands. 37. The developer shall contact the City Forestry Division at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan. 38. The developer shall exhaust all alternatives to installing the access road in order to satisfy the emergency access and fire safety requirements. If fire safety requirements cannot be met without installing an access road south of Buildings 1 and 2, the redesign shall be reviewed again by the Parks Commission for tree preservation, water quality and wetland issues. 39. Parks dedication shall be fulfilled through a cash dedication. 40. In lieu of a cash trails dedication, the developer shall install public sidewalks and trails throughout the development. �/¢�p�F• -iSERVICE > wl j\ RAINIER q, 9?I <CC V V 1 OF CS o I �, h Z x J-�` W + 90� �i �� W'i g4 8i' CO. RD. 26 j �� I i J L CO.RR 26 '' LONE Dr a KNOB . OR PARK 26 ! III�� =�02 �� APOLLO 01 WERVIE RD..�,�� aACE r< CIUBVIEW DR: i ZIP UJ 0 TpwERYEw aD. I PS a' N t � IIII I � r—J OV�� G�•. I{ SITE DRIP m li YI I �++ARICE I z ,ODLE ROAD 110 in i 3 o r 3?1 � O O � a W :. DUCK 0 W _ ! V AL ` '^ ¢ CRESTRIOGE LA. FT F7 jy� (YKEE AMARAC PT. IRCH PT. ORWAY PT. OREST RIDGE TR.ONWOOD LA. EDWOOD PT. PRUCE PT. DOODLE ROAD YYDR. p Tp WN i Z!j<Iit GEMINI RD. ZI WI i SII Z 60 RMISE MLLS )LF CoLp-cz LN. LOCATION C � ■ ; 1 1 r 1� 1 --MEMO dp—ON h. i • , - I �s •�I 111 � �■ 7�r1 I Bp= 1 a Vo W4 a 'OR ow NION �IY�11 4W_ w N ^Ulm 1 � c �1 O .; c I h 1its- - - M'Y ILar_�.l r�� �: ' "T .�- 1 1 vkj V/ --- i d z •'Z-- Irs' ,■ r i Ir r. r. Is cc La ' l i CD 2c cc co cc 00. 1 I •• r�♦ �� 1'•', 1'�` °:t4�� 4401 _ a I Ma4.1. 440L rJ lk x I. IL r• i PRELIMINARY PLAT r - s A OG r4 or s ° 1 1 / I I 1 , I Sc DG, x '_g 4 AG. �- ------ - - t � 0 -4 19 E ----•----------------•----------------------------- �.....__..------ ersa------------------------- "rrar---------" ,ri M - �.._°"` `. w ►.� SITE PLAN •__------' -'-__... .- .• --� r-.--' '_ .__. __ ; `^ - ,` • X11 yJ� e -� ��•n r 8 y 1 I j�1� . . ni ti, a \•1 i t f '9,E` - .- C0 , . `, 1 '1 \' : •. i`' t r' \ die 1/// !. filll E..,.E � � �• '/ �• •� •� ',� `� I. i �_ 1. � � r. , l ' // _ ♦ - - ". ,1ti,{� __7. .., -,, •;����._-_.•..-i-�..'T��.-.:+i.: � lily .. As ix. +-_.. ... .....•...._ IME PRDR[NkDE �At_.:.IQ.., LANDSCAPE I -`t - _ -" �� _ I Y�`� ISI '^: d '•1 w j __ - •I � ,'�1• �. I'T it \., 'v � - �.-- .77 '14 IT aiJ4• L . t - ' _ •'� _ - - ..E JAI PF IV I r 47 421 b ePl- N, L CZ 11- t,r,�1 till F, Tr � ��i, �,- i r �-wi!+1 �S•: �j i�,r.,_,((�m�n ,�1 ��:t11 :.:.:�i ii �� � � (,l� �r•' t �!it jgu! � � = i i ' I ! !ti' 'F:.! f q�,r p• L'r-! 1 4`•� •;� {'� :: «i P t �!1 • �.�N[.r+ Ir;r{rFtitl�i i�i•r ii �'�iit 11 �fY1 ► �'��'�"�' PRELIMINARY — vr'7f �.]-Hr � IL7�T .1-.�waic r.•r., GRADING/DRAINAGE o ►► r r r p r -r ► r PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN ►► r r r p r -r ► r PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN I /l(� SIGNAGE/GARAGE I ����� 'ii' til! 1 I •� � I � � � � Jill q 111' il u !III a TYPICAL ELEVATION 1 � 1 R 1 � l�I 1'1' '1- 1• � � lii� � � h � � ill to i iM ACTIVITY CENTER 1 1 �I i ■ ;1 I ;1 EMMA. ■� ' mmm mmm 9 !I dl■Ir ill to i iM ACTIVITY CENTER F n 0 . . . . . . . . . . . .. ........... /� 7 ---- ------ ji; \%6' A�N� - ................ ----------------------- ............... ............. ----------------------------- -------------- 0 . . . . . . . . . . . .. ........... /� 7 ---- ------ ji; \%6' A�N� - -, - -V ORIGINAL PD (APPROVED 1995) ................ ............ -, - -V ORIGINAL PD (APPROVED 1995) Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 City Council Meeting C. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AND PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - HONEY TREE LTD. ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve or deny a Preliminary Subdivision for Honey Tree First Addition consisting of two lots, previously platted as Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2, Mari Acres Second Addition. To approve or deny a Preliminary Planned Development consisting of two four-story hotels including on -sale liquor for Lot 1 of the proposed Honey Tree First Addition. FACTS: 61 In May of this year the applicant presented a similar development and subdivision proposal for this site which the City Council denied. A summary of how the current proposal differs from the previous proposal is outlined in the attached memo. The proposed Preliminary Subdivision consists of two reconfigured lots on the 4.83 acre site previously platted as Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2, Mari Acres Second Addition. The property is currently zoned CSC, Community Shopping Center. The proposed Preliminary Planned Development, as compared to the CSC zoning standards, includes deviations for building height, setbacks, green space, signage, and parking. The APC conducted a public hearing on this proposal at its regular meeting on July 23, 1996, and recommends approval of the Preliminary Subdivision and the Preliminary Planned Development subject to the conditions listed in the APC minutes. ISSUES: In response to issues raised at the June 18, 1996 City Council meeting, the applicant's revised proposal includes both hotels being reduced from five stories to four stories and the removal of the restaurant component. The total number of units is 212, 26 more than the original proposal. Concern was expressed at the July APC meeting that the current proposal (without the restaurant) was less desirable than the original development plan. The overall site parking is short 36 stalls, based on a conservative calculation of one space for every three seats of the convention center, and all parking stalls are proposed to be 9.5 feet wide. 'a o ► Neighborhood residents are concerned that the revised proposal will be imposing on the residential area in terms of building mass and related traffic generation. BACKGROUND/ATTACHMENTS: APC minutes of July 23, 1996, pSt � through" July 22, 1996 Staff memo, page July 18, 1996 staff report, pageshrough Z17 p Letters to the Ci Council and APC dated Au ust 14, 1996, pages o through City g .y Page 16 July 23. 1996 ADVISORY PLANNING CONMISSION PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT & PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - HONEY TREE LTD. Chairman Miller opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding a Preliminary Subdivision of 4.83 acres consisting of two lots, Honey Tree First Addition and a Preliminary Planned Development to construct two hotels on property legally described as Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2, Mari Acres Second Addition located west of Nicols Road and bounded on the north, west and south by Erin Drive in the SW'/_ of Section 30. Planner Dudziak introduced this item. Ms. Dudziak highlighted the information presented in the City staffs planning report dated July 18, 1996. Ms. Dudziak noted the existing conditions and the background and history of this item. Ms. Dudziak also provided to the Commission a memorandum dated July 22, 1996, highlighting the various revisions made by the applicant. Planner Dudziak further indicated that Page 11 of the planning report concerning the action to be considered should be amended to delete the reference in paragraph A, page 11 to the restaurant on Lot 3 and in its place insert for the "hotel on Lot 1." Ray Anderson, a representative of the applicant, was present and offered various diagrams Showing the buildings proposed for the planned development. Mr. Anderson further indicated the applicant's acceptance of all of the recommendations proposed by the City staff s report. Several area residents expressed concerns with the application. Chris Bess, indicated concerns regarding the compatibility of the proposed development with the surrounding neighborhood and expressed a belief that the proposed buildings were too high, were right across from a park, and would create adverse impact on traffic, lighting and security in the area, in addition to a perception that too many deviations from the City Code were being requested and approved and that the Code should be followed. Another resident, Roxie Soderhohn expressed concerns regarding a perceived lack of notice of the meeting and concerns that more residents would appear and express objections in the event they had received notice. Ms. Soderholm expressed additional concerns that in her opinion this was too small of a space to build a structure of this density and that the proposed buildings were not compatible with the surrounding area and would lead to increased drinking and crime. Another resident of the area, Cindy Childs, addressed the Commission and referenced Mayor Egan's comments regarding fringe site hotel development and concerns she had with the building heights, density, signage and potential adverse impact on area wildlife including geese and herons in the area. Another resident, Randy Diamond, expressed concerns that this area is a low -profile neighborhood and the applicant is proposing to construct a high-profile hotel. Pale l" July 23. 1996 ADVISORY PLANNING COMNUSSION Gary Tanl:enhoff. the landowner of the proposed development, addressed the Commission and noted that there exists on the subject property, a 20 to 25 -foot rise in elevation which he stated would result in any development be it the applicant's proposal or other commercial property, being built above the homes and creating a perception of a high-profile development. Mr. Tankenhoff expressed his belief that the applicant's proposal is an attractive use of the subject property compared to less attractive alternatives which have been suggested, including among others, mini golf and strip malls. Member Segal expressed his view that this is the second time this application has been addressed and he believes as revised the proposal is positive for the City and the community. Chairman Miller noted his opinion that the revised proposal appears to be vastly improved and commented that development per se, may have no benefit to surrounding property owners who are used to enjoying the undeveloped nature of surrounding property, but stressed that as currently zoned, there is a potential for far worse development to take place than that proposed by the applicant. Member Isberg stated as to whether or not the density could be reduced without materially affecting the proposal and the applicant responded by indicating his belief that if density was reduced, the conference center would be lost. Member Burdorf also commented that there were two hotels in the area and stated his belief that there was too many for the subject area. Member Richards agreed and further indicated that with the restaurant removed, the proposal appeared less attractive. Member Heyl moved, Member Segal seconded, a motion to recommend approval of a Preliminary Subdivision of 4.83 acres consisting of two lots, Honey Tree First Addition, subject to the following conditions: Standard Conditions The developer shall comply with these standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 3, 1993: A 1, B 1, B2, B3, B4, C 1, C2, C4; D1, El, F1, and H1. 2. The developer shall replat the property. Grading 3. The grading plan shall be revised to reflect slopes of 2:1 or gentler or the construction of retaining walls to attain 2:1 or gentler slopes in the area east of the proposed trail reconstruction. ��3 Page 13 July 23. 1996 ADVISORY PLANNING CONMSSION 4. Detailed plans and specifications covering the construction of any retaining walls on the site shall be submitted to the City prior to Final Plat approval. Water Quality 5. The developer shall meet water quality mitigation requirements through the pavment of a cash dedication. Access/Streets/Circulation 6. The driveway access to Lot 2, Honey Tree First Addition, shall align with one of the existing driveway accesses to Lot 3, Block 1 of Mari Acres 2nd Addition. 7. The developer shall remove the existing driveway curb cuts not utilized by the development and replace them with full height concrete curb and gutter. Easements/RiQht of Wav/Permits 8. The developer shall prepare a cross parking easement agreement to be reviewed by the City Attomey. Parks and Recreation 9. The developer shall be responsible for a cash parks dedication and a cash trails dedication. 10. The existing trail shall be reconstructed further east to provide more growth space for the landscaping and for vehicle overhang on the parking lot. The exact alignment of the relocated trail shall be determined prior to Final Subdivision approval. Should a portion of the existing trail be relocated on City property, this development shall be required to provide an easement over the remainder to allow for public use of the trail. All approved in favor except Members Burdorf and Richards. Member Heyl moved, Member Segal seconded, a motion to recommend approval of a Preliminary Planned Development to construct two hotels on property legally described as Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2, Mari Acres Second Addition located west of Nicols Road and bounded on the north, west and south by Erin Drive in the SWI/:! of Section 30, subject to the following conditions: Page 19 July 23, 1996 ADVISORY PLANTNTNG COMMISSION General Conditions 1. Approved as part of this Preliminary Planned Development are: Lot 1: a four-story hotel with 108 rooms, including a swimming pool and 3,740 square foot conference center and possibly on -sale liquor. Lot 2: a four-story hotel with 104 rooms and a swimming pool. 2. A Preliminary Planned Development Agreement shall be executed 3. The term of the Preliminary Planned Development shall be six years. 4. A Final Planned Development Agreement for each phase shall be executed prior to final subdivision and Final Planned Development approval. The following exhibits are necessary for this Agreement: * Final Site Plan * Final Building Elevation Plan * Final Sign Plan * Final Landscape Plan * Final Lighting Pian Upon submission of these final plans, provided they are in conformance with the Preliminary PD, the Final PD may proceed to the City Council for approval. Access/Street Design 5. The driveway access to Lot 2, Honey Tree First Addition, shall align with one of the existing driveway accesses to Lot 3, Block 1 of Mari Acres Second Addition. Setbacks 6. Setbacks as identified on the site plan dated July 10, 1996, are approved. Landscaping 7. A landscape plan shall be prepared by a Minnesota registered landscape architect or certified nurseryperson in accordance with the provisions of City Code Chapter 11. 10, Subdivision 15. Page 20 July 23, 1996 ADVISORY PLAINTNIIvG CONMISSION 8. The landscape plan shall be revised to allow for sufficient growth space for the spruce trees along the east side of the site. Spruce trees around the base of the building on Lot 2 shall be removed and possibly replaced with a more appropriately sized evergreen material. To provide year around visual screening of the buildings, evergreen trees shall be added to the landscaping on the west side of the property. Spacing of all plantings shall provide sufficient growth space for the plant materials at maturity. Architecture 9. Exterior building materials shall be as shown on the approved building elevation plans. 10. Any rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened and not visible from the public right of way. 11. Trash and recyclable materials enclosures should be attached to the buildings. constructed of materials to match the principal buildings, and of a size sufficient to enclose all trash and recyclable materials receptacles. Lighting 12. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, the developer shall provide a detailed site lighting plan showing foot-candle levels throughout the site. Light standards shall not be taller than 25 feet, and all lights shall have sharp cutoffs and be directed downward to minimize glare and visibility of the lighting from off the site. Lighting on the east side of the site should be shielded on the east side to deflect light onto the site. Signage 13. Approved signage includes the following: a) one pylon sign at the southwest corner of the site; b) building signage on the north and south building elevations of the hotel on Lot 1, and the west building elevation only of the hotel on Lot 2; c) one monument sign shall be permitted at each entrance to the site. The pylon sign shall comply with standard size and setback requirements in the City Code. The monument signs shall comply with standard setback requirements, be no greater than six feet in height and have a message area of not more than six square feet per side. Building signage shall be as shown on the approved building elevation plans. All approved in favor, except Members Burdorf and Richards. .—city of eagan TO: Chair Mark Miller and Members of the Advisory Planning Commission FROM: Pamela Dudziak, Associate Planner DATE: July 22, 1996 SUBJECT: Honey Tree First Addition MEMO} At the May 28, 1996 Advisory Planning Commission meeting a public hearing was held on a preliminary subdivision and preliminary planned development requested by Honey Tree, Inc. Subsequently, at their regular meeting on June 18, 1996, the City Council voted to deny both requests. The applicant has submitted a new application for a revised development proposal on the same site. The following is an overview of the revisions made by the applicant. P. The number of lots has been reduced from three to two. ► The restaurant has been eliminated from the proposal which now consists of two hotels, one with a conference center. ► Both hotels have been reduced from five stories to four. The Comfort Suites on the north portion of the site has reduced the number of rooms from 122 to 108, and the height has been reduced from 61 feet to 47 feet (and from 68' to 55' at the highest parapet). The conference center was reduced in size from 4,355 square feet to 3,740 square feet. ► The Sleep Inn has been shifted south in its location, but the building orientation is the same. The number of rooms increased from 64 to 104, and the height was reduced from 51 feet to 37 feet (and from 71.6' to 65' at the peak of the tower). No The parking deviation has increased slightly from 28 stalls to 36 stalls, however, the calculations differed slightly. In the current proposal, staff evaluated the conference center parking at 1 stall per each 3 seats capacity, whereas with the previous proposal, staff accepted the applicant's parking calculation of 1 stall per 3.5 seats capacity. In addition, the current proposal does not include underground parking. ► In the previous proposal, both hotels had green space deviations of 5' to 10' in the rear and from 20' to 25' in the front. The current proposal eliminates the green space deviation for the Comfort Suites and reduces it to 5' on the west and south sides of the Sleep Inn. All building setbacks are met except for a 5.25' deviation from the public right of way for the Comfort Suites building. ► In the current proposal, only one pylon sign instead of two is requested, however the applicant is still requesting a directional monument sign at each entrance to the site. Building signage proposed remained the ame in the current proposal. I C)-7 PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: July 18, 1996 CASE: 30 -PP -13-7-96 APPLICANT: Honey Tree Ltd. HEARING DATE: July 23, 1996 PROPERTY OWNER: Hillcrest Development PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak REQUEST: Preliminary Subdivision (Honey Tree First Addition) and Preliminary Planned Development LOCATION: Lots 1, 2, and 3, Mari Acres Second Addition COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: CSC, Community Shopping Center ZONING: CSC, Community Shopping Center Honey Tree Ltd. is requesting approval of a Preliminary Subdivision and rezoning from Community Shopping Center (CSC) to Planned Development (PD). The property is located north of Cliff Road, west of Nicols Road, and east of Cedar Avenue (Hwy. 77) and consists of Lots 1, 2, and 3 of Block 2, Mari Acres Second Addition. The site is 4.83 acres in size. The proposed Subdivision consists of replatting the property into two reconfigured lots. The proposed Planned Development consists of two four-story hotels, one of which includes a conference center and possibly on -sale liquor. The project is proposed in two phases with construction of a 104 -room Sleep Inn on Lot 2 in 1996-97 and a 108 -room Comfort Suites on Lot 1 in 1998. F4111 1 *_ • a"M 01 ` ._ *3 13 lull City Code Section I3.20 Subd. 6 states that "In the case of platting, the Planning Commission and the Council shall be guided by criteria, including the following, in approving, denying or establishing conditions related thereto:" A. That the proposed subdivision does comply with applicable City Code provisions and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. B. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision complies with applicable plans of Dakota County, State of Minnesota, or the Metropolitan Council. �,q Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 2 C. That the physical characteristics of the site including but not limited to, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, water storage, and retention are such that the site is suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. D. That the site physically is suitable for the proposed density of the development. E. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is not likely to cause environmental damage. F. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause health problems. G. That the design of the subdivision or the improvements will not conflict with easements of record or with easements established by judgement of court. H. That completion of the proposed development of the subdivision can be completed in a timely manner so as not to cause an economic burden upon the City for maintenance, repayment of bonds or similar burden. I. That the subdivision has been properly planned for possible solar energy system use within the subdivision or as it relates to adjacent property. (Refer to City Handbook on Solar Access). J. That the design of public improvements for the subdivision is compatible and consistent with the platting or approved preliminary plat on adjacent lands. K. That the subdivision is in compliance with those standards set forth in that certain document entitled "City of Eagan Water Quality Management Plan for the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization" which document is properly approved and filed with the office of the City Clerk hereinafter referred to 'as the "Water Quality Management Plan". Said document and all of the notations, references and other information contained therein shall have the same force and effect as if fully set down herein and is hereby made a part of this Chapter by reference and incorporated herein as fully as if set forth herein at length. It shall be the responsibility of the City Clerk to maintain the Water Quality Management Plan and make the same available to the public. Chapter 11.20, Subd. 8, B., Determination. states: "In considering any petition for such district, the Planning Commission and the Council in the interests of carrying out the intent and purpose of this Subdivision, shall determine whether or not such planned development will: �d Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 3 (1) better adapt itself to its physical and aesthetic setting and that of surrounding lands than does development of the underlying zoning district; (2) be feasible for the owner and developer economically to complete according to proposed plans; (3) benefit the community at large to a greater degree than would development of the underlying zoning district." Melliel ID 11, 1_ • The property consists of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2, Mari Acres Second Addition which was platted in 1981. The property is currently zoned CSC, Community Shopping Center, as is surrounding property. In May of this year, the applicant had presented a similar development and subdivision proposal for this site. That proposal consisted of replatting the property into three reconfigured lots. The proposed Planned Development consisted of two five -story hotels on the northern portion of the site, with building heights of 61 and 51 feet, and a Class I restaurant (Country Kitchen) on the third lot. The City Council denied this proposal, finding that the increased building heights and the intensity of the uses proposed was inconsistent with nearby residential development. This proposal replats the property into two lots, eliminates the Class I restaurant from the development, and reduces the heights of the two hotels to 47 feet and 37 feet. larxelliel Ots Ulm The site is relatively flat and without significant vegetation. There are no existing structures on the site. Along the east property line is a bituminous path which was previously installed. The path apparently was installed in anticipation of future commercial development when Mari Acres Second Addition was platted. The path was intended to provide pedestrian access around the pond to the restaurants and other commercial development in the Cliff and Nicols Road area. .•• The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Vacant - Zoned CSC, Community Shopping Center; Guided CSC - Community Shopping Center South - Cliff Place Offices/McDonald's - Zoned CSC; Guided CSC East - Sediment Pond AP-9/Across Nicols Road to the east are residential homes - Zoned Planned Development and Guided D -Il /3D Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 4 West - Erin Drive and Cedar Avenue (St. Hwy. 77)/west of Cedar Avenue are residential townhomes - Zoned Planned Development and Guided D -IV The developer proposes two four-story hotels. The four-story Comfort Suites is proposed to be located on Lot 1, and contains 108 rooms with a 3,740 square foot conference center which can seat approximately 250 people, and a swimming pool. The Sleep Inn on Lot 2 contains 104 rooms and a swimming pool. Pedestrian access from each building to the trail on the east side of the property is identified on the site plan. 111OL81A Oki 3011) The City Code does not specify setback requirements, height restrictions and other specific standards for PD districts; however, the CSC zoning allows hotel and motel development as a conditional use. For this reason, the CSC zoning standards are used as a guide for comparison in evaluating the elements of the Planned Development. Preliminary Planned Development Term - The applicant's proposed term of the Planned Development is ten years. However, the proposed phasing of construction is less than three years. Ten years is a substantial amount of time to lock in property to a particular development. If anticipated phasing for construction is three years, the City may want to retain some flexibility with a shorter term PD than the ten years proposed by the developer. At the expiration of the term, the City would then have the option of extending the PD for a further term, or terminating the PD if it no longer serves a useful purpose. Staff suggests that a six year term may be reasonable since this is twice what the developer anticipates for construction. Phasing - The proposed Planned Development consists of two four-story hotels, one of which includes a conference center. The project is proposed in two phases, with construction of the Sleep Inn on Lot 2 in 1996-97 and the Comfort Suites on Lot 1 as the second phase in 1998. Compatibility with Surrounding Area - The proposed Preliminary Planned Development consists of development on the two lots of the proposed Honey Tree First Addition. The two hotels are consistent with the existing CSC zoning of the property and the CSC Comprehensive Guide Plan designation. The Commercial Land Use Study, accepted by the City Council in May 1994, identifies this area around Cliff Lake Center as one of three major commercial nodes in the City. The Study also identified hotels and motels as an emerging industry in Eagan which should be accommodated based on location and scale. The location of this site with easy access to Cliff Road and two major freeways, I -35E and Cedar Avenue (Hwy. 77), makes it desirable for hotel/motel development. Although the building 3/ Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd, July 23, 1996 Page 5 heights exceed the typical Code maximum, in this location the added height appears compatible with surrounding development and with the City's adopted plans and policies. The proposal takes advantage of accessibility and visibility to Cedar Avenue. The building height and orientation also takes advantage of visibility from the I-35E/Cliff Road intersection. The site is level with Cedar Avenue and there is a continuous berm along the Cedar Avenue right of way which will serve to screen the parking areas and lower portion of the proposed buildings. Additionally, the site is physically separated from nearby residential properties by the pond and Nicols Road, and there is existing vegetation around the pond which provides screening of the site in addition to the landscaping proposed by the developer. The nearest residences are 500 feet away from the structures proposed for this site. Other existing commercial uses and anticipated future land uses adjacent to the site are compatible with the proposed uses for this site. Final Planned Development - A Final PD Agreement will need to be executed prior to beginning construction on each phase of the development. Upon submission of the final plans, provided they are in conformance with the Preliminary PD, the Final PD may proceed to the City Council for approval. Access/Street Design - Access to the site is provided in four locations: at the northeast and southeast corners of the site, and two curb cuts on the west side of the site. The Planned Development has joint parking throughout. As discussed in the subdivision analysis, the south access to Lot 2 should be aligned with one of the existing driveway accesses to the office building south of Erin Drive. Nicols Road is classified as a community collector roadway in the City Comprehensive Transportation Plan designed to accommodate approximately 10,000 vehicle trips per day. The most recent traffic counts from 1995 are below 10,000 daily trips and the additional traffic estimated to be generated by the proposed development plus the existing traffic does not exceed the Nicols Road designed traffic capacity. The estimated traffic generation for this proposed development is estimated to be .greater than traffic generated by a possible office building complex which may fit on this site, but is less than a retail commercial shopping center which may also fit on this site (see attached memo for detailed traffic analysis). Height - The Code allows for building heights in excess of 35 feet with a conditional use permit or within a Planned Development. The Comfort Suites is proposed to be a four-story building. The Comfort Suites building on Lot 1 is oriented so that the smaller facades face east toward residential properties and west toward Cedar Avenue. The building is 47 feet in height, although some of the architectural treatments reach 55 feet at the highest point. The Sleep Inn building on Lot 2 is also proposed to be a four- story building, and is 37 feet in height with a tower which is 65 feet at its highest peak. The tower is considered an architectural feature and is not used for calculating building height. Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 6 The additional building height appears to be appropriate for this site. The nearest residential neighborhood is 500 feet away from the proposed buildings and physically separated from the site by Nicols Road and the pond. The site is situated for a dense commercial development with easy access to Cliff Road and to two major freeways, Cedar Avenue (Hwy. 77) and I -35E. Setbacks - Within the CSC zoning district, the required building setbacks and green area is increased where building height exceeds 35 feet. Building setbacks are required to be not less than 3/4 of the building height in front yards, and 1/2 building height in side and rear yards. The required green area is increased five feet for each story over the allowable 35 feet. Except for the Comfort Suites building on Lot 1, all building setbacks are satisfied. The Comfort Suites building is 5.25 feet short of the required setback from the public right of way on the north and west sides. This setback deviation would not have a great impact to the west because of the freeway or to the north because the adjacent property is also zoned CSC and anticipated for commercial development. The proposed green space is deficient by five feet to the typical CSC requirements on the west and south sides of Lot 2. As a result of shared parking throughout the development, green space is not required in the side yards between lots. Parking - All parking is shared throughout the PD and will require cross easements for this purpose. The developer should prepare a cross parking easement agreement to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The City Code parking standards for hotels is 1 stall for each room, plus one stall for each 8 rooms. For the conference center, the applicant calculated parking requirements at one stall for each 3.5 seats capacity. A comparable standard in the City Code is for theaters which requires one stall for each 3 seats and this is what staff used for the analysis. The City Code requires parking lots of more than 50 stalls to have a minimum of five percent of the parking lot area in islands. Although there are no specific parking requirements for PDs in the City Code, these standards are used for the purpose of evaluating the PD. The site plan shows that the typical minimum parking requirement is satisfied. To provide joint parking, setbacks from side lot lines are not provided. The entire site is 36 stalls short on parking. All parking stalls are proposed to be 9.5 feet wide. grow, . •l. Comfort Suites 121 115 - 6 Conference Center 83 65 - 18 Sleep Inn 117_ lu _1? TOTAL 321 285 -36 According to the applicant, the hardship for this deviation is that many conference attendees will also be motel guests. In addition, many guests for the motels and conference activities will arrive by airport shuttle or tour bus. The dual use of management and staff and providing joint parking should reduce parking needs. Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 7 Landscaping - The developer has not submitted a formal landscape plan, but proposes landscaping around the perimeter of the site which is consistent with the plan submitted with the previous application. Therefore, the analysis of proposed landscaping is based on the plan submitted with the previous proposal and the information submitted with this application regarding foundation plantings. A detailed landscape plan should be prepared by a Minnesota Registered Landscape Architect or certified nurseryperson to be submitted with prior to Final Planned Development approval. Year around screening of the buildings should be provided. Several spruce trees are proposed for foundation plantings around the hotel on Lot 2. The spruce trees on the west side of the Sleep Inn on Lot 2 should be replaced with a more appropriately sized . evergreen material and more landscaping added to the area on the east side of the building. Additionally, evergreen trees and shrubs should be added to the landscaping along the west and north sides of the property to provide year around green and a visual screen to break up the large building walls. The applicant proposes a mix of spruce and globe arborvitae along the east side of the property. As with the previous proposal, the spruce trees along the east side of the property have insufficient growing room without encroaching on the trail. The trail along the east side of the property should be relocated and the landscaping revised to provide more solid year around screening and sufficient growing room for theplant materials to avoid encroachment into the trail or the area allotted for vehicle overhang where parking is provided. Architecture - The Sleep Inn hotel is proposed to have the signature building architecture consisting of dryvit or similar finish in an eggshell white with grey accents, and steel roof panels in a dark copper or brown color. The Comfort Suites will consist of a dark brown brick on the first two stories on all four elevations. The upper stories will have a dryvit or equivalent finish material in a sandy beige color with brown/gold steel roof panels. It is staff s understanding that the applicant will have color samples available at the public hearing. Rooftop Mechanical - The building elevations do not show any rooftop mechanical equipment. Any rooftop mechanical equipment should not be visible from any public right of way. Trash/Recvclable Materials - A detached trash enclosure is shown between the two buildings on the east side of the parking lot. The City Code requires that all trash enclosures be attached to the building and of sufficient size to enclose all trash and recyclable materials receptacles. Therefore, trash and recyclable materials enclosures should be attached to the buildings, constructed of materials to match the principal buildings, and of a size sufficient to enclose all trash and recyclable materials receptacles. Light - Site lighting is proposed to be 250 watt high pressure sodium lamps mounted on 30 foot poles, spaced to provide two footcandles average minimum light intensity. During the review of the previous proposal, glare from lighting was a concern. To address this concern, shorter light standards should be used and lighting on the east side of the site should be shielded on the east side to deflect light onto the site. All lights should have sharp cutoffs and be directed Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 8 downward to minimize glare and visibility of the lighting from off the site. The developer should provide a detailed site lighting plan showing footcandle levels prior to Final Planned Development approval. Signage - The City Sign Code allows building signage only on building elevations with street frontage. One free-standing ground (monument) or pylon sign per building is allowed. When used, a pylon sign is allowed in lieu of a ground sign. When a business is directly adjacent to a freeway, a pylon sign is allowed for freeway identification and a ground sign is also permitted on the side of the property opposite the freeway. This development proposal includes building, monument and pylon signage, and deviates from these strict requirements in that pylon and monument signs are proposed on the freeway side of the property, and building signage is proposed on elevations not having street frontage. The overall signage plan is designed to take full advantage of the visibility of the site for freeway traffic and traffic along Cliff Road, and to provide identification and direction to motorists once they reach the development site. Building signage is proposed on the south and east tower elevations of the Sleep Inn on Lot 2. These will be internally lit signs. Individual backlit letters are proposed on the north and south elevations of the Comfort Suites on Lot 1. The building signage on the east elevation of the Sleep Inn and the south elevation of the Comfort Suites is a deviation from the strict Code requirements because they do not have street frontage. The developer has indicated that this signage is designed to take advantage of visibility from Cedar Avenue, and from Cliff Road and where Cliff Road intersects 1-35E, however, staff questions whether these signs will be effective for the purpose stated by the developer. As was discussed during the review of the previous proposal, the building sign on the east elevation of the Sleep Inn will be visible from and impact on the nearby residential properties. In order to minimize the impact to nearby residential properties to the east, building signage on the east elevation of the Sleep Inn should not be included. The building sign on the south elevation of the Comfort Suites will have little or no negative impact associated with this deviation and appears justified by the visibility gained from both directions on Cedar Avenue. Four monument signs are proposed, one for each entrance to the site. The signs are proposed to have a two foot high brick base matching the brick of the Comfort Suites building with an identifying sign panel of six square feet for each corresponding building. Although these signs would contain logo identification of the buildings, their size indicates that their purpose is primarily to efficiently identify the site entrances and direct traffic to the proper entrance. City Code allows only one monument sign per building, so four such signs for this site containing two buildings is a deviation from the Code requirements. In addition, with a pylon sign proposed for freeway visibility on Cedar Avenue, the monument sign at the southwest entrance also deviates from the strict Code requirements. However, the monument and pylon signs serve different purposes and the intent of the Code appears to be upheld with this proposal. Monument signage Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 9 should comply with City Code setback requirements, be no greater than six feet in height and have a message area no more than six square feet per side as proposed by the developer. A pylon sign is proposed at the southwest corner of Lot 2. The City Code restricts pylon signs to 27 feet in height and 125 square feet in area. These signs are proposed in addition to the ground signs. Although the site technically is not directly adjacent to a freeway, it is separated from the freeway only by a local street, Erin Drive, which provides the direct access to the site. The pylon signs should not exceed the allowable 125 square feet per side in area. As required by City Code, the pylon sign should meet all standard setback requirements. On -Sale Liquor - The applicant is requesting approval of on -sale liquor use as part of the PD for the Comfort Suites hotel on Lot 1 to allow liquor sales in conjunction with banquets and other such events. A separate liquor license also will be required. Hours of Operation - The proposed hotels will have 24-hour operation and hotels are not included among the uses subject to restricted hours in the City Code. Preliminary Subdivision is - The preliminary subdivision shows two lots. Lot 1 is 2.96 acres and Lot 2 is 1.87 acres in area. Grading/Wetlands - With some modifications, the preliminary grading plan is acceptable. The site gently slopes from west to east toward the wetland to the east of the development. The site is open and was previously graded with construction of Hwy. 77 (Cedar Avenue) and will require a minimal amount of grading to prepare for the proposed building and parking lot construction. The grading plan shows a maximum cut of one foot and maximum fill of three feet. Portions of an existing bituminous trail which runs along the east side of the development are proposed to be removed and reconstructed in conjunction with grading of the site. A portion of the side - slope east of the trail reconstruction as shown on the preliminary grading plan is in excess of a 2:1 slope. The grading plan should be revised to reflect slopes of 2:1 or gentler or the construction retaining walls to attain 2:1 or gentler slopes in this area. Detailed plans a specifications covering the construction of any retaining walls on the site should be submitted to the City prior to Final Plat approval. There are no jurisdictional wetlands within the development. Storm Drainage/Water Quality - The preliminary storm drainage plan is acceptable. Storm water runoff from the site is proposed to drain through a private storm sewer system to Pond AP -9 east of the development. AP -9 is classified as a Class 6 Sediment Basin in the City Water Quality Management Plan adopted in 1990, and was purchased by the City for stormwater management purposes. Pond AP -9 drains to the existing storm sewer within Nicols Road. There are no downstream recreational -classified water bodies. Because of the relatively small size of the Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 10 development and the absence of downstream recreational water bodies, staff recommends a cash water quality dedication for this development. Utilities - The preliminary utility plan is acceptable. An existing trunk sanitary sewer runs along the north and east edges of the site west of Pond AP -9 and is available for connection by this development. The developer is proposing to connect to this sanitary sewer in two locations to provide service for each of the two lots. Water main is available for connection within Erin Drive south, west and north of the site. The developer is proposing to connect to this water main to provide individual service for each of the two lots. Connection to the water main will require the removal and replacement of two street sections of Erin Drive. Access/Streets/Circulation - Erin Drive was constructed in the early 1980s and surrounds the site to the north, west and south. The width of Erin Drive varies from 37 feet wide on the south and west to 48 feet wide north of the site. Erin Drive intersects with Nicols Road at two locations east of the development. The developer is proposing to take public access onto Erin Drive at four locations. The proposed driveway access location to Lot 2 does not align with one of the two driveway accesses to the office complex to the south on Lot 3, Block 1 of Mari Acres 2nd Addition. Aligning these driveway accesses would help to reduce conflict between vehicles using these entrances. The driveway access to Lot 2 should align with one of the two driveway accesses to Lot 3, Block 1 of Mari Acres 2nd Addition. Two existing driveway curb cuts on Erin Drive north of the site are not proposed to be utilized by the development. The developer should remove these existing driveway curb cuts and install full height concrete curb and gutter. Easements/Rights of Way/Permits - The plans show shared parking throughout the development. Cross easements between the three proposed lots will need to be provided. The developer should prepare a cross parking easement agreement to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. Portions of the trail along the east side of the property will need to be removed for proper grading of the site. The applicant has indicated a willingness to relocate the trail further east. This would allow a larger green space and room for landscaping between the trail and the parking lot and provide space for vehicle overhang along the outside edge of the east row of parking. The relocated trail could remain on the development site in which case a trail easement should be dedicated to the City to provide for public use of the trail. Alternatively, the trail could be reconstructed on the adjacent City property which would likely involve grading on City property to accommodate the trail. This option is preferred by the City because it will allow more space for landscaping along the east edge of the site. The alignment of the reconstructed trail should be determined and incorporated in the revised site plan prior to final subdivision approval. A drainage and utility easement covering the existing sanitary sewer line on the east edge of the site was previously dedicated and will remain in place with this replatting. Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 11 Tree Preservation - The site contains no significant trees or woodlands. Parks and Recreation - Cash parks and trails dedications will be required. Honey Tree Ltd. is requesting approval of a Preliminary Subdivision and Rezoning from CSC to PD for a Preliminary Planned Development on 4.83 acres on Erin Drive west of Nicols Road. The proposed Subdivision consists of replatting the property into two reconfigured lots. The proposed Planned Development consists of two four-story hotels, one of which includes a conference center. Within the PD, building heights above 35 feet are requested. The proposal includes on -sale liquor for the hotel on Lot 1. The proposed PD appears to be consistent with existing and potential future surrounding development, the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan and policies established in the Commercial Land Use Study in 1994. The PD and deviations from the typical zoning requirements also appear to satisfy the criteria established in Chapter 11.20 Subd. 8B of the City Code. A. To recommend approval or denial of a Preliminary Planned Development for two hotels including on -sale liquor for the hotel on Lot 1, Honey Tree First Addition. Approval subject to the conditions listed below: 1. Approved as part of this Preliminary Planned Development are: Lot 1: a four-story hotel with 108 rooms, including a swimming pool and 3,740 square foot conference center and possibly on -sale liquor. Lot 2: a four-story hotel with 104 rooms and a swimming pool. 2. A Preliminary Planned Development Agreement shall be executed 3. The term of the Preliminary Planned Development shall be six years. 4. A Final Planned Development Agreement for each phase shall be executed prior to final subdivision and Final Planned. Development approval. The following exhibits are necessary for this Agreement: * Final Site Plan * Final Building Elevation Plan * Final Sign Plan * Final Landscape Plan Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 12 * Final Lighting Plan Upon submission of these final plans, provided they are in conformance with the Preliminary PD, the Final PD may proceed to the City Council for approval. 5. The driveway access to Lot 2, Honey Tree First Addition, shall align with one of the existing driveway accesses to Lot 3, Block 1 of Mari Acres Second Addition. 6. Setbacks as identified on the site plan dated July 10, 1996, are approved. I . • 7. A landscape plan shall be prepared by a Minnesota registered landscape architect or certified nursery person in accordance with the provisions of City Code Chapter 11. 10, Subdivision 15. 8. The landscape plan shall be revised to allow for sufficient growth space for the spruce trees along the east side of the site. Spruce trees around the base of the building on Lot 2 shall be removed and possibly replaced with a more appropriately sized evergreen material. To provide year around visual screening of the buildings, evergreen trees shall be added to the landscaping on the west side of the property. Spacing of all plantings shall provide sufficient growth space for the plant materials at maturity. 9. Exterior building materials shall be as shown on the approved building elevation plans. 10. Any rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened and not visible from the public right of way. 11. Trash and recyclable materials enclosures should be attached to the buildings, constructed of materials to match the principal buildings, and of a size sufficient to enclose all trash and recyclable materials receptacles. Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Page 13 12. Prior to Final Planned Development approval, the developer shall provide a detailed site lighting plan showing footcandle levels throughout the site. Light standards shall not be taller than 25 feet, and all lights shall have sharp cutoffs and be directed downward to minimize glare and visibility of the lighting from off the site. Lighting on the east side of the site should be shielded on the east side to deflect light onto the site. 13. Approved signage includes the following: a) one pylon sign at the southwest corner of the site; b) building signage on the north and south building elevations of the hotel on Lot 1, and the west building elevation only of the hotel on Lot 2; c) one monument sign shall be permitted at each entrance to the site. The pylon sign shall comply with standard size and setback requirements in the City Code. The monument signs shall comply- with standard setback requirements, be no greater than six feet in height and have a message area of not more than six square feet per side. Building signage shall be as shown on the approved building elevation plans. B. To recommend approval or denial of a Preliminary Subdivision for Honey Tree First Addition. Approval subject to the conditions listed below: I. The developer shall comply with these standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 3, 1993: Al, B1, B2, B3, B4, Cl, C2, C4, Dl, E1, F1, and Hl. 2. The developer shall replat the property. 3. The grading plan shall be revised to reflect slopes of 2:1 or gentler or the construction of retaining walls to attain 2:1 or gentler slopes in the area east of the proposed trail reconstruction. 4. Detailed plans and specifications covering the construction of any retaining walls on the site shall be submitted to the City prior to Final Plat approval. Planning Report - Honey Tree Ltd. July 23, 1996 Water Quality Page 14 5. The developer shall meet water quality mitigation requirements through the payment of a cash dedication. Access/Streets/Circulation 6. The driveway access to Lot 2, Honey Tree First Addition, shall align with one of the existing driveway accesses to Lot 3, Block 1 of Mari Acres 2nd Addition. 7. The developer shall remove the existing driveway curb cuts not utilized by the development and replace them with full height concrete curb and gutter. 09 neam M-0=00= S. The developer shall prepare a cross parking easement agreement to be reviewed by the City Attorney. • 3 19 R-1474 We 9. The developer shall be responsible for a cash parks dedication and a cash trails dedication. 10. The existing trail shall be reconstructed further east to provide more growth space for the landscaping and for vehicle overhang on the parking lot. The exact alignment of the relocated trail shall be determined prior to Final Subdivision approval. Should a portion of the existing trail be relocated on City property, this development shall be required to provide an easement over the remainder to allow for public use of the trail. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL A. Financial Obligations 1. This development shall accept its additional financial obligations as defined in the staffs report in accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval. B. asements and Rights -of -Way 1. This development shall dedicate 10 -foot drainage and utility easements centered over all lot lines and, in addition, where necessary to accommodate existing or proposed utilities for drainage ways within the plat. The development shall dedicate easements of sufficient width and location as determined necessary by engineering standards. 2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially guarantee the acquisition costs of drainage, ponding, and utility easements in addition to public street rights-of-way as required by the alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required public utilities and streets located beyond the boundaries of this plat as necessary to service or accommodate this development. 3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way and temporary slope easements for ultimate development of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate jurisdictional agency. 4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and ponding easements to incorporate the required high water elevation plus three (3) feet as necessitated by storm water storage volume requirements. C. Plans and Specifications 1. All public and private streets, drainage systems and utilities necessary to provide service to this development shall be designed and certified by a registered professional engineer in accordance with City adopted codes, engineering standards, guidelines and policies prior to application for final plat approval. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current City standards prior to final plat approval. 3. This development shall ensure that all dead-end public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in accordance with City engineering standards. 4. A separate detailed landscape plan shall be submitted overlaid on the proposed grading and utility plan. The financial guarantee for such plan shall be included in the Development Contract and shall not be released until one year after the date of City certified compliance. D. P brie Im rovements 1. If any improvements are to be installed under a City contract, the appropriate project must be approved by Council action prior to final plat approval. E. Eermits �. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition of all regulatory agency permits required by the affected agency prior to final plat approval. F. arks and Trails Dedication 1. This development shall fulfill its park and trail dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Paries, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. G. Water Quality Dedication �. This development shall be responsible for providing a cash dedication, ponding, or a combination thereof in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan, as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. H. Other 1. All subdivision, zoning and other ordinances affecting this development shall' be adhered to, unless specifically granted a variance by Council action. Advisory Planning Commission Approved: -August 25 1987 LT315 sTAweARo.coN City Council e tember 15 1987 Revised: 10,. 199 Revised: February 2, 1993 — city of eagan TO: Advisory Planning Commission FROM: John Gorder, Design Development Engineer DATE: July 15, 1996 SUBJECT: Traffic Analysis for Nicols Road Honey Tree Preliminary Subdivision/Preliminary Planned Development MEMO At the May 28, 1996, meeting of the Advisory Planning Commission, the Commission requested that staff provide to the City Council analysis of the street design and traffic estimates for the proposed Honey Tree development. The purpose of this memo is to provide traffic impact information based on the developer's most recent proposal for this site. � 1 � Nicols Road is a community collector roadway designated to accommodate 5,000 to 10,000 ADT (Average Daily Trips). Nicols Road is 48 feet wide. (four lanes) and designed to State Aid standards (9 -ton design) with a 40 mile per hour design speed. This section of Nicols Road is signalized at its intersections with Diffley Road and Cliff Road. The 1995 weekday 24-hour traffic counts for Nicols Road are as follows: South of Diffley Road - 5,475 ADT North of Cliff Road - 6,868 ADT For reference, the following roadways are classified similar to Nicols Road with associated vehicle traffic: Silver Bell Road (Beau D -Rue to Blackhawk) - 4,250 to 8,000 ADT Wescott Road (Pilot Knob Road to T.H. 149) 4,900 to 8,200 ADT 14 &1141 X91 131 1X4191X419MI 111 Using the Institute of Traffic Engineers Handbook, 5th Edition, the most recent proposed development is estimated to generate 2,050 ADT. For purposes of comparison, a 60,000 square foot retail shopping center, and a 120,000 (two-story) office building which could fit on this site Memo to APC - Honey Tree Inc. July 15, 1996 Page 2 would generate an estimated 6,780 ADT and 1,370 ADT, respectively. Assuming a directional split of projected traffic from the proposed development of 30% to the north and 70% to the south, traffic for Nicols Road after full development of the proposed Honey Tree Addition is estimated as follows: South of Diffley Road - 6,090 ADT North of Cliff Road - 8,303 ADT Nicols Road is designed and constructed to accommodate the existing traffic plus potential traffic generated by the proposed Honey Tree development. FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - Honey Tree 1st Addition There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $835 on the parcels proposed for platting. The pay-off balance will be allocated to the lots created by the plat. At this time, there are no pending assessments on the parcel proposed for platting. The estimated financial obligation presented is subject to change based upon areas, dimensions and land uses contained in the final plat. Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and the connections proposed to be made to the City's utility system based on the submitted plans. Improvement Use Rate Quantity ,;,--xrmt None —M.0 I ZIRCON L L6A t6ol 12) EYD- CORAL LA Sli DR., CALF 09? DR I � i of . ,,� _ ARK CEDAR *WEI - 91 L��S-AL LAt% �l N -400 VMS SRN .c IFT w 46 '4. 4amm- SA AM©LQ Irrmu ............ RAM "001*0 7. 'y R LLA A _Mw_TER i�iCLr-' RD. CLIFFS RD CC. R S, S' 1 <CI ^� RON WAY w MANCIr CR. ON OAK DR. w PA RE R I L W5------------ C"A PM4 yra k4 I" tCC%, \\ I VsLvtNu A 11 SLIATE R PAR C�- &�, 'CRE ' c l ; iE��p Jr. �i..-..�-7'3"3\N( VqmNA \ LAOC (q7 LOCATION lit 1,N ,,,I;.l:lyd�ln(; 1'I . r 1 �n .,�\�,1� �. •.� . ..,�a ;Illt°'; ..lid; v� 'b�r' V� it l' Ill.` ,/ .,``� �\\�� .� ,:Ilp'•I --�-,I�i,f, fir{ 1if 01 dro .11 mill 'hw -jp M�7 L/p AREA MAP It . 1. I\ I I I I I I � 0 w J Ali F I\ I I I I I _ , ;L �- - 4j, PRELIMINARY PLAT L c C U U U W cr I w Ali 1 l 56 ttt i1 dx I _ , ;L �- - 4j, PRELIMINARY PLAT L c C U U U W cr ! �� ` � §_�E €=fid 8s€Y�� zY! CL i lei" I a rs Z I 3 U •h• R s` S •� Y J sn 'e v "lira �� iaiails� I� all 'i l'I ♦ a � l�QI t` � its :Rg ` �ttt ��i� a C 1� jet !R s' � 5eILI I'll a r SITE PLAN I .i IL S v�', _l --- 40 I �nU d) 2 z1— .... i Is J I g� F 1% OL = O I .i IL S E a Im 9 W: gQ Y' 3� s N i v�', _l --- 2 N �nU ieu 2 a§c1, 4111 v- 9 .... i Is 2p` J IY I g� 1% E a Im 9 W: gQ Y' 3� s N i v�', 81 �nU ieu a§c1, 4111 v- 9 .... i Is 2p` J IY PRELIMINARY UTILITY/LIGHTING c 6 40F L 0 V � Lp g z Eia a. y a �S_ gg jr asolz i 3 Vis! f i��i fit. Id.5.+baa• a 3le2 EIYiJs111 t$op id ` j d:3%as a�3w fit#211 pj (S PRELIMINARY GRADING/DRAINAGE =—., mr v NNI dEH3 n r) g J„ c 31� Do a ELEVATION J co W U W ix SLEEP INN SIGNAGE PACKAGE F9 ?leas= 1<CM-- S1aeF =nn sign. sizes are identical t- -hose shown. in.. the previous section: under the "Regent Style" A WALL-7VIOUNT SIGNS C DIRECTIONAL SIGN T.^.� L:•�R '::all•-n^'�?:i.`. _Cede signs are ve-satiie When us__ a. - supplementary proper"/ signage. MODEL# 313E Z+-92 SLSF 1:.'X9' sing:e-faca cabinet only B IIID—RISE SIGN The ZI-144 Regent sign is the primary identification for a Sleep Inn. This sign is installed at a height of approximately 25 to 30 feet. XODELi SIZE ZI-144 SLM 121x::' Double -face cab'.net. monument base. As a convenience for arriving crests, Sleep Inn offers the Regent Directional signs. These signs are meant to clearly identify property entrances and exits and direct traffic flow. They are available in monument style and installed at heights up to 6 feet. ZI-7 DRM 21x3' Monument sign, copy: ENTER/EX:T or Sleep Inn HOICE HOTELS T E R\ n, T 1 0 N A L si SIGN ELEVATION I I I I I I r' I I I t s e r §- [til aid IF- /� s WA— t. -- r • to PRELIM. PLAT DENIED BY CC (MAY 1996) NJ LIE Z O fy T 9L T 0 I I I I I I r' I I I t s e r §- [til aid IF- /� s WA— t. -- r • to PRELIM. PLAT DENIED BY CC (MAY 1996) NJ IL al al 7d ly J d ul O Q O I a I gll flips"R I<; 3§ III';� �s I e G R k g o R � og IsI V } C LU W Lr _ I 1 r I1� I fog --------- SITE PLAN ZII'1) DENIED BY CC ;� (MAY 1996) �S� LU I - bt a I gll flips"R I<; 3§ III';� �s I e G R k g o R � og IsI V } C LU W Lr _ I 1 r I1� I fog --------- SITE PLAN ZII'1) DENIED BY CC ;� (MAY 1996) �S� August 14, 1996 Eagan City Council Municipal Center 3830 Pilot Knob Eagan, MN 55122 RE: AUGUST 20, 1996 AGENDA ITEM PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BY HONEY TREE, LTD AT NICOLS AND ERIN DRIVE Dear Councilmember: AUG ! 5 For your consideration at the upcoming Council meeting I would like to submit concerns and issues that I have regarding this proposed development. Some of my concerns revolve around the manner in which proposals are processed by the Planning Commission. I have enclosed a copy of a letter submitted to the Planning Commission which I am hoping they and you will read and contemplate. Most of my concerns/issues will be addressed by other residents attending the meeting but there are a few I would like to identify for you: - It is my understanding that the property just north of Erin Drive, still off Nicols, is owned by the same individual. If a hotel must be built this may be a better site as it would not visually impact the neighborhood as much, it would still be highly visible from the freeway and all roads and the owner would still make his profit from the land sell. Aesthetically and environmentally this would not overwhelm the small pond area of the current proposed site. The upgrade in the land on the Nicols side of the property could remain, along with any mature trees, as a buffer. I also think this would provide a traffic flow. - One thing I am extremely concerned about is the number of variances each proposed project carries with it. After living in Eagan for almost fourteen years I am having a hard time remembering if we have any City codes anymore. If codes still exist I assume there is reasoning behind them but that seems to be getting lost in most development proposals. - A convention center would be nice for the City of Eagan however does this site really provide the convention center you want or need? The request for this proposal is based on it's proximity to the Mall of America. I think it is naive, almost foolish, to believe that people attending a convention at this site are going to venture into central Eagan (the Promenade area) or any other area rather than the Mall. People attending conventions, which are usually one to three days, do not usually "explore" a smaller city they usually travel to tourist attractions such as the Mall of America. I think a convention center closer to the Promenade development, where it is visible, may attract more visitors and tourist dollars. However I do agree that a hotel alone at the proposed location would attract Mall visitors wishing to stay more than one day. S� - A hotel may not be a bad idea for this area but the size and scope of this is enormous. I would recommend before you decide to approve this to visit the location from different viewpoints. I would suggest that you travel on Cliff from Slater towards Nicols and also north to south on Cedar and try going south on Cedar using the Cliff exit ramp. I think you will realize there will be no missing this hotel and you will be able to visualize the magnitude of this development. This leads me to my concern with the requested pylon signs. It is almost comical tao think that anybody could miss this development - believe me if someone cannot find the hotel they have a serious problem and probably should not be driving! This is a ridiculous request and is not for the purpose of direction information but for more advertisement. If you look at the numerous other hotels in our area they do not have all of these additional signs, some are less visible and yet anyone should be able to find them. Most of my other concerns are in the attached letter so I will not go over them again. I would like to add that I believe there has been some misrepresentation at meetings regarding the neighborhood. Most people that live in this neighborhood are not low income - for the most part they are middle income. Most of us choose to live here because we simply like the area and the diversity the neighborhood provides not because we can't afford to live elsewhere. Many of us have owned our homes for over nine years and have seen this neighborhood vastly improve and become a neighborhood Eagan can be proud of. I sincerely hope that when you make a decision regarding this or any other proposal you really take into consideration the effect it may have on your citizens. Sincer ly, P#454 -3261 n rgren Clif ill Lane , M 55122 August 14, 1996 City of Eagan Planning Commission Municipal Center .38.310 Pilot Knob Eagan, MN 55122 RE: Proposed development by Honey Tree, LTD at the site of Nicols and Erin Drive Dear Commission Members: I am writing as I have several concerns regarding how proposals are currently being considered by your commission and how citizens are dealt with. One issue is a lack of notice to area residents. After the Council denied the proposed development the Notices on the site location were removed. Most area residents did not know that a second "modified" proposal had been submitted and would be addressed at commission meeting about two weeks after the denial. A commission member suggested that residents need to read the paper to watch for scheduled items - I think many people, such as myself, would have watched more carefully if we had known this proposal was still on the table. If the signs had not been removed residents may have called to inquire if their was further proposals or if there was a notice in the local paper. Others would not have shown up because the general consensus is that proposed developments receive rubber stamp approval from the Planning Commission so why bother to show? This brings me to another issue. Should the public be required to play "watchdog" on the commission or is it the commission's responsibility to make a determination regarding proposal that is in the best interest of the community and surrounding area whether or not residents attend the meeting? Based on the comments I heard during a delayed broadcast it sounded like if more people had attended that may have changed some minds rather than the easy pass it received. Another concern is that one Commission member stated that he is not even familiar with our area (I believe this was at the first meeting). This causes great concern for me as a citizen and leads me to believe that decisions are made based only on what is on paper. Doesn't the Commission ever go out and look at sites that may be greatly impacted by the scope of proposals or the variances they are considering or when they are not familiar with the area? I think if you went to this area you would be able to see the impact the proposal will have. Does the Commission seek alternatives when working with proposals? The property just north of Erin Drive on Nicols is owned by the same individual and seems to make more sense than engulfing a pond area. The north site is larger and not directly across from the neighborhood access - 2-3 homes would have visual impact which could be lessened by keeping the upgrade on Nicols and any trees on the street side. The development would still be very visual from the freeway and city streets. Or perhaps there is some other hidden project going in there that we do not know about yet. For some time now I have watched your meetings on a regular basis and I would be curious to know why each proposal put forth to you has so many variances and why the Commission agrees with so many? The City codes are there for a reason or if they are no longer valid maybe changes need to be addressed. Several of the neighborhood residents stated that this is a low income neighborhood. While I am not sure what the income situation of all area residents is I think this was an unfair statement and probably should have been stated as more of a middle class neighborhood. It is a culturally diverse neighborhood and many of residents have chosen to remain here because of this and the area has improved as a result (many of us have lived here 9 or more years). The Commission also needs to be aware that because of cultural differences not every resident feels comfortable running down to city hall to battle this issue. Given the negative statement made by your member, the oblivious attitude by some members regarding the effect of development on neighborhood placing such a development as proposed is really making quite a statement by the Commission. Sincerely, Marion Bergren 2103 Cliffhill Lane Eagan, MN 55122 #454-3261 / cc: Eagan City Council Agenda Information Memo August 20, 1996 Eagan City Council Meeting D P IGNATI N OUS DOG JOHN L& MICHELLE SCHAEFER 2246 WHISPERING TRAIL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To authorize staff to designate a hearing officer for an administrative hearing of the facts associated with this matter. FACTS: Following two reported incidents of bites by a dog belonging to the Schaefers, Animal Control Officer Kathleen Gilbertson served them with a dangerous dog notification. The Schaefers requested an opportunity to appeal this matter and it was placed on the Council agenda. Subsequent to the publication of the agenda, it was determined that Minnesota Statute provides for an administrative hearing mechanism to consider such appeals. As the matter is a determination of fact associated with Minnesota Statutes rather than an interpretation of City Code, staff is recommending that the matter be referred by the Council to such a hearing. The City Administrator will appoint a hearing officer pursuant to the rules of Statute. ATTACHMENTS: Schaefer letter on page L(O Staff memorandum on pages 4k. through. John and Michelle Schaefer 2246 Whispering Trail Eagan, MN 55122 August 9, 1996 Tom Hedges City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Mn 55122 Dear Mr. Hedges: My husband and I respectfully request a hearing in front of the City Council at your next meeting on August 20, 1996. Animal Control has informed us that we need to register our dog, Shilo, as a dangerous dog. We feel there are special circumstances involved in this case and would like the opportunity to meet and discuss this registration with you. If you need additional information or have any questions, please contact me at home (894-5746) or at work (831-5333). Sincerely, 4 l�71NO-�-6 A - Michelle Schaefer 1 Co'3 city of eagen 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122-1897 PHONE: (612) 681-4700 TDD: (612) 454-8535 FAX: (612) 681-4738 August 15, 1996 police department PATRICK GEAGAN Chief of Police RICHARD SWANSON Captain Patrol & Investigation JAMES SEWALD Captain Administration THOMAS EGAN Mayor PATRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Administrator E. J. VAN OVERBEKE TO: Tom Hedges, City Administrator City Clerk FROM: Jim Sewald, Administrative Captain SUBJECT: Dangerous Dog Appeal from John and Michelle Schaefer The Dangerous Dog Statutes 347.50-347.55 were passed in 1988 because of a boy in Plymouth who was killed by a dog. This Statute requires animal control officers or peace officers to notify owners of a "potentially dangerous dog" or a "dangerous dog" as defined by the Statute. On July 30, 1996 at approximately 6:30am, Tom Cass (victim) of 2241 Whispering Trail was placing his garbage out on the curb when Schaefer's German Shepard ran across the street and bit him in the buttocks as he was bending over. According to Ms. Schaefer their dog came out of the garage when she opened it. Ms. Schaefer never approached Mr. Cass about the bite incident even though she witnessed the bite. Mr. Cass suffered bruising but the bite did not break the skin. Mr Cass never reported the incident, but his wife called and reported for him. Mrs. Cass stated she was concerned for the children in the neighborhood. Animal Control Officer Kathleen Gilbertson met with Ms. Scheafer on August 2, 1996 at about 7:00am and issued her a "Notice of Potentially Dangerous Dog". This was done because the bite was unprovoked. On August 3, 1996 at approximately 2:30pm, Mr. Stack was in his front yard putting out his sprinkler at the same time Ms. Scheafer was in her front yard with the German Shepard on her retractable leash. After a conversation between the two parties, the dog pulled away from Ms. Schaefer, ran at Mr. Stack, jumped up and bit him in the left side of his buttocks causing bruising and 4 welts. Mr. Stack was concerned about the dog bite and that is why he reported the incident to us. On August 6, 1996 Animal control Officer Kathleen Gilbertson at about 5:00pm, issued Mr Schaefer a "Dangerous Dog" notification, which he refused to take. THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL 7TH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer By State Statute, any dog owner so notified must comply with the following requirements. (1) Must file the "Dangerous Dog" registration with the County within 14 days, (2) maintain the dog in a proper enclosure, which is defined as a building or fenced area from which the dog cannot escape on its own volition, and which cannot be entered by children or others, (more details are attached), (3) if the dog is outside its enclosure, it must be muzzled and on a sturdy leash or chain and controlled by an adult. The dog cannot be tied out of its enclosure even if muzzled and if the dog is in another building other than its owners, it must be muzzled, (4) proof of insurance in the amount of $50,000, (5) liability bond with a rider or letter from the agent or insurance company indicated dog bite coverage or a surety bond, and (6) the dogs enclosure must be posted with the Minnesota "Dangerous Dog" warning symbol, which is supplied by the County when the dog is registered. On August 13, 1996, I spoke with Ms. Schaefer over the telephone and asked her what the special circumstances were. She told me that the special circumstances are, (1)the dog is a puppy (will be 2 years old in October), (2) that the dog has been in obedience classes, 3 classes at the time of the incidents, and 5 classes total as of this week and she has seen much improvement, (3) that the dog is friendly to everyone she knows, (4) that she did not consider the incidents as dog bites, but rather nips because they did not break the skin. Finally, Ms. Schaefer expressed concern that their dog would be labeled and restricted as a "Dangerous Dog" for the rest of its existence. I told Ms. Schaefer that I would pass this information along and that she should be notified as to the time and place of the hearing. I contacted Sharon Hills at the City Attorney's office in reference to this matter. She told me that the people should be given a hearing and that could be done by any administrative person in the City. The Legislature is suppose to address this issue in their next session, so it might be to the advantage of the City to wait for the legislation. Meanwhile, the City Council could administer the hearing but all the testimony has to be sworn and recorded. Also, unless the dog owner agrees to stipulate to the reports about the dog bites, we would also be required to have the victims present at this hearing. On August 14, 1996, Sharon Hills left me a message stating that an attorney representing the Schaefer's called her and wanted to work out a compromise. Sharon advised the attorney that we should continue with the hearing as a matter of procedure. The Schaefer attorney said she would accept the police reports at the hearing if she had a chance to review them in advance. Sharon gave the attorney my name and I have not heard from the attorney as of today, August 15, 1996. Attached to this memo are the different forms, copies of the reports and other pertinent papers associated with this appeal. u Jim Sewald r�J w �. L:: ... ... �,� !1 �::... I':: •:: L•• El LG220 Rev06/95 Minnesota Lawful Gambling Application for Authorization for an Exemption from Lawful Gambling License Organization .Information Organization Name '1/-A c (_t v I I= Lu I_ ISS 4^" C L j Street City Name of Chief Executive Officer of organization (CEO) First Name I Last Name Name o! �_)rganization Treasurer First Name , Last Name Type of Nonprofif Organization Check the box below which best describes CI your organization h% F --j Fraternal Veterans [] Religious F7 Other nonprofit e For Board Use Only Fee Paid Check # Initals Date Recd Previous lawful gambling exemption number X— I1OT6 -7.3 o� I 3 ate Zip Code County Maj 5 ` t� A Iz-oT Daytime Phone number of CEO ( ) 3 y 0 —,FZ u, Daytime Phone Number of Treasurer ( ) '3140 - P_SQ+ eck the box that indicates the type of proof attached to this applicati, your organization: F] IRS letter indicating income tax exempt status [Certificate of good standing from the Minnesota Secretary of State's office E]A charter showing you're an affiliate of a parent nonprofit organization 03roof previously submitted and on file with the Gambling Control Board Gambling: Premises Information Name of Establishment where gambling activity will be conducted -F u t^ (T'�f V\,- L L (Cc wm lv\013 IT, Poo Pi Street f City State Zip Code County L O r �r1�o � � o A-r� ���ti-� Date(s) of activity (for raffles, indicate the date of the drawing) ---I-Ai -)Lzl Mq (t,�)eC) A- Check the box or boxes which indicate the type of gambling activity your organization will be conducting E4 Bingo I] Raffles [::] Paddlewheels 0 Pull -tabs M Tipboards Be sure the Local Unit of Government and the CEO of your organization sign For Board Use Only the reverse side of this application. Date & Initials of Specialist i s ■ Local Unit of Government Jurisdiction Is this gambling premises located within city limits? KI Yes No If Yes, write the name of the City: City Name & A A] If No, write the name of the County and the Township: County Name Township Name Check the appropriate status of`uie Township: Dorganized unorganized unincorporated Zocal..Unit Of Government Acknowledgment 1. The city must sign this application if the gambling 3. DO NOT submit this application to the Gambling Control premises is within city limits. Board if it is denied by the local unit of government. 2. The county and township must sign this applica- 4. NOTE: A Township may not deny an application. tion if the gambling premises is not within city limits. Upon submission of this application to the Gambling Control Board, the exemption will be issued not more than 30 days (60 days for cities of the 1st class) from the date'the local unit of government signed the application, provided the application is complete and all necessary information has been received, unless the local unit of government passes a resolution to specifically prohibit the activity. A copy of that resolution must be received by the Gambling Control Board within 30 days of the date filled in below. Cities of the first class have 60 days in which to disallow the activity. City or County Acknowledgment of Receipt of Township Acknowledgment of Awareness of Application Application Signature of person receiving application Signature of person acknowledging application V � e Date ceived: A% �� Date Signed: ® , Title of person receiving application Title of person acknowledging application ASS7— Oath of Chief Executwe Ofcer I have read this application and all information is true, accurate and complete. Date: /6 /17 ? Submit the application at least 45 days prior to your scheduled date of activity. Be sure to attach the $25 application fee and a copy of your proof of nonprofit status. Mail the complete application and attachments to - Gambling Control Board 1711 W. County Rd B Suite 300S Roseville, MN 55113 This publication will be made available in alternative format (i.e. large print, braille) upon request. Questions on this form should be directed to the Licensing Section of the Gambling Control Board at (612)639-4000. Hearing impaired individuals using a TDD may call the Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627-3529 in the Greater Minnesota Area or 297-5353 in the Metro Area. The information requested on this form will be used by the Gambling Control Board (GCB) to determine your compliance with Minnesota Statues and rules governing lawful gambling activities. All of the information that you supply on this form will become public information when received by the GCB. FAX: -688-6306 Jai Ln Dennis Green Miu $0.00 Pw license CITY OF EAGAN acv Pdot Knob Road eam (RAN selamw APPMATION FOR LICENSE TO SELL TOBACCO Pl w Pflflt APPUCAM' R. Idel htidnlefl; 4* '21rff-MeAr 21F -M &Xh= Address 1101, Ph" Gfa - � p &$Wness Prions(e/Z Business name. in Eagan tobaM k} tv to SM A,,cf,�, easiness address in Eagan tobacco is to be sdd s� . (Clod anew apply) i� c1gamm agars d Dow smoking acee tab SIRA plug and chewing to�eco Clippings, aRtiV wmq*V& she for OwMng or smoking Pipes and adw fewod devices •--� Cip.mme pqwmm a wrapp" PACUQM OF o (Cheek +11 that &F ff IrldWuel pocck or Tvw or more pwM or cans packaged tagather fulf cafnons SHIN (Ch m* all on SQlf smice mmft Ift Over*"Outtter VoWing machine Accessible Number of vending mad*c3 wNhift nushm to stare oNy (-4?IF-JJVAJ6 70C WWA) SEP'MATmicENSE$ sm LL as ISSUEQ FoR TTIE SALE of TiD81K;G ; PLACE OF BUSINESS AM FM EACH VENDING MA MNE. TOMCM sates TRS ANY UNDER THE AGE of SEM (1s) Is GROUNDS FOR OR REVOCATICM OF LICENsE. I (WE) HEREBY AGREE T D OPERATE SUCIi SMINESS IN ACCORM MINNEWTA AND THE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN. THE Fom TRUE AND CORRECT TO BEST OF MytcR 8E EF. DATE 1340 AV7 J0qj=p SIGNATURE RM OFFICE USE ONLY CRY Council Approval Owe: Date Issued! 0 y New Renewal &.f ' soul z- ow -d 6w-0 Z3 state zlp AT EACH FIXED IS UNLAWFUL AND Th THE LAWS OF 8TATEMENTS ARE FROM BARNA 6UZY & STEFFEN B. 6.1996 15:46 P. 3 102 RM81ss I'lnnesots Lawful L3ambung Application for Authorization for an Exemption from Lawful Gambling 1-icense 16 R=95% I - - 7801777 08-06-96 04:55PM, P003 #35 FROM BARNA GUZV & STEFFEN B. 6.1996 15:46 P. 4 L.ipcal Unit' df tavernment ;1�rrisdiction Is this gambling premises located within city lWts? CO Yes Q No If Yes, write the naum of the City: City Name, Eao n If No, write the name of the County and the Township: Township Name County Name nixed nincorporated Check the appropriate status of the Township: C anize�lnorga 'tool erit Ackni�wiedgMent Unit':0f..Governrn 1. The city must sign this application if the gambling 3. DO NOT submit this application to the Gambling Control premises is within city limits. Board if it is denied by the local unit of government. must si this applica- 4. NOTE: A Tov,riship may not deny an application. 2. The county and township gn tion if the gambling premises is not within city e issued not Upon submission of this spfor limits - plication estaf he 1 st class) he fConrim the date the ocai unl soard, the exemption it hof government more than 30 days (Bo days signed the application, provided the application is complete and all necessary information has been received, unless the local must be received b Government the Gambling asses a resolution Control Board within 30ibit the days of hivity. A e date copy of that resolution must y filled in below. Cities of the first class have W days in which to disallow the activity. Ci or County Acknowledgment of Receipt of Application Signature of person receiving application Date Received: g a Title of parson receiving application AaYA11,Je Asp r 060th of Chief Exe utIVO 1 haus read this appfj'catio d all info Township Acknowledgment of Awareness of Application Signature of person acknowled&S application Date Signed: Title of person acknowledging application is true, accurate and compieta. Data: 6 �. Submit application at least 45 days prior to your scheduled date of activity - Be sure to attach the $25 application fee and a copy of your proof of nonprofit status. Mail the complete application and attachments to: Gambling Control Board 1711 W. County Rd B SuitD 3005 Roseville, MN 55113 This publication will be made available in alternative format (i.e. large print, braille) upon request. Questions on this form should be directed to the Licensing Section of the Gambling Corift Board at (812)639-4008! g Hearing Impaired individuals Arearusin 53 In DE MetrolA the Minnesota Relay Service at 1-800-627-3529 in the Gr The information requested on this form will be used by the Gambling control Board (GCB) to determine your Compliance with Minnesota Statues and rules governing lawful gambling activities. All of the information that you supply on this form will become public information when received by the GCB. R-96% 7801777 08-06-96 04:55PM P004 #35 YJ 07-26-96 09AE-41 FP,OI! GIT° of HAGAN TO 99310751 $40.00 per license CITY OF EAGAN 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, ISN 55122-1897 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO SELL TOBACCO puce PnkVt Art Mi l ler APPLICANT Residential Address 6752 Upper 35th St. N. Business Address street - 1299 Promenade Place Oakdale city Eagan P002/002 -r-%6 -_R(P5� New Renewal ;35 -19-52 MN 55128 state zip N 55121 street city state ztp Home Phone 770-8649 ' Business Phone 686-96 9 Business name In Eagan where tobacco is to be sold Byer ly' s Business address in Eagan where totaaaco is to be sold. 1299 Promenade PI Wee W@ACCQ PRODUCTS TO BE SOLD: (Check aN that apply) X Cigarettes, cigars and other smoking tobacco X Snuff, plug and other che%Wiing tobacco X Clippings, cuttings and sweepings suitable for Chewing or smoking X F'ipes and nthAr tobacco rd&ed devices Cigarette papers and wrappers PACKAGINGF TOBACCO PRODUCTS T DLD (Check oil that appy X IndWidual pack or can _K Two or more packs or cans packaged together X Full cartons LQQATION OF TOBACCO PRQDUCTS WITHIN BUSING (Check all that 2 X Self-service merchandise (Only from 10 pm - 8 am) X Over-the-counter Vending machine Number of vending machines within business Accessible to store clerk only SEPARATE LICENSES SHALL BE ISSUED FOR THE SALE OF TOBACCO PR PLACE OF BUSINESS AND FOR EACH VENDING MACHINE. TOBACCO SALES TO ANY PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN (18)1'1 IS GROUNDS FOR SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE. I (WE) HEREBY AGREE TO OPERATE SUCH BUSINESS IN ACCORDANT MINNESOTA AND THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF KAGAN. THE FOREG TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Atli)BELIEF. DATE % ( 1(/� AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE -__------------------ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY City Council Approval Date: Date Issued: r, r� E UCTS AT EACH FIXED tS UNLAWFUL AND WITH THE LAWS OF JIG STATEMENTS ARE 07/26/96 09:43 TX/RX N0.8507 P.002 0