The URL can be used to link to this page

08/21/1990 - City Council RegularAGENDA REGULAR ME TING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING AUGUST 21, 1990 630 PAL L 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (BLUE) IL 6:35 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF M NU `M (BLUE) III. 6:45 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS (BLUE) A. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ( 1. 1990 Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan 312. PROJECT 598, Fire Station # p IV. 6:55 - CONSENT AGENDA (PINI) S A. PERSONNEL ITEMS B. 1990 General Fund Budget Adjustments • l� C. DEFERMENT, Special Assessments/Olsen ' D. DEFERMENT, Special Assessments/Coates • '.' E. RESOLUTIONS, Multifamily Residential Land Study F. VEHICLE #131, Receive Bids/Authorize Purchase (4 -Ton Asphalt Roller) Public Works Department �4 G. CONTRACT 90-09, Receive Bids/Award Contract (West Publishing & Wilmus Addition - Trunk Storm Sewer) H. PROJECT 589, Resolution Restricting On -Street Parking (Elrene Road) I. CONTRACT 89-05, Approve Change Order #1 (Skyline Drive - Storm Sewer) ,4 J. CONTRACT 89-QQ, Acknowledge Completion (George W. Giles Addition) K CONTRACT 90-04, Approve Change Order #3 (Coachman Road Right Turn Lane) L. PROJECT 572, Receive Final Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing (Lexington Way - Streets) M. PROJECT 581, Receive Final Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing (Hills of Stonebridge 2nd - Trunk Storm & Watermain) L&jN. PROJECT 508, Receive Final Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing (Daniel Drive - Streets & Utilities) O. FINAL PLAT, Country Hollow Second Addition FINAL PLAT, Sherwood Downs Q. FINAL PLAT, Boulder Ridge 2nd Addition V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS (SALMON) PROJECT 586, Final Assessment Hearing (South Oaks Addition - Streetlights) PROJECT 575, Final Assessment Hearing (Slaters Acres & James Street - Streetlights) to C. VACATE Drainage & Utility Easement (Lots 3 & 4, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park) VL OLD BUSINESS (ORCHID) Z A. CONSIDERATION of Plans for Storm Sewer Improvements for Stafford Place ' V B. AGREEMENT, Cost Participation, Fairway Hills 2nd and Dakota County ,JD C. RENEWALS, Trailer Permits 0kD. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT, City of Eagan, Area J, Multifamily Residential Land Study, to Change the Land Use Designation of Approximately 7.5 Acres from D -III Mixed Residential (6-12 Units Per Acre) to LB (Limited Business) and a REZONING of Approximately 7.5 Acres from A (Agricultural) to LB (Limited Business). Property Located on the South Side of Yankee Doodle Road East of Coachman Road in nthe NW 1/4 of Sec 16 VII. NEW BUSINESS (TAN) 9. A. PERMIT, Special Hunting, Jonathan R. Yanta, 7760 France Ave S, Bloomington RENEWAL, General Liability/Workers Compensation Insurance July 1, 1990 - June 30, 1991 �r C. CERTIFICATION of Proposed 1991 Property Tax Levy P. wrD. CERTIFICATION of 1991 Budget Public Hearing and Continuation Hearing Date E. VARIANCE for a Cul De Sac in Excess of 500 Feet, United Mortgage/Hills of Stonebridge 3rd, Located North ( of Diffley Road and East of Dodd Road in the SW 1/4 of Section 24 �sy F. PRELIMINARY PLAT, Finaserve, Inc. Addition/Fina Oil & Chemical Co, Consisting of Approximately 1.7 Acres for a Motor-Fuel Station and a CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT for a Pylon Sign and Motor-Fuel Sales Located at the Intersection of Highway 149 and Highway 55 in the NW 1/4 of Section 12 '. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT, Area A/Multifamily Residential Land Study, to Change the • Land Use Designation of Approximately 3.5 Acres from D-I (Single Family Residential, 0-3 Units Per Acre) to D-II (Mixed Residential, 0-6 Units Per Acre) and Approximately 9 Acres from D-I (Single Family Residential, 0- 3 Units Per Acre) to LB (Limited Business) and a REZONING of Approximately 9 Acres from R-4 (Multiple Residential) to LB (Limited Business). The Subject Property is Located Along the East Side of Highway 13, North of Yankee Doodle Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 8 r)q H. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT, Area Q/Multifamily Residential Land Study, to Change the Land Use Designation of Approximately 6 Acres from D-III (Mixed Residential, 6 to 12 Units Per Acre) to D-I (Single Family Residential, 0-3 Units Per Acre). The Subject Property is Located on the South Side of Diffley Road, West of Lexington Avenue in the NE 1/4 of Section 27 DL ADMRCSTRATIVE AGENDA (GREEN) X. VISTPORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda) XL ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCELIAEM 3ERS FROM: CTTY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: AUGUST 17, 1990 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR AUGUST 21, 1990 CTTY COUNCIL MEETING `ADtPT` 't After approval is given to the minutes for the August 7, 1990 regular City Council meeting and the August 7, 1990 Board of Appeals and Adjustments, the following items are in order for consideration: DEP:ARTATEN'T HEAD BI1SIl��ESS. ...... ...:_.;- PUBLIC .... . PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Item 1. Present the 1990 Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan --In 1965, the first Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan was prepared for the township. It has been subsequently updated and revised in 1972, 1978 and 1984. With each revision and updating, most recent development plans, zonings and technical design criteria are incorporated. In addition, this most recent revision also incorporates the policies and criterias associated with the recently adopted Comprehensive Water Quality Management Plan for the City. Subsequently, there are several modifications to the existing system that are recommended to increase the depth and water retention capabilities of several drainage basins for water quality and ground water recharge benefits. This plan identifies additional trunk storm sewer facilities and ponds that must be acquired and/or constructed to complete the overall system to accommodate the ultimate development of the community to handle surface water runoff in accordance with present day standards. This Comprehensive Plan is being forwarded to the City Council under separate cover for their review in anticipation of it being presented for formal adoption by Council action on September 18. This most recent update is a culmination of approximately 18 months of detailed review and analysis of our existing and anticipated future needs. It should serve the City well in helping to review and design future land developments well into the 21st century. If the City Council would like an informal presentation and discussion prior to the September 21 meeting, we will be happy to accommodate your schedule. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the 1990 Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan and schedule consideration for formal adoption for September 18. Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting Item 2. Project 598 (Galaxie Cliff Plaza 2nd Addition - Fire Station #5 Access Alternatives --On August 7, a public hearing was held to discuss the installation of streets and utilities to service the proposed Galaxie Cliff Plaza 2nd Addition under Project 598. As a part of that public hearing discussion, concern was raised regarding alternatives for the access 'to Fire Station #5 and the possible inclusion of relocating the existing Fire Station access under this project. On August 15, representatives of the Engineering Division, Planning Division, Fire Department and City Attorney's Office met with the developer to review alternative accesses and related land acquisition costs. Enclosed on pages 3 through 'I— is a memo from the Assistant City Engineer addressing the results of that meeting. This information is being presented to the City Council for their consideration and direction as to whether staff should proceed with negotiating the land acquisition at the costs identified and to set up the appropriate neighborhood meetings. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Plaza 2nd Addition) - Fire Station #5 Access direction to staff regarding future negotiations. To review Project 598 (Gala)de Cliff Alterntives, and provide appropriate MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: MICHAEL P FOERTSCH, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER DATE: AUGUST 17, 1990 SUBJECT: CITY PROJECT #90-10 - GALAXIE CLIFF PLAZA 2ND ADDN On Wednesday, August 15, 1990, representatives from City staff and the City Attorney's Office met with the owner of proposed Outlot D, Galaxie Cliff Plaza 2nd Addition, to discuss fire station access locations from proposed Plaza Drive. As you may recall from the public hearing for the project for Galaxie Cliff Plaza 2nd Addition, the City Council had concerns about providing access to Fire Station #5 and what effect it would have on the developability of proposed Outlot D. The following points were discussed at the meeting: • Proposed Outlot D was created by request from the City to provide access to the Astleford property and to align Plaza Drive opposite West Wind Trail. • The developer stated that Outlot D contains approximately 0.75 acres of gross area. • The PD Agreement for Galaxie Cliff Plaza includes a 50' "no build" buffer adjacent to Galaxie Avenue. • The owner indicated that Outlot D is valued at approximately $3.50 per square foot or in excess of $114,000 for the parcel. • The owner of proposed Outlot D stated that he was open to revisiting the issue of the intersection point of Plaza Drive with Galaxie Avenue. • The owner of proposed Outlot D stated that if access to the fire station is provided from Plaza Drive or not, the City's action to align Plaza Drive as shown created a "severance" damage to the property value. Seems contradictory to the statement of value of property. • At this point, City staff advised the owner of proposed Outlot D that the information discussed at the meeting would be forwarded to the Council for their input and direction to City staff. Attached for the Council's information are three proposed alternatives: Alternative A: Alternative A proposes to remove the existing driveway access onto Galaxie Avenue and take full access for the fire station from Plaza Drive. This proposal has caused some reservation from the Fire Department because it requires the responding firemen to cross in front of the bay doors which the emergency vehicles would be exiting from. Although this alternative is not the most desirable from the Fire Department's standpoint, it provides the least amount of impact to proposed Outlot D while still providing access to Plaza Drive. This alternative Page 2 would in turn require the vacation of the existing Galaxie Avenue street easement. The cost to construct these improvements for the fire station is estimated at approximately $37,000. As council may recall, the developer, as a condition of his preliminary plat approval for the Galaxie Cliff Plaza 2nd Addition, was required to provide access to Fire Station #5 from Plaza Drive. This cost was included in the total street cost as identified in the feasibility report for the project. Assuming a strip of land approximately 50' wide and 75' long (3750 square feet), a property value of $3.50 per square foot, the value of the property used to provide access to the fire station amounts to approximately $13,100. Alternative B: This alternative best addresses the concerns of the Fire Department. Access to Plaza Drive is provided for the exiting of emergency vehicles from the fire station and allows the firemen responding to the emergency to enter the fire station site from the existing driveway from Galaxie Avenue. This traffic circulation eliminates the potential conflict of the firemen responding to the fire with the exiting emergency vehicle. The construction dollars associated with this alternative assumes that the existing driveway will be left in its existing condition and that a new driveway is constructed from Plaza Drive and connected to the existing drive. The cost of this alternative is approximately $30,000. With this alternative, the value of the additional property necessary to construct the access to Plaza Drive would be the same as the first alternative. The question with this alternative is what value does the existing easement for Galaxie Avenue have. Alternative C: The last alternative reviewed was the "do nothing" alternative. This alternative proposes to leave the existing fire station access driveway in its present location and not provide access to the fire station from Plaza Drive. There would be no construction dollars associated with this alternative. The only question is the developability of proposed Outlot D as it exists, and the owner's potential claim for severance damages. Assista t City Engineer MPF/jj Enclosure im lox i i� tj 0 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting There are seventeen items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring 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 Additional Items unless the discussion required is brief. PERSONNEL ITEMS A. PERSONNEL ITEMS Item 1. Contract Fire Inspector --The Fire Department has money in its 1990 budget to fund approximately 60 hours per week for the services of a contract fire inspector(s). The City recently advertised for persons interested in contracting with the City to perform this service. Persons responding were interested in contracting either for 40 hours or 20 hours per week. Interviews for the 40 hour contract were held on Wednesday, August 8. Those persons on the interview panel were Chief Building Official Reid, Fire Marshal Wegleitner, District Chief DiIoia and Assistant to the City Administrator Duffy. It is the unanimous recommendation that the contract be offered to David Childers. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the contract with David Childers to perform fire inspection tasks for the City of Eagan. Item 2. TSP Review/Exempt Employees --The City of Eagan's position evaluation plan requires that Time Spent Profiles (TSP) for positions be reviewed annually if so requested by either an employee or supervisor. The Council has already approved the TSP review results for hourly employees. It is now appropriate to approve the review results for exempt employees. Fourteen TSPs were checked out for review by either exempt employees or their supervisors. No revisions were requested for three of those TSPs. Of the remainder of the TSPs, the review/revision process indicated that the point total for the Recreation Supervisor I position remained the same (75); the point total for the Land Development/Design Engineer remained the same (89); the point total for the Superintendent of Streets/Equipment went from 99 to 97 points; the point total for the Street Supervisor position went from 85 points to 84 points; the point total for the Head Mechanic/Shop Supervisor position went from 76 to 77 points; the point total for the Manager of Support Services (Police Department) went from 86 to 87 points; the point total for the Assistant City Engineer position went from 97 to 100 points; and the point total for the Assistant Chief Building Official went from 87 to 86 points. None of the above reviews/revisions require compensation adjustments. However, the review did indicate that the point total for the position of Recreation Supervisor II went from 78 to 82 points. This basically changes this position from exempt wage range I to exempt wage Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting range J. The City had had separate TSPS for the two Senior Engineering Techs/Supervisor positions. It was the decision of the City Administrator and Department Heads that these two positions be given one TSP. The point total of that TSP is 82. (Point totals for the two separate TSPs were also run; the results were 83 and 81 points respectively.) This revision will cause a wage range change for the Senior Engineering Tech Supervisor (construction activities) from exempt range I to exempt range J. The compensation adjustment, per City policy, will be retroactive to January 1, 1990 as were the other TSP compensation adjustments. For the Council's information, the City plans to begin an all - position TSP review this fall, as required by legislation and to provide information for the pay equity report which the City must submit to the Department of Employee Relations for December 31, 1991. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the above changes in point totals as indicated by revisions to Time Spent Profiles for exempt positions as indicated above. Also, to approve a compensation level change from exempt level I to exempt level J for both the Recreation Supervisor II and the Senior Engineering Tech/Supervisor (construction activities) retroactive to January 1, 1990. Item 3. Child Care Leave --According to the City's personnel policy, employees are allowed to use up to six months of unpaid leave, sick leave, vacation or a combination of the aforementioned types of leave for "child care leave" in order to care for a newborn or newly adopted infant. The policy requires that the City Administrator approve this type of leave. For your information, City Administrator Hedges has received and has approved child care leaves for the following two City of Eagan employees: Clerical Technician III Tina Zink of the Finance Department from the birth of her child which is due in late September/early October for the six month period and for Investigator Linda Myhre of the Police Department from approximately the middle of November, 1990 until the end of April, 1991. This item is informational and requires no action on the part of the City Council. Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting 1990 GENERAL FUND BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS B. 1990 General Fund Budget Adjustments—Throughout each year the Finance Department in cooperation with each of the other departments monitors revenues and expenditures which were either not budgeted or are not being collected or spent as expected. These variances to the budget are accumulated and then presented to the City Council for formal budget adjustment authorization. Attached on pages and " is a copy of a memo from Assistance Finance Director Damlo detailing the adjustments which are being recommended for approval at this time. Also included in the memo is a brief explanation of the activities necessitating the adjustments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the 1990 General Fund Budget Adjustments as presented. MEMO TO: FINANCE DIRECTOR/CITY CLERK VANOVERBEKE FROM: ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR DAMLO DATE: AUGUST 13, 1990 SUBJECT: 1990 GENERAL FUND BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS Consideration should be given to the following line item account budget adjustments to reflect certain activity which has occurred to date in 1990, as specified below. POLICE ACCREDIDATION Revenue Account Expenditure Account 01-3980-000-00 + $ 4,870.00 01-4414-153-11 + $ 25.00 01-4560-156-11 + 210.00 01-4226-153-11 + 590.00 01-4210-153-11 + 50.00 01-4210-156-11 + 1,220.00 01-4211-156-11 + 765.00 01-4530-150-11 + 700.00 01-4233-000-07 + 570.00 01-4383-000-07 + 740.00 $ 4,870.00 $ 4,870.00 This activity relates to Police Accredidation expenditures for January - July, 1990. The $4,870.00 will be transferred from Fund #14 - Police Fines & Forfeitures. D.A.R.E. Revenue Account 01-3850-000-00 + $ 2,920.00 $ 2,920.00 Expenditure Account 01-4211-161-11 + $ 20.00 01-4220-161-11 + 640.00 01-4224-161-11 + 2,160.00 01-4411-161-11 + 100.00 $ 2,920.00 This activity relates to the Police D.A.R.E. program, and reflects expenditures for January -June, 1990. The amount will be deducted from the Lion's Club donation which was recorded in a deferred revenue account (01-2450-001-00). ARBOR DAY/TREE SALE Revenue Account 01-3850-000-00 01-3581-000-00 + $ 2,530.00 + 7,110.00 $ 9,640.00 Expenditure Account 01-4350-000-32 01-4250-000-32 01-4530-000-32 01-4328-000-32 01-4840-000-32 + $ 1,540.00 + 540.00 + 250.00 + 200.00 + 7,110.00 $ 9,640.00 This reflects the Arbor Day program for which the City received a donation of $2,537.40 from First Bank Eagan, and also activity relating to the tree sale. POLICE VESTS Revenue Account 01-3850-000-00 + $ 350.00 $ 350.00 Expenditure Account 01-4224-153-11 + $ 350.00 $ 350.00 This was a donation from Super America intended to assist the Police Dept. in purchasing protective vests. CABLE TV Revenue Account 01-3980-000-00 + $ 190.00 $ 190.00 Expenditure Account 01-4550-000-10 + $ 190.00 $ 190.00 This was an expenditure for installation of a monitor mounting bracket to provide cable television service in the Municipal Center lunchroom to accomodate overflow crowds at public meetings. The amount will be transferred from Fund #96 - Cable TV Franchise Fees. These adjustments result in a total increase to the General Fund budget of $17,970.00. If approved at the August 21, 1990, City Council meeting, they will be reflected on the August financial reports. Let me know if there are any questions regarding this matter. c /2 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting DEFERMENT. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS/OMEN C. Deferment of Special Assessments/Olsen—Enclosed on page is a copy of an application from Dorothy A. Olsen requesting deferment of assessments related to Project 466 for parcel #10-02800-020-79. The property is located at 4565 Pilot Knob Road. Also enclosed without page number is support information concerning this application. Mrs. Olsen is not 65 years old and is therefore not technically eligible as a senior citizen. The City Code however also allows the deferment by a person who is retired by virtue of permanent and total disability. Staff has not verified the disability beyond the statement included in her letter that she is unable to be employed full-time because of personal physical problems. Mrs. Olsen clearly qualifies from the financial standpoint. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the special assessment deferment for Mrs. Dorothy A. Olsen for parcel #10-02800-020-79. /-3 APPLICATION AND AUTHORIZATION FOR DELAYED PAYMENT OF TAX ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR SENIOR CITIZENS' HOMESTEAD LAWS 1974, CHAPTER 206 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) f C! DATE TO: County Auditor, Dakota County, Minnesota I, the undersigned, declare undepenalties of perjury: That I reside at YS -,(-, h Db (�Lr Faa c 19 t v my birth is - __150 That I am the owner of the property legally described as: Section 28 Twp p 27 Range 23 PT OF SE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 COM 528 FT N OF SE COR W 435.6 FT N 300 FT E 435.6 FT S 300 FT TO BEG SUBJ TO HWY ESMNT PARCELS 9 & 9-1 IN CTY R/W MAP 25 & 25A Property Identification No. 10-02800-020-79 That my interest in the ownership of the above property was aquired on January 1.9 64 and is as follows: ' 1. Sole ownership (Enter Yes, if applicable) �lt� 2. Joint tenancy, held with 3. OTHER undivided interest (Specify) That on January 2, 19 90 or June 1, 19 90 I owned and occupied the above property as my homestead and such occupancy began on 19 That the installments for improvements on the SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS duly adopted in ordin- ance by the City Council OF Eagan AS OF 8-14 1990 which have been allocated against the subject property would create undue personal hard- ship on my behalf and I respectfully request that payment be delayed and that such in- stallments be so deferred for the years 19 90 to time eligibility is lost SIGNEDC"�(' cd Eo1S� _ C':ER SPOUSE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I, Clerk of the OF IN County, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that the application of above named, has been duly reviewed and that in aczcrdance with the: minutes of official record in said chambers was duly : APPROVED or DENIED as of 19 That in accordance with approval granted, the SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS listed below on the affiants subject property levied for annual collection in the amounts and for the years shown be so deferred with interest at the annual rate shown until such time as it is deemed the applicant no longer qualifies or the property loses its eligibility. ASSESSMENT D/P NO. TOTAL AMOUNT YEARS INTEREST RATE Water lateral Street 2066 2069 3837:18 10 5316.00 10 DATED 19 Clerk or Authorized Deputy 91- 9°( % (over) Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting DEFERMENT, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTSICOATFS D. Deferment of Special Assessments/Coates—Enclosed on page is a copy of an application from Mr. and Mrs. Neil F. Coates requesting deferment of assessments related to Project 466 for parcel #10-78200-020-01. The parcel is located at 4605 Pilot Knob Road. Also enclosed without page number is support information concerning this application. Mr. and Mrs. Coates meet the City Code requirements for both age and income. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the special assessment deferment for Mr. and Mrs. Neil F. Coates for parcel #10-78200-020-01 for Project 466. /S00600, APPLICATION AND AUTHORIZATION FOR DELAYED PAYMENT OF TAX ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR SENIOR CITIZENS' HOMESTEAD LAWS 1974, CHAPTER 206 STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) - DATE A _; g ; s • s 19� TO: County Auditor, Dakota County, Minnesota - I, the undersigned, declare under penalties of perjury: That I reside at U605 Pilot Knob Road. Eagan, MN That I am not less than 65 years of age and that the date of my birth is Mav 5; 1071 That I am the owner of the property legally described as: Twin View Manor. ,aj l of Lot 1 B1_ock 1 & A1.1- of Subj to Hwy Esmnt Parcel. b CityMap , Property Identification No10•-78200•-020 .01 That my interest in the ownership of the above property was aquired on October 7. 1958 1.9 and is as follows: 1. Sole ownership (Enter Yes, if applicable) 2. Joint tenancy, held with Neil. F. Coates 3. OTHER undivided interest (Specify) That on January 2, 19 $L2 or June 1, 19,oI owned and occupied the above property as my homestead and such occupancy began on December �. 19 58 That the installments for improvements on the SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS duly adopted in ordin- ance by the Gft 6 L7.fifer OF ,.L AS OF 19,6,o which have been allocated against the subject pro ty would create undue personal hard- ship on my behalf and I respectfully request that payment be delayed and that such in- stallments be so deferred for the years 19 to SIGNED:oe /� r:i (�' OWNER SPOUSE FOS. CITY- -OSEONLY• I, Clerk of the OF IN County, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that the application of above named, has been duly reviewed and that in aczcrdance with the minutes of official record in said chambers was duly : APPROVED or DENIED as of 19 That in accordance with approval granted, the SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS listed below on the affiants subject property levied for annual collection in the amounts and for the years shown be so deferred with interest at the annual rate shown until such time as it is deemed the applicant no longer qualifies or the property loses its eligibility. ASSESSMENT D/P NO. TOTAL AMOUNT YEARS INTEREST RATE Storm sewer lateral 2068 Street 2069 5937.50 10 9% 865.49 10 DATED 19 Clerk or Authorized Deputy 9% (V (over) Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting RESOLUT IONSIMU-LTIFAMII.Y RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY AREAS C, K AND L E.. Resolutions, Multifamily Residential Land Study Enclosed on pages through ,, you will find resolutions incorporating the findings of the City Council with respect to multifamily residential land study areas C, K and L. Each resolution addresses a different parcel by property identification number and, as a consequence there are more resolutions than study areas in this action. The resolution on pages `~dWrefers to study area C, the resolutio s on pages through refer to study area K and the resolutions on pages through refer to study area L. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the resolutions pertinent to multifamily residential land study areas C, K and L. 17 R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission noted that Tax Identification Parcel 10-00900-011-02, while approximately sixteen acres in size and designated D -III (6 to 12 units per acre), was inconsistent in that it has a zoning designation of R-4 (PD) for the northerly six acres and a zoning designation of R-3 (PD) for the southerly ten acres, respectively. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning within P.I.D. 10-00900-011-02 (pt) from R-4 (PD) to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. One zoning designation would better serve the development of the property; 2. The R-3 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; 3. The R-3 use would be consistent and harmonious with neighborhood characteristics; 4. No written Planned Development Agreement could be found or located which addressed this property; 5. R-4 is not harmonious with the adjacent school and park; 6. The R-4 use imposes a disproportionate heavy burden on City services; and (9 WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990 and July 10, 1990, respectively; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 1. Approve a rezoning within P.I.D. 10-00900-011-02 from R-4 (PD) Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential. CITY OF EAGAN ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor as R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and a I WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission noted that Tax Identification Parcel 10-01700-010-53, while approximately nine acres in size and zoned Agricultural, was inconsistent in that it has a D -III (6 to 12 units per acre) designation for the westerly 5 acres and a D -IV (over 12 units per acre) designation for the easterly 4 acres in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan, respectively. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation within P.I.D. 10-01700-010-53 (pt) from D -IV Mixed Residential (over 12 units per acre) to D -III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre) and did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-010-53 from A Agricultural to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. One comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation would better serve the development of the property; 2. The R-3 use would be consistent and harmonious with surrounding uses; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 02so;?— 1. Approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation within P.I.D. 10-01700-010-53(pt) from D -IV Mixed Residential (over 12 units per acre) to D -III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre); and 2. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-010-53 from A Agricultural to R-3 Townhouse Residential. ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk C04`4 1 Kai�*W-��7 By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and a� WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission noted that the Tax Identification Parcel 10-22451-010-00 is zoned R-4 and is designated D -IV (over 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of P.I.D. 10-22451-010-00 from D -IV Mixed Residential (over 12 units per acre) to D -III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre) and a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-22451-010-00 from R-4 Miltiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. Traffic concerns and the resulting public safety hazards from the increased traffic on Blackhawk Road; 2. The R-4 uses of the property would not be harmonious with the existing surrounding residential uses; 3. An R-4 use would be detrimental to the natural topography; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 1. Approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of P.I.D. 10-22451-010-00 from D -IV Mixed Residential (over 12 units per acre) to D -III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre); and 2. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-22451-010-00 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential. ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor o2G R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and WHEREAS the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency in that Tax Identification Parcel 10-01700-040-78, while zoned R-4 has been designated D -III (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-040-78 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. Traffic concerns and the resulting public safety hazards from the increased traffic on Blackhawk Road; 2. The R-4 uses of the property would not be harmonious with the existing surrounding residential uses; 3. An R-4 use would be detrimental to the natural topography; 4. The R-3 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 1. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-040-78 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential. ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor R E S O L D T 1 O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and 30 WHEREAS the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency in that Tax Identification Parcel 10-01700-010-79, while zoned R-4 has been designated D -III (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-010-79 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. Traffic concerns and the resulting public safety hazards from the increased traffic on Blackhawk Road; 2. The R-4 uses of the property would not be harmonious with the existing surrounding residential uses; 3. An R-4 use would be detrimental to the natural topography; 4. The R-3 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 3/ 1. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-010-79 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential. ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and 55 WHEREAS the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency in that Tax Identification .Parcel 10-01700-010-80, while zoned R-4 has been designated D -III (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-010-80 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. Traffic concerns and the resulting public safety hazards from the increased traffic on Blackhawk Road; 2. The R-4 uses of the property would not be harmonious with the existing surrounding residential uses; 3. An R-4 use would be detrimental to the natural topography; 4. The R-3 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 3 � 1. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-010-80 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential. ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk35 CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and 3G WHEREAS the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency in that Tax Identification Parcel 10-01700-030-80, while zoned R-4 has been designated D -III (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-030-80 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. Traffic concerns and the resulting public safety hazards from the increased traffic on Blackhawk Road; 2. The R-4 uses of the property would not be harmonious with the existing surrounding residential uses; 3. An R-4 use would be detrimental to the natural topography; 4. The R-3 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 37 1. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-030-80 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential. ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and 3 � WHEREAS the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency in that the southerly seven (7) acres of Tax Identification Parcel 10-01700-010-77, while zoned R-4 has been designated D -III (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning within P.I.D. 10-01700-010-77 (pt) from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. Traffic concerns and the resulting public safety hazards from the increased traffic on Blackhawk Road; 2. The R-4 uses of the property would not be harmonious with the existing surrounding residential uses; 3. An R-4 use would be detrimental to the natural topography; 4. The R-3 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 40 1. Approve a rezoning within P.I.D. 10-01700-010-77 (pt) from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential. ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and 4.L WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency that Tax Identification Parcel 10-01700-011-51, while zoned Agricultural has been designated D -III (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-011-51 from A Agricultural to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. The R-3 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; 2. The R-3 use would be consistent and harmonious with surrounding uses; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 1. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-011-51 from A Agricultural to R-3 Townhouse Residential. CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor �3 ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk 44 R E 8 O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency that Tax Identification Parcel 10-01700-011-51, while zoned Agricultural has been designated D -III (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-011-51 from A Agricultural to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. The R-3 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; 2. The R-3 use would be consistent and harmonious with surrounding uses; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 1. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-011-51 from A Agricultural to R-3 Townhouse Residential. CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency that Tax Identification Parcel 10-01700-010-52, while zoned Agricultural has been designated D -III (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-010-52 from A Agricultural to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. The R-3 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; 2. The R-3 use would be consistent and harmonious with surrounding uses; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 1. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-01700-010-52 from A Agricultural to R-3 Townhouse Residential. CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor qq ATTEST: By: E. J. Vanoverbeke Its: Clerk :50 R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 22, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and S/ WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission noted that the Tax Identification Parcel 10-77100-010-00 is zoned R-4 and is designated D-IV (over 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of P.I.D. 10-77100-010-00 from D-IV Mixed Residential (over 12 units per acre) to D-III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre) and a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-77100-010-00 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. Traffic concerns and the resulting public safety hazards from the increased traffic on Blackhawk Road; 2. The R-4 uses of the property would not be harmonious with the existing surrounding residential uses; 3. An R-4 use would be detrimental to the natural topography; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on June 19, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 1. Approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of P.I.D. 10-77100-010-00 from D-IV Mixed Residential (over 12 units per acre) to D-III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre); and 0 2. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-77100-010-00 from R-4 Multiple Residential to R-3 Townhouse Residential. ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor I� R E 8 0 L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on June 26, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and 54 WHEREAS the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency in that Tax Identification Parcel 10-68060-020-00, while zoned R-4 has been designated Ind (Industrial) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-68060-020-00 from R-4 Multiple Residential to I-1 (Limited Industrial); and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. The I-1 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; 2. The proximity to the Seneca Plant; 3. The heavy truck traffic in the area; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission's recommendations came before the City Council on July 17, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 1. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-68060-020-00 from R-4 Multiple Residential to I-1 (Limited Industrial). CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor S� ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk S% R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, in the Spring of 1989, the City Council authorized a comprehensive study of multi -family residential zoned/designated property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a written report prepared by the Community Development Department, it was noted that Eagan has a large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land and further that Eagan possessed a higher than average percentage of existing multi -family units; and WHEREAS, the City Council held informational meetings involving all of the property identified in the Multi -Family Residential Study for the purpose of determining whether the existing zoning or designation was appropriate as far as general location; known history; general environment and alternatives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department, at the request of the City Council, did provide notice and an opportunity to review the findings of the Multi -Family Residential Study with each of the affected property owners; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the property owners' comments, both oral and written, the City Council did direct that the property noted below be publicly noticed and forwarded to the Advisory Planning Commission for a formal recommendation regarding a potential rezoning; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on June 26, 1990 before the Advisory Planning Commission; and 5"'07 WHEREAS the Advisory Planning Commission noted an inconsistency in that Tax Identification Parcel 10-68060-031-00, while zoned R-4 has been designated Ind (Industrial) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. NOW THEREFORE, upon all the evidence, testimony, records and proceedings, the Advisory Planning Commission did recommend to approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-68060-031-00 from R-4 Multiple Residential to I-1 (Limited Industrial); and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation was in part based on the following reasons: 1. The I-1 use would be consistent with the present Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation; 2. The proximity to the Seneca Plant; 3. The heavy truck traffic in the area; and WHEREAS, the Advisory Planning Comr,ission's recommendations came before the City Council on July 17, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council heard further comment from the public, and had available to it the records of the previous proceedings. Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the Eagan City Council did: 1. Approve a rezoning of P.I.D. 10-68060-031-00 from R-4 Multiple Residential to I-1 (Limited Industrial). CITY OF EAGAN By: Thomas A. Egan Its: Mayor re6 ATTEST: By: E. J. VanOverbeke Its: Clerk I Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990, City Council Meeting VEHICLE #131, RECEIVE BIDS/AUTHORIZE PURCHASE F. Vehicle #131, Receive Bids/Authorize Purchase (4 -Ton Asphalt Roller) --At 11:00 a.m., on August 17, formal bids were received for the purchase of a 4-5 ton articulated double - drum self- ropelled asphalt roller for the street maintenance operations. Enclosed on page is a tabulation of the bids received. An evaluation of the bids will be performed to determine if there are any deviations or variations from the bid specifications. Any significant comments or concerns will be addressed at the Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids for Vehicle #131 (4 -ton Asphalt Roller) and authorize the purchase from the appropriate low bidder. *Note: A memo from the Superintendent of Streets/Equipment regarding the bid tabulation will be included with the Additional Information Packet on Monday. LA r.a A q (9( m N 41 U fa a' 0 0 0 'd o0 O N co O 00 rh N i r•� O H O O O H I O O O C b 11i 14 N .-4 H b 0 0 0 Qa 000 N Q+ O 00 .� Ln �v � 0 o G � � a x CLO cli o N —4 N x 1•+ N 7 00 H U � O N O •,4 Oa � ani a � GL V1 ♦i? 14 A -i14 � � W 7+ d3 E w G ° .G c v o u w � a � u G a� (9( m N 41 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990, City Council Meeting RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT ONEST PUBLISHING & WILMUS ADDN G. Contract 90-09, Receive Bids/Award Contract (West Publishing & Wilmus Addition - Trunk Storm Sewer) --At 10:00 a.m., on Friday, August 17, formal bids were received for the above -referenced contract which would provide for the trunk storm sewer outlets for the West Publishing 3rd Addition d the Wilmus Addition under Project 585 & 592, respectively. Enclosed on page is a tabulation of the bids received which show the comparison of the low bid to the feasibility report estimate for each project. All bids will be reviewed for their accuracy and compliance with the bid specification documents and any deviations will be discussed at the meeting on August 21. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids and award Contract 90-09 (West Publishing & Wilmus Addition - Trunk Storm Sewer) to the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. m WEST PUBLISHING 3RD ADDITION (P3 PROJECT #585 WILMUS ADDITION PROJECT #592 CONTRACT 090-09 EAGAN, MINNESOTA BID TIME: 10:00 A.M. BID DATE: FRI., AUGUST 17, 1990 CONTRACTORS TOTAL BASE BID 1. Danner $ 464,637.42 2. Brown and Cris 474,336.95 3. Richard Knutson, Inc. 479,701.00 4. Glendale Contracting 495,375.50 5. R. D. McLean 497,029.00 6. Barbarossa & Sons 545,318.70 7. J. P. Norex 562,000.00 8. Northdale Const. 567,706.75 LOW BID $ 464,637.42 Feasibility Estimate $ 393,113.00 Engineer's Estimate $ 485,000.00 $ Over (+) Under (-) F.R. + 18.2% $ Over (+) Under (-) E.E. - 04.2% Preliminary % Over (+) Engineer's % Over (+) Resort Under C-) Estimate Under _[-) Low Bid Wilmus $ 210,253.00 - 02.37% 235,000.00 - 12.65% $ 205,275.05 West Pub. 182.860.00 + 41.84% 250.000.00 + 03.74% $ 259.362.37 $ 393,113.00 485,000.00 $ 464,637.42 (P3 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990, City Council Meeting APPROVE RESOLUTION RESTRICTING ON -STREET PARKING ELRENE ROAD H. Project 589, Approve Resolution Restricting On -Street Parking (Elrene Road) --In order for the design width of Elrene Road to be reduced from the 44' standard to the proposed 36' width which is not sufficient to accommodate on -street parking, it is necessary for the Council to approve a Resolution restricting on -street parking through this section of roadway. Enclosed on pages44 through " is a copy of the Resolution and Certification form addressing this issue. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve a Resolution restricting on -street parking for Elrene Road under Project 589 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. CERTIFICATE CITY OF EAGAN STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA CITY OF EAGAN I, the undersigned being the duly qualified City Clerk of the City of Eagan, Minnesota, hereby attest and certify that: 1. As such officer, I have the legal custody of the original record from which the attached resolution was transcribed. 2. I have carefully compared the attached resolution with the original record of the meeting at which the resolution was acted upon. 3. I find the attached resolution to be a true, correct and complete copy of the original RESOLUTION NO. 90 - RESOLUTION APPROVING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON MINNESOTA STATE AID HIGHWAY 195-123 (ELRENE ROAD) BETWEEN CSAR 28 AND WRO= DRIVE IN THE CITY OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA 4. I further certify that the affirmative vote on said resolution was ayes, naves, and absent/abstention. 5. Said meeting was duly held, pursuant to call and notice thereof, as required by law, and a quorum was present. WITNESS my hand officially as such Clerk and the Seal of said City, this day of 1990. (Jf Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990, City Council Meeting APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #1 ( SKYLINE RD) I. Contract 89-05, Approve Change Order #1 (Skyline Road - Storm Sewer) --This Change Order consists of two parts described as follows: Part 1. This provides for a change in the storm sewer alignment across Lot 12, Treffle Acres (Phil Heller) in an effort to minimize the damages associated with the condemnation acquisition of the easement. (Add $3,508) Part 2. This provides for the deletion of the sanitary sewer and water services beyond the public right-of-way that is typical with new development construction prior to the installation of private utilities (gas, telephone, electric, etc.) that is not appropriate in this situation due to these private utilities already existing. It also provides for the installation of sewer service cleanouts being installed at the property lines for the deep sanitary sewer risers to provide better maintenance and minimize future blockages. (Add $2,054) The total of Parts 1 & 2 amount to a total change addition to the contract of $5,562. This cost will be added to the total project cost and assessed against the benefitted property owners in accordance with the feasibility report. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Change Order #1 to Contract 89-05 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. ACKNO`NTEDGE COMPLETION (GEORGE W. GILES ADDN) J. Contract 89-QQ, Acknowledge Completion - George W. Giles Addition (Utilities) --The installation of utilities to service the above -referenced subdivision were installed privately by the developer under the terms and conditions of the development agreement. These improvements have been completed in accordance with the requirements of the development agreement, inspected by City staff and found to be in order for formal acknowledgement of completion for future City maintenance of those public related facilities. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To acknowledge the completion of Contract 89-00 (George W. Giles Addition) and authorize perpetual maintenance by the City of related public facilities subject to appropriate warranty conditions. CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION RESOLUTION APPROVING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON MINNESOTA STATE AID HIGHWAY 195-123 (ELRENE ROAD) BETWEEN CSAR 28 AND WINDTREE DRIVE IN THE CITY OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA CITY PROJECT NO. 589 WHEREAS, plans and specifications have been prepared for improvements on Minnesota State Aid Highway 195-123 (Elrene Road) between CSAR 28 (Yankee Doodle Road) and windtree Drive in the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota (S.A.P. 195-123-02); and WHEREAS, in accordance with Minnesota State Aid Highway Standards the design of the street does not provide adequate width to allow parking on either side of Elrene Road between CSAR 28 and Wescott Road; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Aid Highway Standards require that certain parking restrictions be placed on MSAH 195-123 in order to assist in mitigating hazards which may be caused by the deviation of width from Minnesota State Aid Highway Standards; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has proposed the parking restriction on MSAH 195-123 as a necessary prerequisite to approval of project S.A.P. 195-123-02 as a Minnesota State Aid Project in the City of Eagan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, approve a restriction which bans parking on both sides of Minnesota State Aid Highway 195-123 (Elrene Road) between CSAR 28 (Yankee Doodle Road) and windtree Drive in the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, this day of , 1990. Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990, City Council Meeting APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #3 COACHMAN RD RIGHT -TURN LANE' K. Contract 90-04, Approve Change Order #3 (Coachman Road Right -Turn Lane) --This Change Order provides for the widening of the south leg of the Coachman Road intersection with Yankee Doodle Road as necessary to accommodate a right -turn lane as a part of the signalization of this intersection. The cost associated with this Change Order ($11,478) will be the responsibility of the Major Street Fund which is also financing the City's share of the signalization project through the County. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Change Order #3 to Contract 90-04 (Coachman Road Right -Turn Lane) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. RECEIVE FINAL ASSMT ROLUORDER PUBLIC HEARING (LEXINGTON WAY) L. Project 572, Receive Final Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing (Lexington Way - Street & Water Main) --The installation of streets and water main facilities under the above -referenced project has now been completed, all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. This roll is now being presented to the City Council for their consideration of scheduling a final assessment public hearing to present these final figures to the affected benefitted property owners. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the final assessment roll for Project 572 (Lexington Way - Street & Water Main) and order the final assessment public hearing to be held on September 18, 1990. m Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990, City Council Meeting RECEIVE FINAL ASSMT ROLUORDER PUBLIC HEARING SII FLLS OF STONEBRIDGE 2ND ADDN1 M. Project 581, Receive Final Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing (Hills of Stonebridge 2nd Addition - Trunk Water Main & Storm Sewer) --The installation of trunk water main and storm sewer along Dodd Road adjacent to Hills of Stonebridge 2nd Addition has now been completed, all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. This roll is now being presented to the City Council for their consideration of scheduling a final assessment public hearing to present these final figures to the affected benefitted property owners. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the final assessment roll for Project 581 (Hills of Stonebridge 2nd Addition - Trunk Water Main & Storm Sewer) and order the final assessment public hearing to be held on September 18, 1990. RECEIVE FINAL ASSMT ROLLIORDER PUBLIC HEARING (DANIEL DR) N. Project 508, Receive Final Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing (Daniel Drive - Streets & Utilities) --The installation of streets and water main facilities under the above - referenced project has now been completed, all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. This roll is now being presented to the City Council for their consideration of scheduling a final assessment public hearing to present these final figures to the affected benefitted property owners. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the final assessment roll for Project 508 (Daniel Drive - Streets & Utilities) and order the final assessment public hearing to be held on September 18, 1990. �1 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting FINAL FIAT ICOUNTRY HOLLOW SECOND ADDITION O. Final Plat, Country Hollow Second Addition—Documents relative to the final plat for Country Hollow Second Addition are being processed by both the applicant and the Department of Community Development. If agreements are properly executed and all conditions have been met, the final plat will be in order for approval at the August 21, 1990 Council meeting. If not, a recommendation to continue this item will be made at the time of the adoption of the agenda for the meeting. Enclosed on page —IL is a copy of the final plat as it appears for signature and recording at Dakota County. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for Country Hollow Second Addition. -•s r: •:1 .f it 9;:: a i:; =i iii �s! .1 � •i Q 's; E� iii I ;i � -;i �� •� I i' I a E=: z ' si i i r I= s= i.9; if _ Ica _= Iia = SH = I if .i it = =F.'"i:: 31 :i 1r -;H Es HS nl; I: Q s 3:i.mi :' ::= •rs: Y ri I ii = 1e i I I� :if z /W V / l Sir 9e; o � i to �. S ��i d �• t+ � i r yrs i� 4 � i N 'S a T� � S .-••yf .. =1rr:.-�_. _t.fl_._r�. .t•...e•c�..�!__ _!•!__.AH.! wr t N fS ry•AW � .4a1ia- ti t - T7 4 �7 �ifL 1TT .�'!r: lthia+tajl- 'f f L r_n Wit' 1�f TT•� 1' .i.. +.ate i� � .•► i�Y--- •rte- i••'::"_-+..�' '�.♦ w is f 01 '� • `,ib + • 'r 'r r'I.lte • �1 P a ••fir f?, •' (�•'•� V � �l �1�.� � r, A t + /.4lr,A 101 I � i I4.a'1 ntl 1S � .• . .1 n � ,� vw •..r_ �� i Ji!L't•w U� _: 1.7 S ft tj/f t ty, re a. i• i Y t r74. ~�^ Ji --F 1 Yi IIt 'f r 7� a: .yf{± -f ,lv,tac Lg / � 3_ TT •. rG• •Y� }'tL � :0314 is �t C4 ••ry LO LU I� Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting FINAL PLAT HERWOOD DOWNS P. Final Plat, Sherwood Downs—Documents relative to the final plat for Sherwood Downs Addition are being processed by both the applicant and the Department of Community Development. If agreements are properly executed and all conditions have been met, the final plat will be in order for approval at the August 21, 1990 Council meeting. If not, a recommendation to continue this item will be made at the time of the adoption of the agenda for the meeting. Enclosed on page is a copy of the final plat as it appears for signature and recording at Dakota County. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for Sherwood Downs Addition. Z 0 a C 0 0 M W i I 1� �- s1 av •+w• .wt...e •L+Isyr L � �' •�•`t l ►.w af�' �.'., .'RI/ .11.•n49 rj4MR1 / (oreir IONY 401m) it 'ON N'I's AF 1 1 �i `* � ice.• •. •'.' � ; �� ''` u � � C ++ +I i ,1 V �+:., Vit' "� �y1 • l,`ri�i++ ♦ � ++��` ,' +r 1 , a _J i I■r. _•.� ��j � • �..rl � ,, / ,•.�.i��"'� �� , �C14r«w)I07f.1 iy it I 13 1 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting FINAL PIAT MULDER RIDGE 2ND ADDITION Q. Final Plat, Boulder Ridge 2nd Addition—Documents relative to the final plat for Boulder Ridge 2nd Addition are being processed by both the applicant and the Department of Community Development. If agreements are properly executed and all conditions have been met, the final plat will be in order for approval at the August 21, 1990 Council meeting. If not, a recommendation to continue this item will be ade at the time of the adoption of the agenda for the meeting. Enclosed on page is a copy of the final plat as it appears for signature and recording at Dakota County. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for Boulder Ridge 2nd Addition. -1 � +fife ai i t �• -f`? ;1 1 =;' 02 t H I k , I I jf. 111.1 2A. 10: 2; lit iii. ;l's iFii•�$if �'•is� _ ! •u �:, ; �f ! �ii � _ 4A in uj In jz 4�i 3 C E V? �v A. y47— vj,%j,V Sw —V /..Y� F La .1, ISO q 4Q PFj �g -t;r- e 0 >_ ......... ..... Wd -L 6 . ......... 1.2 ss 1H. Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 Cite Council Meeting PROD. 586. FINAL ASSESS'MEN'T HEARING (SOUTH OAFS ADDITION -STREETLIGHTS) A. Project 586, Final Assessment Hearing (South Oaks Addition -Streetlights) --The installation of residential streetlights within the South Oaks Addition has now been completed, final costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared identiNing the costs to be assessed against the benefitted properties associated with this project. The final assessment roll was presen ed on July 17th with the public hearing scheduled for August 21st. Enclosed on page is a summary tabulation of the final assessments compared to those estimated in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on November 9t 1989. The slight increase in cost is associated with the additional trenching under existing driveways during installation that was not anticipated with the concept design under the feasibility report. All notices have been published in the legal new-spape. and sent to all affected property ou-ners informing them of this public hearing. The City staff will be available to address any questions or concerns regarding this public hearing process. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and adopt the final assessment roll for Project 586 (South Oaks Addition -Streetlights) and authorize the certification to Dakota Counrv. 7,K FIRAL A.SSESSMENT BEdRING PROJECT NUMBER: 586 •SUBDIVISION/AREA: SOUTH OAKS ADDITI014 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F.R. - Feasibility Report SANITARY Sr'i"ER ❑ Trunk ❑ Laterals ❑ Service ❑ Lat. Benefit/ Trunk F A. TER ❑ Trunk ❑ Laterals ❑ Service ❑ Lat . Benefit/ Trunk ❑ WAC SERVICES ❑ Water b San. Sever CONTRACT * OF NO. PARCELS NA 36 COMKENTS: FINAL F. R. RATES _ RATES TERMS 3 Yrs ASSESSMENT EEAR. NG DATE: ML7 C HEARING DATE: INTEREST RATE 8 t FIN&I. F. R. ST0RIS SEYEk _ILATES RATES ❑ Trunk ❑ Laterals ❑ Lat. Benefit/ Trunk STREETS ❑ Gravel Base ❑ Surfacing ❑ Res. Equiv. ❑ Multi Equiv. ❑ C/I Equiv. ❑ Trail AM STREET LIGHTS ® Installation 261.94/lot 255.001I.Q ❑ Energy Charge 71 AMOUNT CITY ASSESSED FINANCED $9,429.84 19,198.00 F.K. -0- Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting PROJECT 575, FINAL ASSESSMENT HE.ARING (SLATER'S ACRES & JAMES STREET -STREETLIGHTS] B. Project 575, Final Assessment Hearing (Slater's Acres & James Street -Streetlights)- -Installation of streetlights within the Slater's Acres Addition, including James Court and James Street, has now been completed, final costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. This assessment roll was presented to the Council on July 17th with the public hearing being scheduled for August 21st. Enclosed on pageis a tabulation of the final assessment rate as compared to the estimate contain the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 15, 1989. As can be seen, the final rate was below the original estimate. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of this public hearing. The staff will be available to answer any questions or concerns pertaining to this project and its subsequent assessment. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roil for Project 575 (Slater's Acres and James Street - Streetlights) and authorize the certification to Dakota Count'. 1h FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 575 SUBDIVISION/AREA: JAMES COURT AND JAMES STREET/SLATERS ACRES FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARINC: AUGUST 21, 1990 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F.R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES QArea Q Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/ Trunk STORM . Cl%rea QLateral SANITARY Area QLaterals QService Q Lat. Benefit/ Trunk STREETS QGravel Base Surfacing Des. Equiv. ' Street Lights NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 17 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 3 8% RATE OF INTEREST: TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $1,264.97 (F.R. $1,320.00) TOTAL AMOUNT CITY FINANCED: -0- CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWINC CONTRACTS: NA PUBLIC HEARING DATE: AUGUST 15, 1989 FINAL F.R. RATFS RATES 74.41/Lot 78.00/Lot Agenda Information 'Nemo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting VACATE DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASENMENT [LOTS 3 & 4. BLOCK 1, SIBLEY TERMINAL IND. PARK] C. Vacate Drainage & Utility Easement (Lots 3 & 4, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park) --On July 10th. the City received a petition from the above referenced property owner requesting the vacation of the existing drainage and utility easement incorporating a storm sewer system as shown by the sketch and description enclosed on pageA public hearing was then scheduled for August 21st to receive any comm is or concerns pertaining to this vacation. The vacation of this drainage and utility easement would result in the abandonment of the existing storm sewer system servingr Terminal Drive. Therefore, it would not be appropriate for the City to vacate this easement until the replacement storm sewer facility had been approved and a contract accordingly awarded by Council action. This storm sewer project and contract has been approved by Council action on August 7th thereby allowing formal consideration of this vacation to take place on August 21st. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all potential affected utility companies informing them of this proposed vacation. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to this request. Staff will be available to discuss this petition in further detail during the public hearing process. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEi1I: To close the public hearing and approve the vacation of the drainage and utility easements as described between Lots 3 and 4. Block L. Sibley Terminal Industrial• Park and authorize the Mayor and City_ Clerk to execute all related documents. s Py ;..�.� ,.tip � _ •G ?Q�r� O J c/' —0 a z ,�• � � v � �`` � �� l"►F 34 t .0 J a FPOj ivi6,7C [ 0 4b i o .• • .o N ' •° &Dots so•s ZIMM F- 1 z qrun z o , 73 CO Description of easement to be vacated: All of a 20.00 foot drainage and utility easement lying 10.00 feet either side of the common lot line of Lots 3 and 4, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park cording to the recorded plat thereof. Aul Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting OI 1 D"BIISSS .... ... :M.. PRO.. 602, CONSIDER PLANS FOR STAFFORD PLACE DRAINAGE AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS A. Project 602, Consider Plans for Stafford Place Drainage and Storm Sewer Improvements --At the August 7th Council meeting, in response to the most recent storm of July 28th and increasing concerns by residents within the Stafford Place, the Council directed staff to accelerate its investigation of remedial action to the overall surface water runoff and storm water drainage for the Stafford Place development. Subsequently, due to the previous investigation and ongoing analysis, the City staff and consultant were able to complete this analysis and present these concepts to the neighbors, school district and developer at meetings held on August 15th, 16th and 20th. The general approach to the solution consists of 3 areas: 1) to remove as much of the excess storm runoff from the center of the Stafford Place development and direct it around the critical areas of recent erosion damage; 2) to provide additional storm sewer capacity to the cul-de-sacs of New York Avenue and Vermont Avenue and their common backyard drainage basin, and; 3) to provide additional detention ponding areas in the common backyard drainage swales between New York and Vermont Avenue cul-de-sacs. The end result is to reduce the amount of excess water at its concentrated focal point, temporarily pond whatever remaining water does collect at that point and then to convey it through additional storm sewer facilities. This concept, with the exception of John and Cathy Griggs (4091 Vermont Avenue) was generally accepted and supported. Mr. and Mrs. Griggs objected to the creation of a tempo ry detentiun basin in their backyard area, as evidenced by the enclosures on pages V 4C a U-through9_150,� As a result of discussion with the school district, they were receptive to performing some onsite modifications to better contain and redirect their internal excess surface water runoff as well as to provide additional grading on their site to provide for the conveyance of excess surface water runoff on Braddock Trail to Northview Park Road rather than through the Stafford Place development. Due to the general acceptance of this overall concept of combined improvements, the consulting engineer will be providing estimated costs associated with various portions which will be forwarded to the Council as a part of the administrative packet. The City Attorney's office will continue to be involved to help identify financial participation obligations of the developer. The Director of Finance will be able to identify alternative sources of revenue to finance the project. If the Council approves the concepts as presented on August 21st, the consultant can proceed with detailed plans and specifications which could be presented to the Council for Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting formal approval on September 18 to allow the advertisement of bids with the contract award scheduled for October 16th and construction completed by Thanksgiving, weather permitting. Staff will be available to address other aspects and details during the discussion of this item at the Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the concept drainage and storm sewer plans for Project #602 (Stafford Place) and authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications. f-3 s . 014)11 1 1 1930% Date: August 17, 1990 To: Tom Colbert Cc. T. Egan Director of Public Works T. Wachter P. McCrea From: John and Catherine Griggs D. Gustafson 4091 Vermont Avenue T. Pawlenty Eagan MN 55123 Subject: Stafford Place - Storm Sewer/Overland Drainage Upgrade Proposal Reference: 2. 8/15/90 vadghborhood meeting at City Full. 2. 8/16/90 meeting between C. Griggs and T. Colbert. Purpose: Document our recommendations regarding proposal to reduce project impact while achieving drainage objectives. Thank you for informing the neighborhood of the proposed Sewer/Drainage proposal for Stafford Place on 8/15/90. We want you to know that you and your staff's efforts are recognized and appreciated. We all know this development has been a tough egg to crack ... for all involved. As you know, my wife and I took the opportunity to raise our questions, concerns, and comments to the city on 6/15 and 8/16. You have heard our verbal recommendations regarding revision of the proposal. It is our belief that these recommendations would still allow the city to implement an aggressive and effective drainage plan. As a point of clarification, our concerns regarding the "upper dry - pond" DO NOT stem from fears of high -tides. Quite the contrary. We feel this feature will be absolutely unnecessary and can be substituted for a much simpler and cost effective solution for all. Tom, attached you will find a brief summary of our recommendations followed by a summary of the expected benefits resulting from these recor..mendations. We want to encourage the city to consider these alternatives seriously. PRESENTLY, TEE PROPOSAL OF 8/15 (UPPER DRY -POND) IS UMCCEPTABLE TO US. We would like to work with the city to resolve this issue. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at work (892-4383) or at home (688-9456). Sincerely, 8,1-7 b John G. Griggs M; I J. Griggs 8/17/90 LECONni,'DED MODIFICATIONS TO 'TEE 41/16/90 FROPOSKL: 1. Omit from the proposal the dry -pond concept (and berm) in the "upper overland drainage area" between Vermont and New York Avenues. 2. As an alternative, plan to intercept a percentage of overland flow via a stormsewer inlet (no berm) placed in this "upper area". Preferably at a common lot corner. 3. In the "upper area", minimize the re -grading and er,phasize turfgrass establishment in the "upper area" to be corpleted in the Fall of 1990 (you are only days from comrleting this now!). NEKEFITS : A. Rea-_,ctio* of IYPACT to the development (by 6 to 10 properties) B. Feductlon o construction ScnOUu. C. Reduction of,Rroiect COST to the city. D. Acceleration of REST©R.ATTON and TURFGRASS ESTABLISHnKT. E. Rgduction offuture cor,Ylaints on restoration of trees, lawns, grades, etc, etc, etc. Any questions, please call John Griggs at $92-4383 (work) or 668-9456 (home). Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting AGREEMENT, COST PARTiCIPATIONFAIRWAY HII1S 2ND AND DAKOTA COUNTY B. Agreement, Cost Participation, Fairway Hills 2nd and Dakota County—In the summer of 1989 the City received a request from Al Herrmann as the developer of Fairway Hills for City/County participation for the Fairway Hills frontage road along Pilot KDob Road be ,een Camelback Drive and Interlachen Boulevard. Attached on pages Through the agenda information for the September 5, 1989, City Council meeting and the minutes from that meeting. Based on the City Council action additional meetings have been held between the City, County and developer to try to determine appropriate costs and to reach an agreement. The developer requested reimbursement for costs of approximately $44,500 and requested that all City bills for Engineering, Legal and Staff be written off. The County agreed to take the City bills off the table and proposed a settlement of $18,050. The County arrived at this figure by eliminating certain costs such as the developer's work as project manager and by reducing other requests to in their opinion more accurately reflect a shared responsibility. The developer through his attorney made a counter offer of $24,196.87 by applying a more consistent percentage to the various items included in the request. City staff felt it was inappropriate to take all the City's costs out of the settlement and then participate in paying 45% of the settlement through the County. Mr. Herrmann has therefore agreed to reimburse the City 55% of those costs to match what the County would have cont ' uted if the costs had remained in the County settlement offer. Attached on pages and 4747 is a copy of a letter from Finance Director VanOverbeke to Mr. Herrmann outlinin t e proposed settlement. Dakota county has not taken official action to approve or deny this proposal agreement therefore the City's acceptance should be contingent upon County approval. As the City Council is well aware, this is a very complex issue with very little agreement as to what costs are a result of the problem and then who has responsibility for those Costs. With that uncertainty in mind, the following table attempts to summarize those costs and the proposed acceptance of responsibility. Final Allocation Per Proposed Settlement eement Developer Costs City County Developer Excluding City Bills S44,357.98 $10,888.59 $13,308.28 $20,161.11 City Fees 7,224.23 3,250.90 - 0 - 3,973.33 TOTAL $51,582.21 $14,139.49 $13,308.28 $24,134.44 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the City's agree- ment to the proposed settlement for Fairway Hills 2nd contingent on Dakota County acceptance. Agenda Information Memo September S. 1989 City Council Meeting P-ZQUZST TOR COST P"--TICIPATTO iA11BWAY HILL6 1J1 D 2& U21TI_ON A. Repast for Cost ]Participation, 7airray Eills lot azad 2nd Additions - Frontage Road --At the August 1 City Council Meeting a motion was approved to continue a request by Al Herrmann for City/ County financial participation for the Fairway Hills frontage road along Pilot Knob Road between Camelback Drive and Interlachen Boulevard, to allow the developer to approach the County Commissioners and present its case and to allow staff to analyze the engineering and legal issues. The City Administrator facilitated a meeting on Wednesday, August 23 with the developers Al Herrmann, Roger Derrick, their engineering representatives Sill Maurer and Ralph Wagner, representatives of Dakota County, the Director of Public Works, Assistant City Engineer and Assistant to the City Administrator. Issues that were raised at the City Council meeting were discussed in detail and for a copy of background information, the developers reg~aest and a restatement of the issues, refer to a memo prepared by Assistant to the City Administrator Hohenstein from notes that he and the City Administrator compiled during the meeting. Also included in that remo is a set of findings, analysis and conclusions that represent the issues and proceedings as recorded by the City Administrator's office. It is apparent from the issues described that the City's Engineering Department has made a substantial effort to coordinate two adjacent projects as they were being built. While it is apparent that certain frictions arose as a consequence of this effort, it does not appear that the Department's actions were in any way inappropriate, but simply were intended to bring about a timely and well-designed solution to the situation. The developer has operated under certain assumptions that approvals had been granted and acted on his own to grade and install certain iarrovements on the presumption that his preliminary plans were acceptable. In taking such action, the developer has exposed himself to a certain risk that the costs mould not be absorbed by other parties. A detailed discussion of the issues raised and proposed findings concerning these Issues are included in a memorandum prepared by the Administrator's office which is attached on pages through 'Z. It outlines several courses the Council could take. They i elude: 1. Developer takes issue to County Board without City reco=endation. i i Agenda Information Nemo September 5, 1989 City Council Meeting 2. Developer responsible for all costs. 3. City/County responsible for 50% of the cost of the rets: wall and guard rail only. 4. City/County responsible for 200% of the cost of the retaining wall and guard rail only. 5. City/County responsible for all or part of all costs. Additional detail and rationale for these options appears in the memo. The Council must first decide whether or not it is appropriate for the City to take a position in the County project decision or to permit County consideration without a recommenda- tion. If the Council chooses to consider a position, it is appropriate to consider one of the other options as outlined in the memcrandum. The City Administrator is not recommending alternative 45 for the reascns staled in the memo. Also enclosed for your review on pages ;is a copy of the cost estimates submitted by Bridlewilde Joint `enture in this regard. The total of the costs as submitted is $36,760. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To consider a position on the developers regiest for City/County financial participation in o submit such recommendation 4 MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES FROM: ASSISTANT TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR HOHENSTEIN DATE: AUGUST 29, 1989 SUBJECT: FAIRWAY HILLS/PILOT KNOB ROAD ISSUES Background This memo is intended to define certain issue areas, present findings and suggest alternative approaches to the Fairway Hills/Pilot Knob Road issues raised by Bridlewilde Development and Probe Engineering. The complexity of this issue is substantial, as might be expected of a multi-million dollar county road project and developments occurring simultaneously around it. That unexpected consequences arose from such a situation is not surprising. The City and County regularly require right of way and set back dedications, financial guaranties and other means by which responsibilities are assigned and contingencies are anticipated. In this case, the developer contends that the City approved certain design features associated with the Fairway Hills service drive and that changes occurred in the County plans for Pilot Knob Road which, when coupled with the grade differentials, caused an undue hardship for the developer in completing this project. Dakota County states that the only change which occurred in this part of Pilot Knob Road between the final design approved on March 27, 1987 and construction was a modification of lane widths which resulted in the use of an additional one foot of right of way on the Fairway Hills side. The City's Engineering Department states that the service road was specifically excluded from the Fairway Hills First Addition construction with direction to the developer to make the final service road design conform with the widened Pilot Knob Road. Discussions were held with the developer, the County and the City's engineering staff both separately and jointly to attempt to define the issues in this matter. In a three hour meeting on Wednesday, August 23, the following people were present: Al Hermann and Roger Derrick of Bridlewilde, Bill Maurer and Ralph Wagner of Probe Engineering, Dave Evards and Dave Zeck of Dakota County and Tom Colbert, Mike Foertsch, you and I from the City. The nature of various approvals, designs and directions were outlined by the parties and an attempt was made to identify points of disagreement. The issues as defined in the joint meeting, the proposed findings and possible outcomes are outlined below. Developer's Request The developer is requesting that the City Council, upon review and analysis by the City Administrator, take a position in support of the developer in his appeal to the County Board for compensation. As this is a County road project, a decision can be made by the County with or without City input. If the City chooses to take a position, it would be stating that it believes certain costs to be directly related to the Pilot Knob Road project and that they are beyond the commitments and obligations of the developer in the ordinary course of completing his development. Ultimately, the County Board will determine whether such costs are a responsibility of the Pilot Knob Road project. Issues At the joint meeting of the developer, County and City representatives, the parties outlined a series of issues to be resolved. These are listed in the order in which they were raised. They are as follows: 1. The construction of Phase I of the Fairway Hills development resulted in certain utilities, namely catch basins, being installed at the end of Camelback Drive. The service road was specifically deleted from Phase I at the end of Camelback Drive. As Pilot Knob Road construction occurred and the developer began to reconsider his preliminary design for the service road, two additional catch basins were added by the developer in the field to collect runoff at a new low point. If the service road is designed to meet City standards for safety, several of these catch basins will have to be relocated. The developer requests compensation for such costs. 2. As a consequence of the final design and construction of Pilot Knob Road, the current terminus of Camelback Drive lies substantially above the County road grade. The developer submitted a plan for the service road location and connection which begins at the Camelback terminus and does not require redesign or modification of Camelback. To maintain a grade for this design, the developer indicated in his second phse plans that "a retaining wall will be constructed if necessary." In consideration of this statement, the Engineering Department approved the second phase plans with the understanding that detailed plans for the retaining wall and its relationship to the service road would be submitted prior to construction. On his own initiative, the developer installed a retaining wall similar to those constructed by the County at other locations along County road projects to support existing grades. The developer maintains that this became necessary because the County's plans for Pilot Knob Road changed from the preliminary design to the final resulting in a substantial encroachment into the grades adjacent to his project. As stated above, the County contends that the developer should have relied on the final plans and that the only change occurring after the final plan design amounted to a one foot shift. Unfortunately, the developer's service road design did not include engineering details for the retaining wall and its relationship to the service road. As Pilot Knob construction occurred, the grade differentials became apparent and the retaining wall was built without detailed plan submittal, review and approval. As a consequence, the service road as originally designed by the developer could not be built as presented. At its current location and height, this retaining wall requires the addition of a guard rail and the relocation of a part of the curve and service road to insure adequate distances from the edge of the street to the guard rail and the retaining wall. While further analysis is reserved for the appropriate section, this issue appears to be one in which a recitation of the facts requires an interpretation of both perspectives. The developer is requesting compensation for engineering costs to redesign the curve and service road to meet City standards. 3. The developer is also requesting compensation for the cost of the I; retaining wall, guard rail and appropriate signage for the reasons stated above. 4. The developer is requesting design guidelines for the service road, guard rails and set backs of the City. City staff has complied with this request with respect to the guard rail and set backs. The design of the road itself remains a responsibility of the developer to be submitted in detail for staff review. 5. The developer must acquire an additional easement from a platted lot to permit any redesign of the Camelback/service road curve. The developer has already acquired this at no cost. 6. The developer asserts that one of the County's subcontractors damaged and removed approximately one hundred feet of roadway during the clearing and grubbing operation. The developer requests compensation for this item. It would appear that some or all of this material would have to be removed to accomplish a redesign as well. 7. The City states that the service road must be completed during this construction season to provide access to certain homes under construction and to prevent additional, future erosion from this site. Such erosion results in deposits at the Pilot Knob/Cliff intersection. The Engineering Department has forwarded a letter to the developer advising him of the need to complete construction of the service road by October 15. To insure this completion date, the letter also requires proof of commencement of construction by September 11. While the resolution of this issue places these dates in doubt, the developer states that such construction can be completed this year, if the matters above are resolved. Findings and Analysis Certain of the issues raised are matters of fact. Others involve interpretation of City and County policy and the application of standards of practice. Some general findings are outlined below: 1. Dakota County's final plan for Pilot Knob Road is dated March 27, 1987. The Fairway Hills First Addition plat was recorded in June, 1987. Other Fairway Hills plans were recorded still later. While various changes occurred and details were added between the preliminary County plan and the final one, the County states that the only change occurring after the final plan completion was a widening of certain lanes resulting in an additional one foot shift to the east. 2. Deletion of the service road from Fairway Hills' first phase was for the expressed purpose of requiring the development to match the ultimate Pilot Knob Road configuration. 3. Approval of the first phase of Fairway Hills extended only to the end of Camelback Drive and not through the service road curve. Approval of the service road as a part of the second phase of Fairway Hills was subject to the submission of additional detailed plans to make the service road and its connection to Camelback compatible with !"D Pilot Knob Road. Possible deficiencies in the developer's preliminary design for the service road and curve were raised by staff during the second phase review process. These were not incorporated into the second phase design. Instead, the reference to the potential for a retaining wall was inserted. City staff agreed to this conditional design with the expressed direction that additional detailed plans would be submitted if the retaining wall were necessary. No detailed plans were submitted prior to the beginning of the current discussion. While it is particularly sharp, the curve from Camelback to the service road may have met the City's design standards if topography were no issue. Only upon review of the grade differentials and the construction of the retaining wall did it become apparent that the curve was unsafe and could not be constructed as originally designed. 4. City policy places responsibility on the developer to engineer and design connections between original and subsequent phases of projects even if such design implies the removal or relocation of previously approved utilities. 5. Certain improvements - grading of the service road, installation of additional catch basins, construction of the retaining wall - were performed without official Engineering Department review and approval, but in the presence of field inspectors or other City or County personnel. While the developer may have interpreted this as official approval, it obviously did not follow ordinary channels of design review and approval, thus contributing to the circumstances surrounding this matter. Grading plans do not imply anything about road design and no engineering details were submitted for either the additional catch basins or the retaining wall. 6. In designing the service road, the developer's engineer should have placed more reliance on the final County plan. Instead, the road alignment which the developer must now redesign is substantially the same as that submitted with the original Fairway Hills plat. If the final County plans had been used, the developer could have incorporated tolerances sufficient to absorb the one foot shift resulting from the lane modifications. Incorporating the final County plans appears to have been precisely the reason that this portion of the plan was originally deleted. 7. While it is the obligation of the developer to design the service road to fit the ultimate design of Pilot Knob Road and while the developer has only received approval for the service road and the curve connecting it to Camelback Drive upon submission of additional detailed plans, the developer's preliminary plans were well enough known that a depiction of the service road appears on the County's final plan of March 27, 1487. While it was incorrect for the developer to presume any design significance from this depiction, it may have contributed to the belief that the design was acceptable and adequate. In considering these findings, it is apparent that the issues arise from an attempt to facilitate two projects at once. If Fairway Hills had developed substantially before Pilot Knob Road, it may have become a preexisting condition with clear implications for the road project. If Fairway Hills had been designed later, there would have been no question that the project would have to conform to the final County road designs with all costs falling to the developer. It is also apparent that the purpose of the deletion of the service road from earlier construction was to place the responsibility to make it compatible with Pilot Knob Road on the developer. It is also clear that in order to get certain things accomplished in a prompt manner, the developer made certain decisions individually and without the usual approvals. Thus costs were incurred without any certainty that the improvements could be approved by the City or County. To this extent, the developer has created his own exposure to certain costs. City policy is relatively straight -forward with respect to the costs of design, redesign, construction and reconstruction of public improvements, especially as it pertains to connections between phases of projects. It is clearly the developer's responsibility to make such connections work at his own cost. The developer asserts that retaining walls and barricades are project costs of the County at other locations along County road projects. In fact, the County did build the substantial retaining walls along the north side of Fairway Hills. While the purpose for these retaining may vary, walls as project costs are not without precedent. Conclusions At the joint meeting, several issues were resolved which should permit the project to proceed, contingent upon a determination of the cost issues above. The City has provided standards to the developer with respect to guard rail design and set backs from the retaining wall. Staff also indicated that the City would consider a variance to the boulevard set back on the lot or lots affected by a realigned service road. The City has already permitted the developer to design the service road at a thirty foot width, with one section possibly shrinking to twenty-eight feet, if necessary. The developer has directed his engineer to begin detailed design work for the service road with a modified curve to connect it with Camelback. At the same time, he will submit an as -built design for the retaining wall to be certain that it meets City standards. With the design considerations above, the developer's engineer will attempt to align the frontage road such that the retaining wall bears no direct weight from the road surface. In general, it would appear that the design issues were resolved in concept as a result of these discussions. Final plans must still be submitted for detailed review and construction must be expedited to insure completion by the end of the construction season. The cost issues remain and possible courses of action appear below. 1. Developer takes issue to County Board without City recommendation - As the determination of County project costs lies with the County. It could be determined that this is a matter between the developer and the County and that no City recommendation is appropriate. CP 2. Developer responsible for all costs - Because the developer was given the responsibility to match the gradelines for the County road and no substantial changes occurred from final design to construction, it could be argued that no hardship has occurred. 3. City/County responsible for 50% of the cost of the retaining wall and guard rail only - Due to the construction of homes which has occurred along the installed portion of Camelback and the grade differential between the completed Pilot Knob Road and the Camelback terminus, it could be determined that the responsibility to insure grade compatibility be shared for those improvements unique to this project and not typically part of connecting subsequent phases of projects. Such costs should be based on what the County would have paid for construction of the same improvements if they had been predetermined to be project costs. 4. City/County responsible for 100% of the cost of the retaining wall and guard rail only - The Council may find that the existence of a plat in progress implies a sufficient preexisting condition to justify treatment of the retaining wall and guard rail as ordinary project related costs, as the term applies to other completed subdivisions. S. City/County responsible for all or part of all costs - This finding would require the Council to determine that the City's approval of the first phase of Fairway Hills constituted an obligation on the part of the City to guarantee approvals for designs of subsequent phases. It would further require that the Council find sufficient hardship in the developer's situation to warrant such a remedy despite long standing City policies to the contrary. I do not believe it prudent to recommend this alternative. Certainly this analysis condenses a substantial amount of information. It may be that there are additional details which the developer or City or County representatives wish to present. I believe, however, that the facts pertinent to this decision have been summarized above. If you have any questions in this regard, please let me know. Assis Vnt to the City Administrator Bridlewilde Joint Venture August 29, 1989 Tom Hedges City Manager City of Eagan Dear Tom, Please find, detailed below, the cost to date as well as anti- cipated cost for correcting the service road and Camelback Drive issue as discussed in -,our morning meeting of August 23, 1989. Engineering meetings, redesign drawing to date for service road ...............................$ 3,320.00 Drawing, engineering, site supervision, re- taining wall to date....... ......................... 1,454.00 Retaining wall ...................................... 12,893.00 Estimated engineer to complete redesign ............. 1,800.00 Estimated engineer to do retaining wall as built ............................................ 400.00 Estimated rip out and replace 100 ft. of street on Camelback Drive .................................. 3,200.00 to 3,500.00 Estimated remove, hall away, old curb and asphalt from 100 ft. of Camelback Drive ..................... 700.00 Estimated moving storm sewer catch basins........... 4,800.00 Legal fees spent by Bridlewilde to obtain easement letter from Valley National Bank and represent our interest in this matter, to date, est ............... 2,333.00 Light and electric moving, estimated ................ 1,000.00 Bridlewilde project manager expenses, actual and future estimated........... ...................... 2,400.00 Guard rail and install estimated... *..see ..... *.966. 21160.00 Tom, we are asking, with this letter, again, for the city of Eagan to support our petition to the County for these costs to be included in the overall assessment of the Pilot Knob Road project. As agreed in our Wednesday morning meeting, we have postponed our August 8, 1989 meeting with the County Commissioners so as to determine the cities position in this matter. In our meeting, as you are aware, 535 Stone Road Mendota Heights Minnesota 55120 891-1100 (2) we have requested of the county through their engineer, to be placed on the next possible meeting after the city council has rendered their decision. Probe engineering has been given the go ahead to start the redesign as agreed to this morning. Sincerely, Rog Derrick, partner Bridlewilde Joint Venture G3 Page 12/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 5, 1989 reported that there was nowhere near five feet of water in the past. Mr. Colbert stated that the City was anticipating full development. Councilmember Gustafson asked what would prevent the owner from filling in a man-made pond. Mr. Colbert pointed out that the owner would need a fill permit. Councilmember Egan remarked that there did not seem to be much of a disagreement. Mr. Gross stated his client requested monetary compensation. Councilmember Gustafson concurred with legal counsel in that the amount was reasonable. Egan moved, McCrea seconded, the motion to approve and adopt staff recommendations and responses to Mr. Gross' letter dated August 23, 1989 as follows: 1. To be addressed and reviewed at a later date as it may pertain to a particular land use application. 2. The staff recommends that this property be responsible for its normal park dedication requirements irregardless of the ponding dedication issue. 3. The staff does not have objections as long as the previously referenced elevations are also complied with. 4. Presently, the City does not require the fencing of any ponding areas. The City should not assume the responsibility for other agency requirements. The staff does not recommend acceptance of fee title to a ponding area, especially if it is used for density calculations of development proposals. 5. The staff recommends that the dedication of the ponding area as referenced be as a condition of plat and development approval and at no cost to the City. All voted in favor. Mr. Gross informed the Council that the action before the Advisory Planning Commission was moot. He stated he would request plat withdrawal and would be in contact with staff. FAIRWAY HILLS IST AND 2ND ADDITIONS/ REQUEST FOR COST PARTICIPATION City Administrator Tom Hedges presented the background information. He praised all present at the meeting for their cooperation. He informed the Council that at the August 23, 1989 meeting, some issues were resolved. He commented that the time commitment was tight but that the frontage road should be constructed this fall. He reported that the letter from Roger Derrick set forth the developer's estimate of its costs. He rte: Page 13/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 5, 1989 referenced Jon Hohenstein's memo dated August 29, 1989 in which staff's opinions were set forth. He requested Council direction as to which option staff should pursue. He felt it was a County issue and stated that the developer requested findings of the Council recommendation to the County Board. Mary Vujovich (Attorney for developer) stated that the facts were still colored. She stated that the Fairway Hills was a DMS project. She explained that the City had approved the plans and requested staff produce the plans. She explained that Camelback Drive abutted the service road. She pointed out that Fairway Hills 2nd Addition was developed by Bridlewilde Properties. She explained that Bridlewilde's plans were also approved by the City which included the frontage road. She stated a letter from Mike Foertsch gave the project the go-ahead. She commented that the County had copies of the plans and that the retaining walls were not built for the development but were for surrounding properties. She stated the developer requested a say in the wall design and that the City asked the developer to satisfy the County. She pointed out that the County had provided the specifications with the developer building the wall. She further stated that the City had asked the developer to redesign the frontage road and that the City then stopped construction. She felt it was a contractual matter between the developer and the City. She requested the costs incurred by the developer be included in the total County cost. She reiterated that the developer relied upon the City and requested that the Council support the developer's approach to the County. Mayor Ellison asked Mr. Herrmann what his understanding was from the three hour staff meeting. Mr. Herrmann stated that the plan had been redesigned and that he was ready to act. Councilmember Egan requested legal interpretation of the rights and liabilities of the City. He asked whether the City or the County was liable. City Attorney Jim Sheldon replied that the factual determination would make a big difference in the legal analysis. City Administrator Tom Hedges explained that there were two main points (1) the City and developer agreeing on the road construction and (2) who would pay for the costs. He explained that the County road had been shifted and that the County admitted it had requested the shift. He felt there should be some cost participation by the County due to that change. Mr. Herrmann felt that the wall and guard rail should have been paid for by the County. Councilmember Wachter asked when notice had been received regarding the road change. Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated there was no formal notice as the change was insignificant. Councilmember Gustafson pointed out that the plans included the road and asked if the plans contained specifics regarding the road. Mr. Colbert stated that the first addition plans did not provide Page WEAGAN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 5, 1989 specifics and that it was deleted for the second addition. He stated the plans had details but did not have adequate dimensions for compatibility with the County road. He explained that the detailed wall plans were never submitted. Councilmember McCrea asked if there was documentation in the file that the road design was inadequate. Mr. Colbert stated that the City had acted in the correct way and had done nothing wrong. McCrea questioned if a problem would still exist if the City had done the installation. Mr. Colbert responded no, that the City would have worked with the County. McCrea questioned why the City had not checked with the County to see if it was compatible. Mr. Colbert stated that the developer said it would work with the County and that the developer was expected to design the frontage road compatible with the County road. Councilmember Egan asked if the City had ratified the County plans and modifications. City Attorney Jim Sheldon stated that it was a very complex fact situation and that until the facts were resolved, the City should refrain from legal conclusions. Councilmember McCrea felt that no one was at fault and that everyone should look for a win/win outcome. Mr. Sheldon stated that it shopld be determined as to what facts everyone agreed and disagreed on. He commented that a contract dispute was a factual dispute. City Administrator Tom Hedges informed the Council he would suggest continuing the matter but that it would delay the project. Mayor Ellison questioned why the road could not be built now. He recommended building the road and determining the cost later. Roger Derrick agreed with Mr. Sheldon regarding the facts. He informed the Council that the March, 1987 County plan was not available to him until December of 1987. He pointed out that the development was complete by that date. Mr. Herrmann stated he felt the City acted in a fair manner. Mr. Derrick felt that the City did not make a mistake by approving the plan but that the County made mistakes. He requested a fair outcome. Mayor Ellison commented he felt that common sense said the City should not pay for what others would have paid for anyway. He asked where the line should be drawn. He remarked that there were differing opinions between the two conflicting engineers. Councilmember Gustafson pointed out that the developers had utilized the plans that had been approved by the City. He felt the City was not involved and that the County was responsible for the changes. He felt the decision was between the developer and the County and that the City did not have authority in the matter. He felt a recommendation should be that it is not a City problem and a Page 15/EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 5, 1989 request to the County to resolve the problem by a certain date. Councilmember McCrea concurred with Mr. Gustafson and recommended the County determine its liability. McCrea moved that the developer go to the County and that the City recommend the County assume 100% liability for the wall and guardrail only. Councilmember Egan stated that a resolution should not impede the project and felt there were three parties involved. He remarked that it was primarily a problem between the developer and the County. He felt the City was not qualified to determine the developer engineering quality. He proposed a nominal involvement by the City and that the County assume 50% of the wall and guardrail only and that the City be involved up to $5,000.00. He felt the County and the developer should assume the majority of the cost. Councilmember McCrea recommended requesting the County to reimburse the developer. Mayor Ellison pointed out the City should not attach dollars until the County decided its liability. He favored inclusion in the project. Councilmember Gustafson felt the County must make its decision. Mayor Ellison felt the County should decide its liability and that the City would then assume its share. Councilmember Egan requested submitting a percentage to the County as reports could drag on forever. Mr. Herrmann requested a positive note from the City Council. Mr. Egan pointed out that it was what the Council was attempting. Councilmember McCrea suggested the Council submit a positive report supporting the position that the developers were caught in the middle. Public Works Director Tom Colbert stated that staff would submit a positive report upon direction by the Council. Councilmember Egan recommended the County participate up to 50% of the cost of the final negotiated amount with the developer and the developer pay the other 50%. He felt the City should not assume 45%. Mr. Colbert stated that the City would reimburse the County 45% of the County cost by contract. Councilmember Gustafson remarked that the County owed money and it should pay and that the amount should be worked out between the developer and the County. Mr. Colbert stated that the developer wanted the County to pay with the City paying its fair share. Mr. Herrmann agreed with Mr. Colbert's statement and informed the Council it would begin construction in the morning. McCrea moved, Egan seconded, the motion to recommend that the County determine its liability and further approve payment by the City of 45% of the cost based on the project cost split, with staff to provide supporting documentation. All voted in favor. R-89.54 STRATFORD OARS/SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ABATEMENT City Administrator Tom Hedges updated the Council regarding the matter. city of ca Us" 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD THOMAS EGAN EAGAN, MINNE501A 55122.1897 Mayor PHONE (612; 454-8100 DAVID K GUSTArSON FAX: (612) 454.6363 PAMELq , kCREA TIM PAWUN7Y THEODORE wACHTER Counci' Members August 10, 1990 THOMAS HEDGES Ciry Admintstraror EUGENE VAN OVM---KE Gry CIerK MR AL HERRMANN BRIDLEWILDE JOINT VENTURE 8723 HIGHWOOD WAY APPLE VALLEY MN 55124 Re: Fairway Hills 2nd/Bridlewilde Development Dear Al: As we have discussed in our recent telephone conversations, I will be recommending to the Eagan City Council that the following settlement proposal be accepted by the City. This item will be placed on the August 21, 1990 City Council agenda. The developer will be reimbursed for the following: 1. Engineering Fees $6,500.00 2. Retaining Wall Construction 7,606.87 3. Rip out and replacement of street and erosion control, sod and curb 9,500.00 4. Light and electrical moving costs 590.0 $24,196.87 The developer will pay to the City 55% of City incurred legal, engineering and staff fees (55% x $7,224.23) or $3,973.33. City costs related to the development incurred after the negative balance of $7,224.23 are to be reimbursed to the City at 100%, however, no additional costs related to the retaining wall dispute shall be charged. Copies of two (2) invoices from Bonestroo, Rosene are included for review with the amounts considered due to the City. The City's approval will be contingent upon acceptance by Dakota County of the same terms. I have requested of Jay Stassen that they review the settlement proposal in light of the City's recommended acceptance and respond to the City. THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunity/Affirmativ Agmen Employer AL HERRMANN AUGUST 10, 1990 PAGE TWO This proposal is identical to the one submitted by Mary Vujovich in her letter dated July 12, 1990, except for the payment to the City by the developer which you have verbally agreed to. It is my understanding that if the proposal is acceptable to all parties, the county will make payment of $24,196.87 and invoice the City for its share. I believe that the settlement proposal and this process is consistent with the action taken by the City Council at its meeting on September 5, 1989. Please contact me if you have any additional questions or if you feel this recommendation should not go to the City Council for any reason. Sincerely, (2L*V�— E.J. VanOverbeke Finance Director/City Clerk cc: City Administrator Hedges Director of Public Works Colbert City Attorney Sheldon Accountant I Sheridan Assistant Dakota County Attorney Stassen Attorney Mary Vujovich EJV/jeh q5 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting RENEWAILDMAMR PERMITS C Renewals, Trailer Permits—At its meeting of July 10, 1990, the City Council directed staff to contact Tripp Oil Company, Lyle Schultz and American Homes and require that they show cost if they wish to have their trailer permits renewed. Administrative Intern Olinger contacted each of the parties and a status report concerning each is enclosed in his memorandum on page Jv'. As the circumstance of each of these parties is unique, it is suggested that action on this matter be considered in three separate motions. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: 1) To approve or deny a one year trailer permit for Lyle Schultz for a residential trailer at 1315 Carriage Hills Drive, 2) to approve or deny a one year trailer permit for Tripp Oil Company for a trailer located at 3085 Highway 13 and 3) to approve or deny a one year trailer permit for American Homes located at 3660 Dodd Road. MEMO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JOHN J. OLINGER, ADMINISTRATIVE INTERN DATE: AUGUST 91 1990 SUBJECT: TRAILER PERMIT RENEWAL Pursuant to Council's direction, staff has notified each trailer permit holder and requested they "show cause" for renewal of the permit. They were also encouraged to attend the Council meeting for questions from the Council related to the permit. The following is the status of each permit as told to staff by the permit holder. Schultz Originally the trailer was for the parents to reside in. Since that date one parent is deceased and the other is now being cared for in a rest home. The trailer is currently being used by a family member who has need of assistance while trying to find steady work. The trailer is not visible from any roadway and is being well maintained. Tripp Oil Staff contacted the manager and he stated the trailer is still in use as an office. There are no plans to build a permanent structure. The trailer is two blocks off Highway 13 and in an area zoned commercial/industrial. Dakota Homes Mr. Steven Isaacson was contacted and informed staff that he has plans to sell the property. He stated he would need at least a year to move the present trailer homes. Staff questioned the salability of the current trailers given their state of disrepair. Mr. Isaacson felt that these homes were covered under a sales permit, allowing him to sell trailer homes. The trailer permit applies to the sales office trailer, but not the other trailers located on the lot. The action for the Council to take is to approve or disapprove these trailer permit renewals. In 7'inistrive Inevh r /j eh poi Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT ZONING AREA WULTIFAWLY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY D. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, City of Eagan, Area J, Multifamily Residential Land Study to Change the Land Use Designation of Approximately 7.5 Acres from D-3 Mixed Residential (6 - 12 Units per Acre) to LB (Limited Business) and Rezoning of Approximately 7.5 Acres from A (Agricultural) to LB (Limited Business) for Property Located on the South Side of Yankee Doodle Road East of Coachman Road in the Northwest Quarter of Section 16—At its regular meeting of June 26, 1990, the Advisory Planning Commission held public hearings to consider four areas of the multifamily residential land study. These included a hearing concerning the comprehensive guide plan amendment and rezoning of study area J. A commission motion to approve the comprehensive guide plan amendment and rezoning as presented failed on a tie vote. At its meeting of July 17, 1990, the Eagan City Council continued this matter for 30 days directing the City Attorney to prepare a memorandum of findings with respect to study area J. That memorandum is enclosed on page � for your review. For additional information concerning this item, please refer to the Community Amen' Department and City Attorney's staff report which is enclosed on ages hrough for your review. Also enclosed on pages "through are dvisory Planning Commission minutes with respect to this item and on page are the City Council minutes from the July 17, 1990 City Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the comprehensive guide plan amendment and rezoning of area J of the multifamily residential land study as presented. /oz HULA +, - Tom Hedges City Administrator T0: Attorney FROM: Jim sheldon, City PATE: August 17' 1990 , (A rea J Sandberg) EaganMulti Family Plan Study -7409 RE: our File Na•: July 17. 1990 regular Council at the the potential by the City finding concerning sa J We were asked and prepare the this discussion of Yankee review The Council in the front area along meeting to J. but to leave Of Az ea of rezoning In rezoning the potential such as limited busiaericultural. considered classification resent zoning g to other Dood1e Road to a of the land in its present Area J in relation portion ezonznthe Cit Touncil, it would be our the rear p of the potential r taken by the our analyzes been reviewed by he position of the which have Council t ?� zone any portion areasjon that the City and not recommendaplanning commission ► .that advisory at this date, mendatioa property it is our recng designion with previous zol have only one z roce§S`$0 c¢neistent w arcel planning p ;uses• To be 8,rate identif cable Pn our total overall the different each .� parcel. This aids n the study Area J would .t � at p dema located is to t the City for are clear lithe p rCml taken by that there a portion °f actions rezone inconsistent with previous p to be prove Council. Dale Runkle cc: Christy Martin / a3 SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT & REZ0ITN G - MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY AREA J APPLICANT: CITY OF EAGAN LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF YANKEE DOODLE ROAD EAST OF COACJIIIZAN ROAD NW 114 SECTION 16 EXISTING ZONING: A AGRICULTURAL DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUN7E 26, 1990 DATE OF REPORT: JUTE 19, 1990 CO]NIPILED BY: CO'14MUNIT'Y DEVELOPME'\T DEPARTMENT & CIT1' ATI'OR_NEY'S OFFICE BACKGROUND: Over the past year, the Community Development Department has been studNing multi -family residential land use in Eagan. Multi -family residential development was desiznated by the City Council as a topic for review for two primary reasons: one, the large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land currently available in Eagan, and two, Eagan's higher -than -average percentage of existing multi -family units. Three reports have been prepared as part of this comprehensive review of multi -family residential land. These reports, entitled "Multi -Family Residential Land Study Draft Report" (July 1989), "Update Report" (December 1989), and "Comment Report" (March 1990, are supplementary to this Advisory Planning Commission staff report and should be used for complete information regarding study background and methodology. Each of the three "Multi -Family Residential Land Study" reports were presented to the City Council for review and discussion. Based on the study reports, comments from affected property oAmers, and Council discussion, the City Council recommended Comprehensive Guide Plan amendments and/or rezonings for 16 of the 23 study areas. Staff was directed to schedule public hearings for those study areas recommended for plan amendments and/or rezonings. STL'DY AREA J: Study Area J consists of one parcel, P.I.D. 10-01600-010-26, approximately 7.5 acres in size. This study area is currently designated for D -III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan and zoned A Am:'cultural. Ids The attached data sheets from the 'Draft Report" (July 1989) and exhibits provide additional descriptions of Study Area J. - CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The City Council recommended consideration of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment and rezoning such that Area J would be designated LB Limited Business and zoned LB Limited Business. PROPERTY OWNER CONBIENTS RECEIVED: Bradley Smith, representing the property owners, Donald and Betty Sandberg, has indicated in meetings with City staff and through written correspondence that the Sandbergs are not opposed to the recommended plan amendment provided that some flexibility in developing the property is maintained. However, the Sandbergs do object to any rezoning of their property at this time because they feel it may limit their ability to market the property and because they feel it may adversely affect their property taxes. The letter submitted by Mr. Smith regarding the Sandbergs comments on the recommended changes is attached to this report. LEGAL, ISSUES: Bradley Smith, representative of the property owners, has wTitten a letter to the City addressing a number of factors for consideration by the City in analyzing a rezoning. The propert owners have indicated that they agree to the Comprehensive Guide ]and use designation change of the property to LB Limited Business, but do not support the rezoning of the property to LB Limited Business from A Agricultural. The property• is not being farmed present]-*, and the property owners have a single-family residence on the property. Under Minnesota Statutes 473.865, should the City redesignate this property as LB Limited Business under the Comprehensive Guide Plan, the City would be required to bring its zoning ordinance into compliance with the Comprehensive Guide within nine months of the change of the Comprehensive Guide. Thus a Comprehensive Guide change to LB Limited Business would require a zoning change to LB Limited Business. With respect to real estate taxes, the Dakota County Assessor's Office has informed City staff that the zoning designation of the property has little to do with the assessment method for the property. The real estate taxes are assessed based on the use of the property and not on the zoning. Therefore, since the property owners are presently using the property as a single-family residence, the property will be taxed as a single-family residence rather than the Agricultural designation which it is presently zoned. The property owners have raised the issue of assessments against the property, and it should be kept in mind that assessments are a charge against the property in connection with public improvements, and again regardless of what the zoning classification of the property may be, the City could not levy an assessment against the property greater than the benefit that the property has received from the public improvement. And finally, the property owner has raised the issue of access. To the extent that the property is presently a distinctive identified parcel, the property owners are entitled to reasonable access from their property to a public right-of-way. But it should be kept in mind that the rezoning of the property is in contrast to the actual development of the property and at issue is rezoning the land use and not with any development concerns. ACTIO'.N TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To recommend approval or denial of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 7.5 acres within P.I.D. 10-01600-010-26 from D -III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre) to LB Limited Business and a rezoning of the same land from A Agricultural to LB Limited Business. MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY AREA J GENERAL LOCATION: SIZE: ZONING: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING, AND COMP PLAN L7XD USE DESIGNATION: TOPOGRAPHY: Area J consists of one parcel On the south side of Yankee Doodle Road east of Coachman Road, in the NW 1/4 of Section 16 7.5 acres Area J is of sufficient size to accommodate a variety of development -intensity options. M D -III vacant North - commercial and vacant; zoned NB and A; designated NB and R & D South - single-family residential; zoned R- 1(PD); designated D -I East - townhouse residential; zoned R-4; designated D - III West - single-family residential and vacant; zoned R- 1(PD); designated D -III The range of uses around Area J indicates that no single land use type will be completely compatible with all surrounding uses. Buffering will be necessary regardless of development type. The terrain drops from Yankee Doodle Road on the north to a large pond/marsh in the center of Area J, then rises steeply in the southeast corner up to the adjacent property. Extensive filling would be necessary with any type of - PAGE J.1 - l01 development in order to provide a stable building pad. VEGETATION: Area J is heavily wooded throughout. Dense aquatic vegetation is located in and around the pond. Development of any type would require removal of significant amounts of vegetation. Landscaping requirements for any proposed development may not adequately mitigate the loss of aquatic vegetation. ACCESS: Area J has access to Yankee Doodle Road, a MINOR ARTERIAL. Adequate access to serve most development types is available, although direct land access to Yankee Doodle Road should be prohibited. UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water service is available to Area J. Utility service to Area J should not be an issue. ASSESSMENTS: Area J has been assessed for storm sewer trunk improvements and lateral benefit from trunk water main service at single-family rates. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The pond/marsh on Area J is a protected wetland (Class IV deep marsh) under jurisdiction of the Department of Natural Resources. Less -intense developments can often be more sensitive to wetland requirements. Nevertheless, a DNR permit will be necessary for any development which affects this pond. In addition, Area J may be impacted by traffic noise from Yankee Doodle - PAGE J.2 - Road. Although the noise levels received from this roadway may not be consistently severe, development design should be sensitive to traffic noise generated by minor arterials. - PAGE J.3 - lag SCHEIDE, SMITH AND LOFSTROM, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LA 14' PHI:.:F N. SccH=IDE BrtADLrm Sh"TH JAME—C C. LOFSTROM CAFs'.]r G. A:AFSH March 26, 1990 Mr. Dale C. Runkle Director of Community Development Eacan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Dcneld and Betty Sandberg Dear Mr. R::nkle: 4635 h ico1s RD • SUITE 206 EAGA'', MN 55122 (612) 454.6440 This Guice represents Donald and Betty Sandberg with respect to the prc::csa_s ccntainec; in the Nulti-Family Residential Land Study of Cly 1:E:, and the Co-nent Report dated March 1990. ?h•e Sandbe_cs have no objection to revising the comprehensive Guide pian des:cnaticn of their property fro+„ D -III to Limited Business. He»e•:er, tie; do object to any rezoning of the property at this time, and the.' ch=est tc any restriction or. access to the property at this tire. 7'-'e re-a:r::ter of this letter will explain the reasons for the Sand-erc's pcs:ticn. This letter in not intended to go into the leca'. ra-:rications in any detail, except to state that to the extent that anv cf the c}anges proposed result in a reduction in market va:t:e cr t}e prc)erty, the Sandbergs reserve the right to make any a.:�rc;r:ate c:air s for compensation. Fs the Land St::d:� dated July 1989 appropriately states, development of t' -.e property tinder the existing D -III designation could be suita*:e if development standards limit the impact on the pond and the exiting vegetation. Property to the east and the south of 5L'bject property has developed as townhouses and small lot single fa-d2y homes, making D -III development appropriate. Any development, whether D -III or otherwise would have to consider such impacts. However, the com:nercial development to the north of the property, across Yankee Doodle Road, would make commercial development under a Limite-4 B-isiness designation appropriate as well. The Sandbergs have no ob=ecticn to chancing the comprehensive guide plan designation to Lir..ite4- Business with the understanding that comprehensive guide plan desicnatiens are not intended to be the same as zoning class:ficaticns, and that a certain amount of flexibility is intended //0 SCHEIDE, SMITH AND LOFSTROM, P.A. Pace 2 Mr. Dale C. Runkle Fa. -ch 2E, 19910 to exist in cor:prehens.ive guide plan designations. In short, the Sandbergs have no objection to atter,pting to ir,arket and develop the Property as Linited Business property, but they feel it would be ina-propriate to tie their hands if a residential development sensitive to the referenced environmental concerns is proposed in the future fcr the property. Any chance of the comprehensive guide plan designation should include language allowing for flexibility in this regard. Fcr the sa-e reasons, a rezoning to Limited Business would be i-a;rrc=:ate. Scne flexihility is required and it would be 1:7=rtant to wait Until development of the property to deter-.ine the amirc: tate ZC_ninc.'. Ancther re=scn the Sandbergs are opposed to a zoning chance at this ti.^.e i= a ccncerr. that this will adversely affect the taxes against t',e parcel. ,.t this time, the parcel contains one single fanily w=iChi is currently being rented. A rezoning from Fg:ic:::__pal to Linited B.:siness would undoubtedly result in a s::bs:a-t:a1 increase in, taxes before the development of the parcel. "is uc::c be cc-.pletely inaprrc_riate given the current use of the FrcpertGiven the willingness of the Sandbergs to accept a chance in cc--re:�ensive cz:ce designation subject to the condition stated az,-,,,e, .t wc.:d be inappropriate for the City to insist on a zcr.ir.c_ c=:a-ce a: this time. In addition, change in the zoning of the Frcpertv wcald result in the City reevaluating assessments against the parce, and in all likelihood increasing assessments ccnsidera''_v. This is inappropriate given the undeveloped state of the prc erty at this time. Fin.aly, the Sandbergs object to any restriction on access to Yankee Dccdle Road. The parcel has been effectively land locked by surroi:ndirc development approved by the City of Eagan. That is, no access to the parcel was allowed at the time of development of the properties to the east and the south. There is no cjarar.ty that in the future access would be allowed from the parcel to the west. If the Sandbergs' parcel develops in conjunction with the parcel to the west, then at that time it may be appropriate to disco=_s access questions. However at this time, with development of both parcels uncertain, discussion of restricting the access is not appropriate. Ir. sur..-.a_l , the Sandberes will not have any objection to chancing the cc-. re e -sive Guice Alar, designation of their property to limited bus:r.ess if the resolution making that chance allows for flexihility fcr an a:prcrriate D -III 6evelop:nent; the Sandbergs strongly oppose SCHEIDE, SMITH AND LOFSTROM, P.A. Face 3 Mr. Dale C. Runkle March 2E, 1,090 any rezcning at this time; and the Sandbergs strongly oppose any restriction on access to the parcel. Thank ycu very rr,uch.for your consideration of these comments. Very #-;;ly yours, B_ac:e ES.t=s cc: Cn an4- et}"• sa^ be"g (rte IK " FDX RIDGE Fly m."OACHLkN PARK , 'NR v 7Q� AG YANKEE DOODLE•RCAG Q T.1 $1 Ab- MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAID STUDY N STUDY AREA J PARCELS II I(3 Ze ml Mal �..__.�_ �i r.•ar� =:s:: -_Z" is �c / OACH!'rI F-OX PARK RIDGE NQ v nAD�y AqD. F. AN EE DOO LE•AGA: I&- MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY N STUDY AREA J PROPOSED COMP LAND USE GUIDE PLAN "his MP Z,; 0 ramp a tp IL w A ■mayMaw OAC A'N FOX PARK RIDGE & AD A D. YANK E DOODLE ROAL Q V $I .116- MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY N STUDY AREA J PROPOSED ZONING Page 16/EAGkN7 ADVISORY PLANNIi GCO2 :ISSIOIi.:XINUTES June 26, 1990 of buffering made sense. Citi::::#tt+rey''bougherty explained that the Planning Commission must eithet'--'approve or deny the Council recommendation for rezoning to R-1. Member Hoeft stated that the Parks Department could evaluate the petition of the landowners butxthat:.•A-I..J. ;st didn't fit and would be completely incompatible. Member::::%ry:gg:�:sta�ed that the City had always tried to have buffers and thatthis;::would::::3e a logical place for one. She could readily envision an R-2 use. •••• Voracek moved, Merkley ..secon`;iii3,..t3::motion to recommend denial of a Comprehensive Guide Pla�.:::ame�dment to change the land use designation of approximately 'i6 acres from D -III Mixed Residential (6-12 units per acre) to D -I Single Family Residential (0-3 units per acre). All voted in favor. Voracek roved, Merkley seconded, the motion to recommend denial of a rezoning of approximately..16 acres from A (Agricultural) to R-1 Single Family Residential fnr.:':::`property located on the west side of Federal Drive along Violet Lane":1-n.-the. ..northeast quarter of Section 16. All voted in favor. Voracek moved, Merkley secol'i ,,..::the "' otion to recommend that the parcel I be considered from D -III to D -II in the Conpreher,sive Guide Plan and reviewed by Parks for park area needs. All voted in favor. CITY OF EAGAN - KREA J MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY Chairman Voracek opened ':::the :rieXt:.::piiblic hearing regarding a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment -t-9 change the land use designation of approximately 7.5 acres from Mixed Resis.Ontial to Limited Business and a rezoning of approximately :,::'::'7.5 acres from Agricultural to Limited Business. The subject property is::located on the south side of Yankee Doodle Road east of Coachman Road in the northwest quarter of Section 16. Kristi Marnin presented the staff report to the Advisory Planning Comnission. Don Sandberg (owner) stated that the"'iezoning was not necessary and that the pond levels iiaci::eeii::tasiec: He had concerns that his taxes would go up. Page 17/EAG7-1,' ADVISORY PLA.NNINiG''CO.vyISSION:"..:P,INUTES June 26, 1990 ... .... Martin DesLauriers (realt6%r"-*,':*:*f said he opposed the rezoning. Rob Brown (neighbor) distributed a letter to the Advisory Planning Cormission. He stated he had environmental concerns and that Limited Business use would devalue the surrounding homes. He opposed Limited Business rezoning. ......... Greg Gee (neighbor) stated thaifti:*the p"t"bperty should be purchased by the City for a reserve. Pat Kness stated she was .'.gffiAP.St .:tezonlng. Mr. Sandberg reiterated his tax concerns. Member Trygg asked if the City was compelled to rezone if the Comp Guide was changed. City Attorney Dougherty stated that the City must rezone if the Comp Guide is changed. Chairman Voracek had questions regarding the tax effects. Ms. Ylarnin stated that the assessor had told the City that the taxes were based on the current' t ' ht h - at being a Single Family homestead. City Attorney Dougherty state'd"tha.e,.had checked specifically with the Assessor on this property :and that i... would only be assessed at commercial rates if it were vacant. Mr156......sLauriers gave examples of :%, '"': : taxes going up when the zoning .-i.�As.' ' c:S.,a-ngea Member Trygg stated that she had a lot of questions...r , e . g . ardir'iig the development because of the wetlands, etc. and felt tba-t- rezoning would be premature at this time. Yje:nber Merkley stated that the DNR would not allow fill into the wetland in any event and that the zoning would not affect it. Chairman Voracek discussed ...the.....par.k,..-::.:apguisition issues and the rezoning's affect on the Merkley moved, Hoeft seconded::::the A"t>*` tion to recommend approval of a Comprehensive Guide Plan ab-4ndmen'�:: to change the land use designation of approximately 7.5 4"C''res tr**,.,.,0,m D -11I Mixed Residential (6-12 units per acre) to LB (Limited Bus"In"ess) in order to make the site more harmonious with the existing Yankee Doodle businesses in the area. Members Hoeft and Merkley voted for the notion. Members Trygg and Voracek voted against the notion. The 'motion failed. ill Page 17JEAGAN CITY COUNCIL MIN[1'"F.,S July 17, 1990 takes public input at the City Council .:stage and they have. all the information the Council has. Councilmember Pawlenty then said the Ci j::Council should::: oF'act until it has the final opinion. The Councilmember said he agreed with the process:stt:ite..tbcxit�iie decision should be delayed as well. City Administrator Hedges said the matter could be -440W:::.0 7" -agreements,. etc, and brought back before the Council as a Consent Agenda item. Gustafson moved, Wachter seconded, a motion to refer the Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment and rezoning of Multifamily Residential Land Study, Area I, to the August Advisory Planning Commission meeting. Aye: 5 Nay. 0 _ ..... -- OOMPREHENsrYE GUIDE PL&N AME1 DMENTR=ON7NG AREA J/MULTIFAMI Y RESIDENTLAL LAND STUDY After introduction by Mayor Egan,;Gity:A4�i�iitistrat4r::#�Tedges said that the public hearing had been held at the last APC meeting of June 26 ::A.:*6domm6t di bh at the Planning Commission meeting for approval of the amendment and rezoning failed on a tie vote. Mr. Don Sandberg, the owner of the property, said residents from the Parranto development were concerned about what might happen along Pilot Knob Road that might disrupt their scenic view and the loss of trees. Mr. Sandberg said their original objection to any change in the zoning had to do with takes and that their taxes would go from single='6it ily..io a business rate. He said he had since been informed by the County that they will tax only on ttie:bsis:f:the. use of the land. The house on the property is being rented and is occupied, and any tax chan&-. woiiWoot.:take place until 1992- Mr. Sandberg said they had no objection to a change in zoning to limitOO business''or.tteighborhood business. He asked, however, that the landlocked portion of their land (apprmimately:3:;a re"I south of the pond remain Agricultural. Councilmember Wachter asked ir:i' a:: si{oia County Assessor's office will change the taxes along with the zoning. Jim Sheldon said that sieadfastly they have gotten the answer that it is the use not the zoning that governs the taxes. Occasionally, however, they have found instances where the taxes have been based on the zoning and in each instance it has been when the property is zoned agricultural. Mr. Sheldon said that it is the County that is the- determining entity for this policy. Councilmember Wachter said he did not wish to mislead anyone regarding the taxes. Mayor Egan asked the City Plattne itir 'sott"hZighf-I ito the tie vote at the APC meeting. Mr. Sturm said there were a variety of reasons among them :environgrtental and discussion on whether the parcel should go Neighborhood Business. The residents of::the Har4ion Heights area were concerned with any type of commercial. Mr. Sturm said the APC there should be any action on the property before a development proposal is brought1d because:4>*f ordinance changes the City may have. A resident asked whether assessments on the property would change if the zoning was changed The City Administrator said that assessments are levied at a particular rate and that would not change. However, any new assessments would be levied at a new rate in accordance with what the zoning is. Gustafson moved, Pawlenty seconded, a motion to coiftuue for 30 days the Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment and rezoning of Area J, of..ft MultifamVl . Mt idential Land Study and request that the City Attorney prepare a memorandum of:fi;<iCti>gs::Aye::5'::::iay. 0 Councilmember Pawlenty said in reading the letter front the attorney for the Sandberg's, the City Attorney should write his opinion as if the Council is taking::*ction on the Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment and rezoning forcibly. He said, based on the circumstances, the City should not imply any consent. /a 6 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting SPECIAL HUNTING PERMIT/JONATHAN YANTA A. Permit, Special Hunting, Jonathan R. Yanta, 7760 France Avenue South, Bloomington- -An application has been received of Jonathan Yanta requesting a special permit for deer, duck, goose and pheasant hunting on Joe Kenneally's property which is located in the south half of section 18 adjacent to CedarZVis a and the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks. Enclosed on pages 13l.through a copy of the letter sent by Mr. Yanta requesting this permit. In addition, criteria relating to ey&ptions to the hunting ban, City Code chapter 10.10, subd. 4 are included on page 2 . Mr. Yanta has been asked to provide a copy of written permission from Joe Kenneally regarding this application and shall provide either before or at Tuesday evening's meeting. Mr. Yanta received a similar permit in 1989. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a request by Jonathan Yanta for a special hunting permit for property owned by Joe Kenneally located in the south half of section 18 between old Cedar Avenue and the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks. 1a/ ColdweII Banker Commercial Real Estate Services BROKERAGE AND MANAGEMEN7 August 1, 1990 The Hon. Mayor Egan and City Council Members of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mayor Egan/City Council Members: -d Real Estate Broker i AUG 2 Prior to the City Council meeting on August 21st, I would like to submit this letter outlining my request for permission through the City for a special hunting season permit for the 1990 season. This permit will follow the guidelines of Ordinance 10.10, Subdivision 4. I have enclosed for your review a copy of the special permit for hunting last year that was granted by the City Council of Eagan. At the City Council meeting, if necessary, I will outline the following potential items of concern that will need to be addressed in order for the City to issue another special hunting permit: 1. We will install and implement the large readable and unremovable signs that indicate "No Public Hunting." 2. We will present a plat map outlining Joe Kenneally's property and, if necessary, all contiguous property that would be affected by this special hunt. 3. We will provide, to the best of our ability, license plate numbers for all individuals' cars and trucks who will be hunting during this special season. These license plate numbers will allow the City of Eagan's Police Department expedient interpretation of any potential trespasser on the subject property. 4. All individuals hunting on the subject property will be carrying a special hunting permit signed by the property owner, Joe Kenneally. A copy of the 1989 special hunting permit will be presented at the City Council meeting on August 21st. Minnesota Center, 7760 France Avenue South, Suit- 77r� 0 - Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435-5282 The Hon. Mayor Egan and City Council Members August 1, 1990 Page Two 5. I will provide, for the following, specific dates for which we are requesting a permit to hunt on the subject property: * Bow Hunting for Deer * Duck and Goose Hunting * Pheasant Hunting 6. Enclosed is a letter from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 7. We anticipate not having more than five hunters at any given time hunting at the subject property. In accordance with the City Council's meeting set for August 21st, I would appreciate the opportunity to present these ideas and address any questions or concerns that the Council may have. If you should have any further questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. My work number is 924-4625. Once again, thank you for the opportunity and your consideration. Sincerely, jt Jon than R. Yanta jib510 Enc. IP3 tSTATE OF HIE ZOM% DEPARTMENT OF 9"ON N01612) 445-9393 Area Wildlife Office 223 Holmes Street, Room 101 Shakopee, MN 55379 le. Join Yam to 7760 France Ave. S. Shite 770 Mpls, MN 55435-5282 Dear Mr. Yanta: NATURAL RESOURCES 31 &VIst 1989 FILE NO. sFp lgRik This is in response to our telephone conversation today concerning the effects of your hunting on the Joe Kenealy property in Eagan. You anticipate having 3 to 4 hunters on the property at various times hunting deer and Canada geese. The property is located in the south 1/2 of Section 18 between old Cedar Avm ue and the Burlington Northern tracks. I would encourage the city to allow you to hunt this area. This is the type of situation which I had in mind when I dismissed the proposed Panting closure with Police Chief Gagen. Your harvest of Cuda geese would be in accord with the objective of the DNR to slaw the graath of the population in the 7 -county metro area. I have already had nuisance complaints from Fagan residents regarding geese. Any goose harvest, especially during the special metro seasons (Sept 1-10) and December will help to reduce local geese %'Pile not impacting migrants. The alternative is the expemive "trap and transplant" pragra+a which is underway in other ca=n --ties and is paid for by the cities. Our projections indicated that the metro population Fculd increase by 200 % (triple) by 1990 without action. Our objective is to limit the increase to 100 % (double). This goose harvest will be beneficial to the city. Geese will net be eliminated from the city, but the harvest will reduce the need for other controls. The harvest of deer in this a.^ea is a?so in accord with DW objectives to reduce the deer population density. Our objectives are well known to the city council, and they have endorsed them by opening the Port Snelling State Park for shotgun deer hunting. Your harvest of deer will help us attain our goal, and it will reduce the need for taking additional deer with sharpshooters. I request that you report the number and hex of deer taken in this area if the city alloys. We can then add this to the special hunt total to determine the mutaber to be taken by sharpshooters. Your deer harvest will be beneficial to the city of Eagan in that it will help to reduce deer -car collisions and damage to vegetation. ^erel �' on M. Parker, Area Wildlife Manager AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER :4 1} HUNTING AREA Applications will only be considered for parcels of property zoned five acres or more and zoned "agricultural". 2) PERMISSION Applicant must secure the written permission of the property owner and supply a copy of said permission as part of the application to the City Council. (This provision is waived if the landowner and applicant are the same.) 3) IDENTIFICATION Applicant must provide names, addresses and motor vehicle license plate numbers of the hunters in the applicant's "party". The maximum number of hunters allowed under one application shall be five (5). 4) WILDLIFE Hunted wildlife shall only be deer (bow or rifle), goose, duck, pheasant and partridge. The Eagan City Council may grant permission for any of these wildlife to be hunted to the exclusion of others. 5) SEASON The maximum dates of the season for each wildlife hunted shall coincide with the hunting dates established by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The Eagan City Council may, at its discretion, reduce the season for each requested permit within the DNR season. 6) WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT The Eagan City Council may deny any application for special hunting if the permit does not serve the purposes of wildlife management, even if the applicant has complied with all of the requirements. oaf Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting RENEWAL. GENERAL LIABILITY/ WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE JULY 1, 1990 - JUNE 30, 1991 B. Renewal, General Liability/Workers Compensation Insurance July 1, 1990 - June 30, 1991—The City has now received the renewal information for the current insurance period. The renewal proposal has been assembled through Jeff Bowers of First Insurance as the City's insurance representative. The proposal for coverage is through the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) which has provided coverage to the City of Eagan since the 1986/87 year. Currently the only other possible market existing in the State for this type of insurance appears to be PENCO. In conversations with them it was determined that the premium would be approximately 15% higher than last year's Eagan premium, consequently, that option was not formally pursued. Attached on pages thro h is a summary of insurance proposed to be provided by LMCIT. Page/contains the premium recap and a 1989/90 versus 1990/91 comparison is provided on pages and 1361 On page,.o3 there is additional information about other possible deductible levels and savings which would be generated by switching to those other levels. As part of the overall risk management effort, First Insurance in cooperation with the City continuously reviews the potential for cost savings to the City through the utilization of higher deductib . The potential cost savings by utilizing a $50,000 deductible is highlighted on page M. That is a $50,000 per occurrence deductible with the option to have an aggregate deductible of either $50,000 for all lines ($52,754 savings) or $100,000 for all lines ($63,193 savings). Given the four year incurred claims of $833,247.53 and four year paid -to -date claims of $292,036.93 it would not seem that any change in deductibles would be appropriate at this time. The overall premium including workers compensation is up nearly 23% over last year; without workers compensation the increase is approximately 8.5%. The overall increase results from more property or expenditures being insured and the rates for particular coverages increasing or decreasing based on underwriting determinations. The comparative analysis explains these changes by coverage type. You will note that both comprehensive general liability and public officials liability have increased substantially primarily as a result of expenditure increases on which premium calculations are based. The premium for Workers Compensation coverage is a result of three (3) factors all of which have increased. Total estimated payrolls have increased by 14% as a result of more employees and higher salaries; rates per $100 of payroll have increased substantially (outside of any City control); and Eagan's experience modifier increased from 1.01 to 1.09. In the last three (3) insurance periods the modifier has increased from .85 to 1.01 and then to 1.09. Again in the area of risk management First Insurance and the City staff have been JaG Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting working closely with EBA, the plan administrator, to control and reduce workers compensation losses to begin to lower the modifier. The current safety program and utilization of safety committees is the first and major step in implementing a plan to lower these costs. Enclosed on pages nand is a copy of a letter from Jeff Bowers explaining this renewal and ongoing risk mana ment activities. Mr. Bowers will be present at the meeting to answer questions and further explain the insurance program as desired. Per the agreement of last year, the commission to First Insurance will be capped at a 5% increase or $22,608. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny as presented or with modifications the 1990/1991 General Liability/Workers Compensation renewal package. ( al JEFF BOWERS FIRST INSURANCE EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 CITY OF EAGAN JULY, 1990 PAGE 2 L.M.C.I.T. COMMERCIAL PACKAGE CMC11086 7-1-90/91 Building and Contents All Risk (Per Company Form) Agreed Amount/Replacement Cost $ 1,000 Deductible $15,487,676 Blanket Limit (Schedule Attached - On File with Company) Contractors' Equipment All Risk (Per Company Form) 100% Coinsurance Actual Cash Value $ 1,000 Deductible $ 921,846 Limit (Schedule Attached - On File with Company) Miscellaneous Property All Risk (Per Company Form) 100% Coinsurance Actual Cash Value $ 500 Deductible $ 385,000 Limit (Schedule Attached - On File with Company) I a 9 JEFF BOWERS FIRST INSURANCE EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 CITY OF EAGAN JULY, 1990 PAGE 3 Voting Machines All Risk (Per Company Form) 100% Coinsurance Actual Cash Value $ 500 Deductible $ 78,500 Limit Valuable Pavers & Records All Risk (Per Company Form) $ 250 Deductible $ 500 Deductible $100,000 Limit Location: City Hall Accounts Receivable All Risk (Per Company Form) $ 250 Deductible $100,000 Limit Location: City Hall Crime Money & Securities Broad Form $ 250 Deductible $ 50,000 Inside $ 50,000 Outside Location: City Hall lad JEFF BOWERS CITY OF EAGAN FIRST INSURANCE JULY, 1990 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 PAGE 4 Comprehensive General Liability "Claims Made" form* $600,000 Each Occurrence Limit $600,000 Products/Completed Operations Annual Aggregate Limit $ 50,000 Fire Damage Limit $ 5,000 Deductible - Bodily Injury (Per Claim) $ 5,000 Deductible - Property Damage (Per Claim) $ 1,000 Medical Payments - Each Person Limit $ 10,000 Occurrence Aggregate Includes: Premises/Operations Products/Completed Operations Blanket Contractual Personal Injury - Including Law Enforcement Personnel Broad Form Property Damage Host Liquor Liability Employees as Additional Insureds Extended Bodily Injury Independent Contractors Incidental Medical Malpractice Non -Owned Watercraft (Up to 261) Fellow Employee Exclusion Deleted Limited Pollution Liability (Retro Date: 6-1-88) Punitive Damages Employee Benefit (Retro Date: 7-1-88) Additional Named Insured: Eagan Police Security Excludes: *Prior Acts (Retro Date: 7-1-87) Airport Liability Utility Supply Failure Nursing Home Liability Liquor Legal Liability 13� JEFF BOWERS CITY OF EAGAN FIRST INSURANCE JULY, 1990 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 PAGE 5 Public Officials Liability "Claims Made" form* $ 5,000 Deductible - Each Loss $600,000 Limit - Each Loss Including: Housing Redevelopment Authority Punitive Damages Inverse Condemnation (Retro Date: 6-1-88) Excluding: Claims occurring between 1-6-86 & 1-6-87 *Prior Acts (Retro Date: 7-1-87) L.M.C.I.T. AUTOMOBILE CMC10229 7-1-90/91 $600,000 Bodily Injury & Property Damage - Combined Single Limit BASIC Personal Injury Protection $600,000 Uninsured & Underinsured Motorist $ 250 Deductible - Comprehensive $ 1,000* Deductible - Collision Actual Loss Sustained Miscellaneous Equipment on Autos (Police vehicles, fire trucks, utility vehicles and ambulances) Schedule of Vehicles Attached - On File with Company (Total - 155) 30 Day Reporting Required Includes: Hired & Non -Owned Auto Liability Fellow Employee (Exclusion Deleted) *Except as Specified 131 JEFF BOWERS FIRST INSURANCE EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 CITY OF EAGAN JULY, 1990 PAGE 6 L.M.C.I.T. ORKERS' COMPENSATION 02-000732-4 7-1-90/91 Employer's Liability $200,000 Bodily Injury - Any One Employee $600,000 Bodily Injury - Any One Occurrence $600,000 Bodily Injury by Disease - Aggregate Limit Classification Street/Road Const. Waterworks Firemen (Volunteer) Policemen Clerical NOC Building Maint. & Repair Parks Street Clean/Sewer Line & Snow Removal Municipal Employees 9 Experience Modification: Premium Discount: Additional Named Insured: ode 5506 7520 7708 7720 8810 9015 9102 9402 Pa roll Rate $ 318,000 9.32 $ 282,000 3.71 45,000 pop. 89.27 $1,532,000 5.22 $1,296,000 .45 $ 38,000 11.44 $ 451,000 5.77 $ 76,000 6.99 0 $1,196,000 3.35 1.09 $28,492 Eagan Police Security United Fire PUBLIC EMPLOYEES BLANKET BOND & Casualty Bond #51-062472 7-1-90/91 $ 25,000 Faithful Performance Blanket Position (Insured Agreement 4) Wr JEFF BOWERS FIRST INSURANCE EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 CITY OF EAGAN JULY, 1990 PAGE 7 HOME INS.CO. VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS POLICY Pending 7-1-90/91 $ 15,000 Principal Sum $ 100 Weekly Indemnity for Total Disability with maximum period payable is lifetime $ 50 Weekly Indemnity for Partial Disability with maximum period payable is six (6) weeks UNITED FIRE PUBLIC OFFICIAL POSITION SCHEDULE BOND & CASUALTY Bond x`51064322 7-1-90/91 $200,000 Limit Treasurer Schedule Position Obligee/Principal: Eagan Volunteer Fire Department Relief Association 133 JEFF BOWERS CITY OF EAGAN FIRST INSURANCE JULY, 1990 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 PAGE 8 PACKAGE Property $ 25,508.00 Contractor's Equipment 7,420.00 Miscellaneous Equipment Included Voting Machine Included Valuable Papers & Records Included Accounts Receivable Included Crime Coverage 1,125.00 Comprehensive General Liability 119,983.00 Public Officials Liability 17,971.00 Inverse Condemnation 4,799.00 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY 38,815.00 PHYSICAL DAMAGE LIABILITY - Include 19,802.00 Miscellaneous Equipment on Autos WORKERS' COMPENSATION 235,094.00 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES BLANKET BOND 1,720.00 VOLUNTEER FIREMEN AD&D 866.25 PUBLIC OFFICIALS POSITION BOND 375.00 (Eagen Volunteer Fire Department) TOTAL $473,478.25 134 JEFF BOWERS FIRST INSURANCE EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS (April 1989) Coveraq 1. Property (Blanket Building & Contents) Values decreased by 1%, from $15,537,676 to $15,547,676 Premium has decreased by 11%. 2. Inland Marine (Contractors Equip. Misc. Equip. & Voting Machines) Values Insured are increased by 46% from $906,279 to $1,320,663. Premium has increased by 56%. 3. Accounts Receivable & Valuable Papers Included in Property. 4. Crime Coverage No change. CITY OF EAGAN JULY, 1990 PAGE 9 Premium 1989190 1990/91 $ 28,668.00 $25,508.00 $ 4,764.00 $ 7,420.00 $ 1,125.00 $ 1,125.00 5. Comprehensive General Liability $110,900.00 $119,983.00 Estimated Operating Expenditures have increased by 5% from $12,977,570 to $13,635,460. Premium has increased by 8%. 6. Public Officials Liability Premium has increased by 23% due to total expenditures increase by 33% from $27,479,931 to $36,526,653. Also includes Inverse Condemnation, $4,799. )3� $ 14,620.00 $ 22,770.00 JEFF BOWERS FIRST INSURANCE EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 Coverage 7. Automobile Liability & Physical Damage Total number of rated autos has increased by 17% from 132 to 154. Premium remains unchanged. Misc. equipment on autos - annual premium of $3,196 included above. 8. Workers' Compensation Total estimated payrolls have increased by 14% from $4,585,143 to $5,234,000. Premium has increased by 41% over-all. Note changes in rates and experience modification. 9. Public Emlaigyee =Blanket Bond Total number of Class I & II employees have increased by 2% from 177 to 180. Premium has increased by 2%. 10. Volunteer Firemen AD&D No change. 11. Public Officials Position Bond (VFD) No change. TOTAL PREMIUM, Other Than Workers' Compensation (9% Increase) TOTAL PREMIUM, Including Workers' Compensation (23% Increase) 1,3� CITY OF EAGAN JULY, 1990 PAGE 10 Premium 1989/90 1990191 $ 56,454.00 $ 58,617.00 $166,356.00 $235,094.00 $ 1,687.00 $ 1,720.00 $ 866.25 $ 375.00 $ 866.25 $ 375.00 $219,644.25 $238,384.25 $386,000.25 $473,478.25 JEFF BOWERS FIRST INSURANCE EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 OPTIONAL COVERAGE QUOTATION CITY OF EAGAN JULY, 1990 PAGE 11 Deductible Premium Savings Property $ 5,000 $ 23,954 $1,554 (Currently $1,000) $10,000 $ 22,918 $2,590 General Liability $10,000 $113,984 $5,999 (Currently $5,000) Auto Comprehensive $ 10000 $ 7,643 $ 700 (Currently $250) Approx. Co .Z k 6 L ; P. 4-X 10 f: a -e duct A {-Q, vio- 1� LO ✓�scQ�AE,� ,� '�'i�FfC �5 0. 'b C�tv,�trrt ' 000 a�eciLL��;bl. 13q First Insurance 8000 West 78th Street Suite 400 Edina, Minnesota 55435 612 829-4800 August 15, 1990 Mr. Gene VanOverbeke Finance Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Gene: In reviewing your renewal, we felt that some comment should be made towards your risk management actions. In light of the fact that your premium increased by 9% on the league program. First, your major premium increase came from the General Liability and Public Officials Liability. Both are rated off the budget from the City. In the case of the General Liability, you had an 8% increase in premium with a 5% increase in operating expenditures, a clear 3% rate increase. The Public Officials premium increased by 23% with a 33% increase in total expenditures. It was a rate decrease of approximately 10%. The property premium actually went down 11% and your auto premium stayed virtually unchanged. We discussed various ways to decrease the premiums on your renewal and these range from full self-insurance, which the citizens of Eagan would probably frown on, to using increased deductibles. We explored this option for you this year by offering optional deductibles for the Property, General Liability and Auto. They are as follows: Deductible Property 5,000 (Currently $1,000) $10,000 General Liability $10,000 (Currently 499,989) $2-5,990 $5,000 $50, 000 Auto Comprehensive $ 1,000 (Currently $250) /3� Premium 23,954 $ 22,918 $113,984 Sc.- A ala" %44 Savin s 1,554 $ 2,590 $ 5,999 Lt-9e.f Q-11.-90 $ 7,643 $ 700 Mr. Gene VanOverbeke Page 2 It appears that for the City of Eagan to make significant in roads on their premium, they must utilize very large deductibles in all areas. To do this, the City must be prepared both monetarily and mentally to do so. Going from a $5,000 deductible to a $50,000 deductible not only means setting aside money but also accepting more risk. Several losses in one year could be very devastating. It is our opinion that a deductible program should be implemented in stages by gradually increasing your deductibles so that you become accustomed to it over time rather than over night. Comprehensive loss prevention programs can help control costs as well. The League has skilled loss engineers that work closely with the Cities to help prevent losses in all areas. This is a service that you already pay for and should be taken advantage of. Examples of these programs are Safe Driving Techniques, What Measures To Take When Building New Buildings, Handling City Equipment on Private Property, and so on. Again, these are programs that the League offers to the Cities at no cost. This lead to the next and the most costly aspect of your insurance, Workers' Compensation. The premium has increased by 41% due to many factors. Payrolls have increased by 14%, rates have gone up in all classes, and your modification has increased by 8%. Even though it would appear that your Workers' Compensation is out of control, we think that you have begun to turn the corner. Rate increases are out of our control, however, your modification can be lowered by an aggressive loss control program. We have had several meetings to discuss various ways to attack your Workers' Compensation program and we believe that they are beginning to work. EBA has helped lend support to the loss program by offering loss prevention ideas, methods to implement the prevention ideas and the willingness to come out a talk with the department heads. All these together add up to lower modification factors and a cleaner Workers' Compensation program. Risk Management is an arbitrary term, however, we feel that Eagan is beginning to develop their own techniques towards a more comprehensive risk management program. Gene, I am also enclosing some information that we requested from the EBA regarding how to choose a clinic. It is pretty simple and straight forward. I hope it helps. Sincerely, Jeffrey A. Bowers Senior Account Executive 137 .-suy. acv gra iia cit ovw.o roa a1va. , cvi1vrq oic— acs — -rear•+ r. 1 '1111First j � insurance 8000 West 78th street " 400 Edna, M{n ewft 55435 512 829.4800 August 16, 1990 Dir. Oene van0varbake City of Ragan. 3830 Pilot Knob Road Ragan, MN 55122 Dear Gone, Per our phone conversation today relative to an increased deductible, here are the premium figureas $50,000 Occurrence Deductible 50,000 Aggregate Deductible for All Lines 1,000 occurrence Deductible after aggregate is reached $52,754 Premium savings. $50,000 occurrence Deductible 100,000 Aggegate Deductible for All Lines 11000 occurrence Deductible after aggregate is reached $63,193 Premium savings Your four-yeav incurred claims amount is $833,247.53 and your four-year paid -to -date claims amount is $292,036.93. Please advie■ if we can provide further information. Thank you. Sin1perely, Swanda or Customer Service e sontat ive MPmhPr Ftr51 Rank Systom 140 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting CERTIFICATION OF PROPOSED 1991 PROPERTY TAX LEVY C. Certification of Proposed 1991 Property Tax Levy—To be in compliance with the Truth in Taxation laws the City must submit to the County Auditor its proposed property tax levy for payable 1991 on or before September 1, 1990. The proposed levy will be the basis for the generic notice to be prepared by the County Auditor and delivered by the County Treasurer to each taxpayer. The final levy may not exceed this proposed amount. The city is also required to adopt a proposed budget for 1991 by the same date. Attached on pages and #8 's a copy of the summary sheets for the proposed budget. Also attached on page tis a resolution adopting the proposal payable 1991 m tax levy. ACTIG '-,E CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the proposed 1991 budget and the proposed levy of payable 1991 real estate taxes. 91REVSUM De'. General Properiy iaAes Licenses Permits Intergovermental Revenue Charges for Services Recreation Charges Fines 8 Forfeits Other Revenue Program Revenues Transfers TOTAL GENERAL FUND a 4,47o,cuu a a o,»7,rvv a 62,846 69,564 78,140 75,020 -3.993% 964,991 1,127,208 816,700 753,120 -7.785% 1,374,216 2,221,935 1,468,890 1,408,800 -4.091% 588,667 628,179 606,150 603,400 -0.454% 109,340 137,707 146,840 149,550 1.846% 177,468 203,147 190,000 240,000 26.316% 203,019 238,960 131,600 154,100 17.097% 788,557 780,180 719,110 735,910 2.336% 41,970 51,679 50,000 57,450 14.900% ............ S 8,767,274 ------------ 510,783,896 ------------ $10,767,130 ------------ 511,109,160 ----------- 3.177% 91BUDEXP GENERAL FUND (4 3 CCMIPARATIVE SUNMARY OF EXPENDITURES Admn Request Actual Actual Budget Dept Request Admn Request % Increase 1988 --•--------- 1989 1990 1991 1991 over 1990 GENERAL GOVERNMENT ------------ ------------ ---------•-- ------------ ........... ------- 01 ---------- Mayor Al Council S 54,586 S 51,482 S 71,010 S 72,720 S 72,720 2.408% 02 Administration 354,066 401,864 420,210 494,440 461,480 9.821% 03 Data Processing 190,473 325,182 268,760 289,144 282,570 5.138% 05 Finance/City Clerk 557,782 642,279 680,210 718,680 711,030 4.531% 06 Legal 306,031 404,369 390,000 390,000 370,000 -5.128% 07 Community Development 1,101,152 1,484,178 1,255,110 1,347,420 1,307,620 4.184% 10 Cable TV 148,660 ............ 48,741 ............ ............ 49,340 114,360 54,360 10.174% S 2,712,750 ------------ S 3,358,095 S 3,134,640 ............ S 3,426,964 ...--------- S 3,259,780 PUSLIC SAFETY ............ ............ ------------ ............ 11 Police S 2,628,868 S 3,048,351 S 3,348,590 S 3,564,880 S 3,504,670 4.661% 12 Fire 478,699 ............ 713,608 ............ ------------ 708,240 761,465 737,485 4.129% S 3,107,567 ............ S 3,761,959 ............ S 4,056,830 ............ S 4,326,345 ............ S 4,242,155 PUBLIC WORKS ............ ............ ............ 21 Public Works Engineering S 632,458 S 701,583 S 677,900 S 700,220 S 699,470 3.182% 22 Streets 8 Highways 964,995 956,619 946,670 929,560 862,670 -8.873% 24 Centra: Services Maintenance 250,583 ------------ 324,965 ............ ............ 317,040 355,000 331,030 4.413% S 1,848,036 ............ S 1,983,167 ............ S ------------ 1,941,610 ............ S 1,984,780 ------------ S 1,893,170 PARKS E RECREATION ............ ------------ ..... 31 . .......... Parks 8 Recreation S 1,290,368 S 1,409,005 S 1,470,810 S 1,636,500 S 1,587,490 7.933% 32 Forestry 70,155 ------------ 88,359 ------------ ............ 97,750 -•---------- 114,430 103,560 5.944% S 1,360,523 ------------ S 1,497,364 S 1,568,560 S 1,750,930 ............ S 1,691,050 OTHER •----------- ............ ----------•- ............ 41 Contingency ............ - ............ S ............ 65,490 S ------------ 0 S 23,005 -64.872% S - ............ S ............ S ............ 65,490 S ............ 0 ............ S 23,005 ------------ ........... 'TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES S 9,028,876 S10,600,5B5 $10,767,130 $11,489,019 511,109,160 3.177% z===zz=zz=== i=====ee=i=e eee=z==zzzzz ca=ezezzzzez see==zzzzzzz zeeeee=Cez= (4 3 RESOLUTION CITY OF RAGAN PROPOSED LEVY OF 1990 REAL ESTATE TAXES WHEREAS, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, was held on August 21, 1990 at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center, all members being present except , and WHEREAS, upon motion by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby is on record approving and certifying the proposed levy of 1990 Real Estate Taxes for Eagan, Minnesota, which taxes are payable in 1991 as follows: General Levy (Levy Limit): General Fund Road & Bridge Fund Equipment Revolving Fund TOTAL GENERAL LEVY Special Levies: Debt Service TOTAL SPECIAL LEVIES GRAND TOTAL LEVY Dated: $8,131,810 460,239 272,820 $1,310,000 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN By: Attest: CERTIFICATION $8,864,869 W1 $10,174,869 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 21st day of August, 1990. E.J. VanOverbeke, City of Eagan City Clerk Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting CERTIFICATION OF 1991 BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING AND CONTINUATION HEARING DATES D. Certification of 1991 Budget Public Hearing and Continuation Hearing Dates—Again to be in compliance with Truth and Taxation laws the City is required to submit to the County Auditor the date that it has selected for its public hearing and the date for the continuation of its hearing, if necessary. This certification must be completed on or before September 1, 1990. The date for the City's hearing or for the continuation of its hearing must not conflict with the hearing dates of the County or of the school districts in which the City is located. The school district and county dates are as follows: Taxing Jurisdiction Hearing Date Continuation Date School District 191 11/15 12/6 School District 196 11/26 12/7 School District 197 11/5 (1) 11/19 Dakota County 11/20 11/27 (The Vo -Tech is not required to hold the hearing under current interpretation of the law.) (l) This date does not fall within the prescribed period for the public hearing. The County Auditor has been asked to review and update the City. A new date will of course affect dates available to the City. The public hearing is subject to the following administrative rules as developed by the Revenue Department: First, there are restrictions on when the public hearing on the proposed property tax may be held. The hearing cannot be held on a Sunday. If the hearing is held on a day other than Saturday, it must be held after 5:00 p.m. If the public hearing is held on a Saturday, it may be held before 5:00 p.m. at the City's choice. Second, the City may hold its public hearing on the same day as a regularly scheduled meeting (except Sunday), provided that the public hearing on the proposed property tax for payable 1991 is dealt with first, the subjects of the public hearing and the regularly scheduled meeting are not intermingled and the final property tax levy for payable 1991 is adopted at the conclusion of the public hearing (unless a continuation hearing is scheduled and held). Mr. Robert Johnson of the Revenue Department has verbally agreed Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting that the City would be in compliance with this provision if the public hearing were scheduled at 7:00 p.m. on the day of a regular City Council meeting as long as adequate time was allowed for the public hearing. The concern appears to be that the hearing be convenient (hence the requirement to be first) and that there be no time limitations which may limit public input. The City is therefore free to select any dates between November 15 through December 20, subject to the above mentioned requirements and a correction on ISD #197. Third, the final property tax levy for taxes payable in 1991 must be adopted at the conclusion of the public hearing, or at the conclusion of the continuation hearing if one is scheduled and held. The City must also adopt its final budgets for payable 1991 at the conclusion of the public hearing or continuation hearing. Finally, the requirement that the published notice be published not less than two days and no more than six days prior to the public hearing refers to working days rather than calendar days. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To set the 1991 Budget Public Hearing Date and Continuation Hearing Date and authorize the City Clerk to certify the dates to the County Auditor. Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting VARIANCELPRELIMINARY PLAT ILLS OF STONEBRIDGE 3RD E. Variance to the Preliminary Plat, United Mortgage/Hills of Stonebridge 3rd --An application has been received of United Mortgage, the developer of Hills of Stonebridge 3rd, requesting a variance to allow a cul-de-sac in excess of 500 feet to revise the preliminary plat for Hills of Stonebridge 3rd Addition. The purpose of this variance is to permit a cul-de-sac to terminate at Camberwill Drive South and eliminate its connection with Oxford Road. The purpose for this variance is to permit overland drainage trails to be designed along rear lot lines rather than using front and sideyard drainage. Upon completion of subsequent phases of this development, Barrow Court will provide an additional outlet to Diffley Road, ultimately eliminating the need for this variance. For additional information on this item, please refer to the ort prepared by the Department of Community Development enclosed on pages through L. ID for your review. Also enclosed on page is a memo from Director of Public Works Colbert concerning this item. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a variance for a cul-de-sac in excess of 500 feet to revise the preliminary plat for Hills of Stonebridge 3rd Addition. I W� CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE/FINAL PLAT APPLICANT: UNITED MORTGAGE LOCATION: SW 114 OF SECTION 24 EXISTING ZONING: PD R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 21, 1990 DATE OF REPORT: AUGUST 14, 1990 COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted requesting a Variance to allow a cul-de-sac in excess of 500 feet within the proposed Hills of Stonebridge 3rd Addition. The original Hills of Stonebridge 2nd Addition, consisting of 125 lots, was preliminary platted in June 1989 with anticipated phased final plats. This third addition contains 74 lots. During the final street and utility design, it was noted that by eliminating the connection between Camberwell Drive and Oxford Road, backyard drainage swales between pond JP - 27 on the south portion of the plat and JP -53 at the center of the plat could be provided. The backyard -type swale would be more desirable than through front yards and side yards. As a result, Camberwell Drive is now proposed as a cul-de-sac connecting to States Avenue with a length of approximately 1,230 feet. However, when Barrow extends to the south (when that agricultural property is rezoned and platted), this Variance will no longer apply. With this modification to the plat, one lot was eliminated. This Variance should be acted upon prior to action on the final plat. The standard noticing procedure was followed for action by the City Council on August 21. If approved, this Variance shall be applicable to all code requirements. L N At H aw C) CL Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting PRELIMINARY PLAICONDITIONAL USE PERMITIF`INASERVE INC ADDITION F. Preliminary Plat, Finaserve, Inc. Addition/Fina Oil & Chemical Company, Consisting of Approximately 1.7 Acres for a Motor Fuel Station and a Conditional Use Permit for a Pylon Sign and Motor Fuel Sales Located at the Intersection of Highway 149 and Highway 55 in the Northwest Quarter of Section 12 --At its regular meeting of July 24, 1990, the Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider an application for a preliminary plat and conditional use permit as described above for the Finaserve, Inc. Addition. For additional information concerning this application, please refer to City Planner Sturm's memo and a Community Development staff report whichaje enclosed on pages through for your review. Also enclosed on pages througVC is a copy of the Advisory lanning Commission minutes related to this item. The is recommending approval of this application. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a preliminary plat for the Finaserve, Inc. Addition/Fina Oil & Chemical Company consisting of approximately 1.7 acres for a motor fuel station and a conditional use permit for a pylon sign and motor fuel sales located at the intersection of Highways 149 and 55 in the northwest quarter of Section 12 as presented. ISj MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: THOMAS A COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: AUGUST 17, 1990 SUBJECT: HILLS OF STONEBRIDGE 3RD ADDITION ALTERNATE ROADWAY ALIGNMENT CUL-DE-SAC VARIANCE REQUEST The developer for the above -referenced subdivision is proposing to revise the development layout to eliminate a through street on the southern end and replace it with a cul-de-sac which will temporarily exceed the City's 500' limit thereby requiring a Variance. During the review of the street and utility plans by the Engineering Division, the Public Works Department has the following concerns pertaining to the approval of this Variance and deviation from the original approved preliminary plat: 1. Not only will this result in a temporarily excessive cul-de-sac (until the southerly stub street is extended to Diffley Road), but it will inhibit immediate access to Diffley Road. The original approved preliminary plat would allow direct access to Dodd Road and its intersection with Diffley Road near Fire Station #4. With the proposed revision eliminating this continuous internal circulation by replacing it with a cul-de-sac, it will encourage all traffic to gain access to Diffley Road by way of Stafford Place and concentrating traffic at the Braddock Trail intersection with Diffley Road. In summary, the overall internal traffic circulation is not as efficient with this requested Variance as compared to the original approved preliminary plat. 2. The elimination of this through street results in sanitary sewer and water main facilities being located along side lot lines and in rear lot areas. We have experienced problems in the past with structure and/or landscaping encroachment which precludes our ability to access these facilities for maintenance. It is much more desirable to have these utilities located within public right-of-way and public streets for access where maintenance and repair can quickly and efficiently be performed. Therefore, we would like .the City Council to take these concerns into consideration of this Variance request- Difecior of Public Works cc: Mike Foertsch, Assistant City Engineer John Wingard, Development/Design Engineer Joe Connolly, Superintendent of Utilities Arnie Erhart, Superintendent of Streets/Equipment Jim Sturm, City Planner /-5/ MEMO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR DALE RUNKLE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FROM: JIM STURM, CITY PLANNER DATE: AUGUST 15, 1990 SUBJECT: FINA ADDITION At the July 24 Advisory Planning Commission, one issue arose with this proposal regarding the pylon signs. Currently, there are two pylons on this site (see attached pictures). It was my understanding that the smaller one would be removed with the platting process. After a lengthy discussion by the Planning Commission and myself, the applicant agreed to remove that sign and have a ground sign which is permitted by Code instead. During the development process, Fina has been requesting that the City issue a building permit prior to the Final Plat in order to beat the winter construction season. The new building will be constructed while the existing facility remains open, or at least as long as possible. Since Fina is an existing business in the community and is making substantial improvements to this site, I agreed to bring the issue to your attention, as well as the Council's, if you so agree. However, it was with the understanding that a Certificate of Occul2anev would not be ganted by the Cin° until the Final Plat was approved and recorded. In the August 15 correspondence from Don Marrow, Fina Corporation, he states that they are now requesting a temporary Certificate of Occupancy even if the Final Plat has not been approved. This could pose potential problems for the City, as well as set a precedent that may cause problems in the future. Fina is also stating that due to an error in the survey, the legal process required to correct the problem does not leave them in control of their own Final Plat submission dates. Attached is the letter of request detailing the situation. If the Council is interested in allowing the building permit, or even more so in granting a temporary Certificate of Occupancy, I would suggest as a possible alternative that the City would have, in hand, the necessary financial guarantees that the Final Plat would require prior to the issuance of a temporary Certificate of Occupancy. I want you to know that the Fina submission was very well done and that Don Marrow has been a pleasure to work with. If I can be of additional assistance, or if you would like further information, please advise. JS/js 0 IV 1t�` �y moi/ ''r • � a �0 MW lift Mo.; JPQGE�;.—• —amp -- -AU 717 __TAW o;W V August 15, 1990 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 Attn: Mr. James Sturm, City Planner Re:' Finaserve Inc. Addition Intersection of Hwy. 149 and Hwy. 55 Dear Mayor, Council Members and Mr. Sturm: Fina Oil and Chemical Company 2051 Killebrew Drive Suite 317 Bloomington, MN 55425 (612)854-7331 As you know, Fina has requested the City of Eagan's approval of Fina's proposal to build a new gasoline station and convenience store on the site of our existing station at Dodd Road and Highway 55 in Eagan. Fina believes that our planned new structures and landscaping will be a definite improvement and beautification to this important corner of your City and we were hoping to build the new structures and station over this Fall and Winter. Any landscaping that would need to be delayed, would be completed next spring. This construction sequence would allow us to keep our existing station open and to serve our customers without significant interruption until the new facility was completed. However, in our preliminary review with City Staff, we discovered that although our property was in an auditor's subdivision, this was not sufficient to satisfy the City's platting requirements and we have been working with City Staff and our consultants as diligently as possible to achieve final plat approval. During the platting process, we discovered for the first time that the legal description of our south boundary line was technically defective as a result of Dakota County's re -survey of all of Section 12 in approximately 1985. Basically, the station and site which we purchased in 1987 The Honorable Mayor and City Council ATTN: Mr. James Sturm, City Planner August 15, 1990 Page Two had been registered as torrens property by its prior owner in 1960 and the legal description for the lot was based upon the County monumentation existing in 1960. In approximately 1985, the Dakota County Surveyor's Office reviewed all of the Section 12 and in the course of this review determined that one or more Section corners had been improperly placed in the past. To correct these prior mis-monumentations, the Dakota County Surveyor's Office reset various corners in the Section. As a direct result, the legal description of our southern border have become incorrect. During the course of this review, we further determined that when the property was registered in 1960, there was a 10 minute error in one of the angle descriptions. Our attorneys have been working with the Examiner of Titles of Dakota County to resolve these matters and the Examiner has agreed to allow us to correct these technical defects through a Supplementary Proceeding in the Torrens Court. While we do not anticipate any problems in the correction of these technical defects, going through the court system will add a few months to the process and it is our understanding that we will not be able to get final plat approval until these torrens proceedings are completed even though the correction of these description defects really had no bearing on our development of the property or the building of our new improvements. Due to the foregoing unique circumstances which were created by the prior incorrect surveys and monumentations by others, and were not in any manner caused by Fina, we respectfully request that upon approval of our preliminary plat Application, the City Council also direct as follows: a. That the City shall immediately issue Fina a building permit for the construction of its planned new station and improvements; and, b. That should Fina substantially complete the construction of its station and improvements in compliance with all pertinent building codes prior to receiving final plat approval, that the City shall then issue to Fina a temporary Certificate of Occupancy to allow Fina to use and occupy the new stations and improvements until final plat approval. ts7 The Honorable Mayor and City Council ATTN: Mr. James Sturm, City Planner August 15, 1990 Page Three We feel that our request for a building permit and temporary Certificate of Occupancy following preliminary plat approval is justified due to the following special circumstances: 1. Our proposal is a substantial improvement and beautification of the corner and will be a credit to both the City of Eagan and Fina. 2. A station has been operated at our site for a number of years and we are an existing business. 3. Granting our request following preliminary plat approval would allow us to do most of the required excavation work and have our building shell erected prior to the worst of the winter weather, would allow us to complete the interior of the station during the winter construction season and would cause the least amount of disruption to our customers and existing business. 4. Even though we have had an existing building and business at this site for some time now and the site is platted as an auditor's subdivision, we are complying with the City's request that we have the property formally platted. 5. As we understand it, if it were not for the technical legal description defects, Fina would probably be able to receive final plat approval for the project in the very near future. As Fina in no way caused the prior incorrect surveys and monumentations and the problem only came to light as a result of Fina's attempt to comply with the City's request that we plat our existing station location, it would be unfair to penalize Fina for others; past inaccuracies by denying us a building permit and temporary Certificate of Occupancy until after we receive final plat approval following the Proceedings Subsequent in the torrens court. (SS The Honorable Mayor and City Council ATTN: Mr. James Sturm, City Planner August 15, 1990 Page Four On behalf of Fina and myself, thank you for your consideration of our request for building permit and temporary Certificate of Occupancy following preliminary plat approval and for all of the assistance we have received from your excellent City Staff. I will be at the City Council Meeting on August 21, 1990 to discuss our Application for preliminary plat approval, and this request, and look forward to answering any of your questions at the Meeting. If, in the meanwhile, you have any questions regarding our request or our plans, please call me at your convenience. Very truly yours, Finaserve Inc. A. Don Marrow Project Engineer cc: James Sheldon, City Attorney /59 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - FINASERVE INC ADDITION APPLICANT: FINA OIL & CHEMICAL COMPANY LOCATION: INTERSECTION OF HWY. 149 & HWY. 55 EXISTING ZONING: GB (GENERAL BUSINESS) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 24, 1990 DATE OF REPORT: JULY 18, 1990 COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted requesting a Preliminary Plat for one lot of 1.7 acres for a motor fuel station and a Conditional Use Permit for a pylon sign and a motor fuel station. COMMENTS: The Fina Oil and Chemical Company has owned and operated the Fina gas station at this site since mid-July 1987. Fina decided to make substantial improvements to this site; when they approached City staff regarding the improvements, they learned the property (P.I.D. #10-03800-060-10) was unplatted. Because of the improvements, platting is required, as well as a Conditional Use Permit for their existing pylon sign and the use as a motor fuel station in a General Business district. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located in the NE corner of Eagan at the intersection of Highways 55 and 149. To the south of this site is Killdeer Addition. Joyce Court (R-1, Single Family) is located to the east of the site. Property 10-03800-081-10 abuts the site to the east and is also zoned GB (General Business). SITE PLAN: The proposal includes a prototype Fina gas station/convenience store, a single stall (18.0' x 33.33') detached car wash, two -island, four pump fuel dispensers covered by a canopy. The plan indicates two future fuel dispensing pumps, two future diesel dispensers, and an air/vacuum unit. The stand pipes for the fuel pumps will be located next to the building as discussed with staff. The building and canopy meet all General Business building setbacks. Building coverage in a GB district is. 35%. As proposed, the project is at 9%. The proposed building will be constructed just to the east of the existing building and the car wash directly south of the proposed canopy. These placements will allow business to operate as usual until the new building is completed. 1�6) Access to the site is gained from T.H. 55 and S.T.H. 149. The applicant is proposing to change the location of the access on T.H. 55. They propose to locate it immediately east of the existing access. Code requires four parking spaces, plus two parking spaces for each service stall. This project does not have any service stalls. They do meet parking code and parking setback requirements. Twelve 10' x 18' parking stalls are designated, as well as one 12' x 20' handicapped stall with a depressed curb for handicapped access. The single stall car wash has a 12' x 20' heated concrete slab located immediately east from the exit, thus eliminating ice build-up in winter. Code allows one pylon sign of not more than 27' in height and 125 square feet per side. The site currently has two pylon signs. The site plan indicates removal of the pylon on Highway 149. The larger pylon on Highway 55 will remain. The landscaping plan.submitted shows five spruce trees that will be relocated in addition to the new plantings provided for on the landscaping plan. Staff recommends that the locusts be replaced due to maintenance and hardiness reasons in commercial locations. Also, some conifers should be added along Highway 55 to add year-round color to the site. GRADINGrDRAINAGE/E RO SION CONTROL: This development involves the regrading of an existing commercial site. Within the site, there is a maximum differential in elevation of approximately 10 feet. The proposed grading of the site will slightly alter the existing grades and will result in the removal of all trees from the southeast and easterly sides of the site. Site generated storm water drainage from the site flows generally to the east and across the TH 55 frontage road through culverts into the ditch section of TH 55. The ditch drainage is directed to Pond GP -2. Pond GP -2 is a designated ponding area in the City's Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan. The existing storm drainage system is not adequately sized to accommodate unrestricted flow from the 100 year storm event. In the past, MnDOT has required storm sewer construction in this area versus open channel ditch drainage. Review and approval by MnDOT will be required for this development. WATER QUALITY: Storm water drainage from the site will flow into Pond GP -2 which is classified as a Nutrient Trap under the Water Quality Management Plan. To meet the water quality criteria established in the plan, a total of 0.26 acre-feet of wet storage volume should be provided from the drainage area of the plat. Staff recommends that a ponding area, 2 feet deep be provided with a skimmer outlet to meet the water quality and quantity requirements for the site and to provide a means of trapping any petroleum product spills that could accidentally occur within the site. UTILITIES: The site is presently served by City sewer and water. The existing sewer and water services will be upgraded as part of the project. STREETIACCESS/CIRCULATION: The existing development has street access from both TH 149 and the TH 55 frontage road. The access from TH 149 will not change but the access from the frontage road is proposed to be moved east approximately 70 feet. RIGHT-OF-WAY/EA SEMENTSfPERMITS: Required easements along the property lines will be dedicated as part of the plat. No additional easements or right-of-way are required. The development will be responsible for ensuring that required MnDOT permits are obtained prior to final plat approval. I L�- FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - FIRMERVE INC. ADDITION Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and connections proposed to be made to the City's utility system based on the submitted plans. Improvement Projoct IIs• Rate Quantity None .vZ CONDITIONS FOR FINA 011, & CIIEMICAL COMPANY I. These standard conditions of plat approval as ndopted by Council ncti►►n on September 15, 1997 shall he complied with: Al, B1, B2, B3, B4, Cl, C2, C4, Dl, El and HI.and F1. 2. No outdoor sales, storage, or displays shall be allowed. .1. Trash and recycling enclosure shall be of adequate size to accommodate trnsh dumpster and recycling contniner. 4. Roof top mechnnical equipment shall not he visible. 5. 'Tile applicnnt shall provide irrigntion system for nll sodded areas. �. 'File locust trees shall be changed to Summit Ash on the landscaping plan. 7. All plantings in MnDot right-of-wny shall require MnUot approval. S. The gnsoline tank stand pipes shall he nttnched to the building. 9 _ The development is required to limit the site generated storm wnter run-off In tl►c 5 -Year storm event. All site generated storm water run-off is required to he ponded prier to disclini ge into the existing storm drainnge system. I I - Review and approval by MnDOT is required prior to final plat npprovnl. 1 7_ . The development is required to provide a nutrient treatment hasin for storm water run-off in nccordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Outility Management Plan. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL A. financial Obligations 1. This development shall accept its additional financial obligations as defined in the staff's report in accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval. B. Easements and_Riahts-of-Wavy 1. This development shall dedicate 10' drainage and utility easements centered over all common lot lines and adjacent to private property or public right-of-way. 2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially guarantee the acquisition costs of additional drainage, ponding, and utility easements as required by the alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required public utilities and streets located beyond the boundaries of this plat or outside of dedicated public right-of-way as necessary to service this development or accommodate' it. 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 necessitated by City storm water storage volume requirements. C. Plans and Specifications 1. All public streets and utilities necessary to provide service to this development shall be designed by a registered professional engineer in accordance with City codes, engineering standards, guidelines and policies. 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 insure that all temporary dead end public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in accordance with City engineering standards. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL PAGE TWO , 4. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted on the proposed grading plan. The financial guarantee shall be included in the Development Contract and not be released until one year after the date of installation. 5. All internal public and private streets shall be constructed within the required right-of-way in accordance with City Code and engineering standards. D. Public Improvements 1. If any public improvements are to be installed under a City contract, the appropriate project must be approved at a formal public hearing by Council action prior to final plat approval. E. permits 1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition of all regulatory agency permits in the time frame required by the affected agency. F. Parks and Trails Dedication I. This development shall fulfill its parks dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission and approved by Council action. G. Water Quality Dedication 1. This development shall be responsible for providing a cash dedication in addition to/in lieu of ponding requirements in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan. H. Otber 1. All standard platting and zoning conditions shall be adhered to unless specifically granted a variance by Council action. Advisory Planning commission Approved: _ Auqust 25, 1987 Revised: plataprv.con LTS *2 l66 City Council September 15, 1987 July 10, 1990 STREET MAP ZONING MAP Ch MAI p9) :It "D11 COMP. GUIDE PLAN MAP AL D- ii, a . NB Ind. N.W. I/4SEC.12.T27, R23 I ^%L I j:—_ I Ole -to -,je- PiIIIA SAL y CIFICI E UIN ONE DDII!TL4t t • � •• ,rid i ! Q i .. � �-..t C �• a � t/ t 1 y�.'�.:.^� � F:• is \.l I��•+ \4, \ £iixr g�: e[o� �, .%u•�� y • Eye. :11 ��\ \} ti a:e�i i._� .�) sEr` •�j,�.`. `,•' {.•+• is r� �`. tl �, 1\\�,• r�4�� F t�\� �' •\♦ . �r...,.•' �• ilii 4 F 'o . j�' �-r�i � r SL �• mss. t ��t, � + C •:' kyt � - �t ` °►u"h an.. w„w.n � �F ` F � \ \ \\ • I S: •_y _ � IF 00 c ? I'T rn TAP- ml P r*i i '•/ I' 1•'1 v jrg ,l-�,� s,. •..� I - :� it I' s �s _ it `t ••�.7�ir/ i � . g •�F (6 i F •:fir"-., }a. '��_;1 � ...,;, l � �=I is /7S ,,�' J :i' a-71 tE E :: r``� ice° a.n,;�t 'n� ----�— /'. l '•� AI iii 5:� i :: \♦ r^„ , ,s f 1 Dila s177 iPr• ��1�� /spsp� `�_ *0��:�,1,�I,_Iis �:�r,iL�II;•,Fg �: ! +�• •a ��/I ! t? f. �J77: jjrji iii iiiiiiiii[[iii 3 •£ zic£t i" £E££E£EE£ii£E£iEe:£Ei-.It��,ril, tllt�i< �// / / F:. It ei _. ,(il��,i a • •+. / /; :e: % i:�ati e F {{r £ : F p £i iti�i��l(i�ilil'I ,y'...' • °..y �� o•' •q,� ,f /r c f1 II II I_.,�, • A". ,. -- if � : irk l £ ii`�ilj �;l!�• 1"L... A2 Illp '=e K -1110' i ---]FINA OIL AND CHEMICAL COMPANY 1710 MO�tH Cl MtAlll It►11E6!?►•1 •••• 11.0 DODD •OaC - ••� x- ■ • L. • �` •' • w e w • e ♦ `L CHla6. T![All ?6401 II31 —V -z — .• f)+ .� ` .l 7N �C W m � � z Tn r �i < Z �C W m �i It D 6 z �I tel► Ll FINA OIL AND CHEMICAL COMPANr `"'•' • • • ► • • w ■ !!!0 NORTH CtRTR AI !I<RRfSlWA1' •�M ROOO R0�0 • ,,..;� • w a w • • e ♦ .. O°LIAR. TERA! t!!0! IIIA - �l►O►K Mww�•Or• rn �o� ear• ... �............�......r......� L ' ■[ On �M �a tD z oA in i' m z C) rn z n * OOH r ■ i O [,I AN ,; i I 6.1 ■ l i i i C7 � i MEM i r �1 PROJECT: FW-I,At"1,A' r DATE I- REVISIONS • ' SEEI LR I - Kl SCALE'. '' L BY: ,fir 3 =VEINS DRAWN ru NURSEAY.�CHECKED - ^ TITLE: LAr1V'5'CAM "N !Y' SWEET ^' `7 IN 111111 wimmmiu u�nu�wmwmni - i r �1 PROJECT: FW-I,At"1,A' r DATE I- REVISIONS • ' SEEI LR I - Kl SCALE'. '' L BY: ,fir 3 =VEINS DRAWN ru NURSEAY.�CHECKED - ^ TITLE: LAr1V'5'CAM "N !Y' SWEET ^' `7 Page 51EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 that the Planning Commission should be able to see what the sign would look like using cross-section diagrams. Member Trygg stated she did not see a reason to vary from the ordinance standards. Member Miller was confident that the Amoco sign was not 10' by 171 and he was not inclined to grant the variance. Member Voracek questioned the hardship and stated that the Amoco sign did not, in and of itself, prove a demonstrated need for the Crown Coco sign. Member Gorman agreed. Member Miller stated the applicant should be given the opportunity to continue the item if he liked for further information. Chairman Graves suggested that the applicant put together a total sign agreement for the site. Member Voracek stated that the APC's action was advisory and that the Council still had the final decision should the APC deny at this point. Chairman Graves stated that should there be an approval of this application, condition number 8 should be modified to require an agreement with staff as to the overall signage on the property. Trygg moved, Miller seconded, the motion to deny a conditional use permit and a variance to allow a pylon sign located at the northwest intersection of Nicols Road and Diffley Road in the southwest quarter of Section 19 due to the requested variance. All voted in favor. Member Voracek stated that there was no hardship demonstrated for the variance. TINA SERVE INC. ADDITION - FINA OIL AND CHEMICAL COMPANY Chairman Graves opened the next public hearing for the evening regarding a preliminary plat consisting of approximately 1.7 acres for a motor fuel station and a conditional use permit for a pylon sign and motor fuel sales located at the intersection of Highway 149 and Highway 55 in the northwest quarter of Section 12. City Planner Jim Sturm provided an application summary and gave background of the site. He further stated that the applicant should be commended for their work with staff. Don Marrow, representing Fina, stated that they had no major issues with the staff report and that the surveyor and architect were available for questions. He questioned the outdoor sales prohibition but was satisfied that it was fairly applied. He further stated that Page 6/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 he would like to keep the smaller pylon sign also as it was used for pricing. The staff report had contemplated only one pylon sign on site. This was an oversight on the part of the developer and two were actually being requested. City Planner Sturm asked if the pricing could be added to the larger sign. Mr. Marrow stated that the price would not be readable at that height. Member Merkley stated that the sign was very large. Member Voracek asked if the signs meet the spacing requirements and what the applicant would like to do if their request was denied. Mr. Marrow stated that he would like the application to go forward. Member Voracek stated that while the larger pylon sign may be grandfathered, he asked staff if there could be two signs on the same lot. Mr. Marrow stated that both signs presently exist. Member Merkley stated that one of the pylon signs should be removed due to the upgrading of the site. Member Miller stated that perhaps the other sign should also meet Code. Member Merkley stated that an alternative would be to grant a variance for the remaining sign. Chairman Graves stated that the second sign presented a problem. Mr. Marrow stated that he would like to.go forward with one sign and get a variance on the second. Member Miller reiterated that the second larger remaining sign should also comply with Code. Chairman Graves asked if a condition of plat approval would be that the smaller sign should be removed, would a variance have to be granted for the remaining larger sign? City Attorney Dougherty responded that a variance would not necessarily be required because of the prior Council action in 1967. Mr. Marrow asked what would be needed to get the second sign approved. City Planner Sturm stated that a separate conditional use permit should be requested. Member Miller stated that he still wanted the remaining sign to conform to Code and that a conditional use should not be approved for a nonconforming pylon sign. Member Voracek stated that an alternative would be to forbid any pylon signs until a conditional use permit was approved. There was more discussion regarding the procedural steps for conditional use permits and pylon signs. Miller moved, Trygg seconded, the motion to approve a preliminary plat consisting of approximately 1.7 acres for a motor fuel station located at the intersection of Highway 149 and Highway 55 in the northwest quarter of Section 12 subject to the following conditions: /-7G Page 71EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on September 15, 1987 shall be complied with: Al, B1, B2, B3, B4, C1, C2, C4, D1, E1, H1 and F1. 2. No outdoor sales, storage or displays shall be allowed. 3. Trash and recycling enclosure shall be of adequate size to accommodate trash dumpster and recycling container. 4. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall not be visible. 5. The applicant shall provide irrigation system for all sodded areas. 6. The locust trees shall be changed to summit ash on the landscaping plan. 7. All plantings in MnDOT right-of-way shall required MnDOT approval. S. Gasoline tanks and pipe shall be attached to the building. 9. The development is required to limit the site generated storm water runoff to the five year storm event. 10. All site generated storm water runoff is required to be ponded prior to discharging to the existing storm drainage system. 11. Review and approval by MnDOT is required prior to final plat approval. 12. The development is required to provide a nutrient treatment basin for storm water runoff in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan. Page 8/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 13. No more than one pylon sign shall be allowed on site. Said sign to conform to City Code or be granted a variance. All voted in favor. Miller moved, Trygg seconded, the motion to approve a conditional use permit for motor fuel sales located at the intersection of Highway 149 and Highway 55 in the northwest quarter of Section 12. All voted in favor. Miller moved, Voracek seconded, the motion to approve a conditional use permit for a pylon sign located at the intersection of Highway 149 and Highway 55 in the northwest quarter of Section 12. All voted in favor. VALLEY ACRES - CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Chairman Graves next opened the public hearing regarding a preliminary plat consisting of approximately 6.8 acres for a municipal gun firing range located west of Terminal Drive in the south half of Section 8. City Planner Jim Sturm provided an application summary and presented the staff report to the Advisory Planning Commission. Eagan Chief of Police Pat Geagan gave background of the application and explained its purpose. He stated that Captain Bruce Erickson from the Apple Valley Police Department was also available for questions. Jim Kennedy, a neighboring resident, asked if the site would be available for civic organizations. Chief Geagan stated that they wanted to keep the shooting down as much as possible in consideration of the neighbors but that he was still unsure if it would be open to other organizations. He stated he would keep in touch with Mr. Kennedy as to its availability. Member Merkley asked if the staff would address the parking issue on Yankee Doodle near the gun range. Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT EZONING MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY AREA A G. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, Area A/Multi-Family Residential Land Study, to Change the Land Use Designation of Approximately 3.5 Acres from D -I (Single Family Residential, 4-3 Units Per Acre) to D -H (Mixed Residential, 0.6 Units Per Acre) and Approximately 9 Acres from D -I (Single Family Residential, 0-3 Units Per Acre) to LB (Limited Business) and a Rezoning of Approximately 9 Acres from R-4 (Multiple Residential) to LB (Limited Business). The Subject Property is Located Along the East Side of Highway 13, North of Yankee Doodle Road in the Southeast Quarter of Section 8 --At its regular meeting of July 24, 1990, the Advisory Planning Commission held public hearings to consider three areas defined in the Multi -Family Residential Land Study. Among these was Area A consisting of two parcels located east of Highway 13 and north of Yankee Doodle Road in the southeast quarter of Section 8. For additional information concerning Area A, please refer to the Commu tv Development Department and City Attorney's report which is enclosed on pages 'through or your review. Also enclosed on pages through opy is a cof the Advis ry Planning Commission minutes related to this item. he Commission is recommending approval roval of the comprehensive guide plan amendment and rezoning as presented. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the comprehensive guide plan amendment and rezoning of Multi -Family Residential Land Study Area A as presented. III SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT & REZONING - MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY AREA A APPLICANT: CITY OF EAGAN LOCATION: ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 13, NORTH OF YANKEE DOODLE ROAD SE 1/4 SECTION S EXISTING ZONING: R-4 (MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL) AND R-3 (TOWNHOUSE RESIDENTIAL) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 24, 1990 DATE OF REPORT: JULY 17, 1990 COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT & CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BACKGROUND: Over the past year, the Community Development Department has been studying multi -family residential land use in Eagan. Multi -family residential development was designated by the City Council as a topic for review for two primary reasons: one, the large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land currently available in Eagan, and two, Eagan's higher -than -average percentage of existing multi -family units. Three reports have been prepared as part of this comprehensive review of multi -family residential land. These reports, entitled "Multi -Family Residential Land Study Draft Report" (July 1989), "Update Report" (December 1989), and "Comment Report" (March 1990), are supplementary to this Advisory Planning Commission staff report and should be used for complete information regarding study background and methodology. Each of the three "Multi -Family Residential Land Study" reports were presented to the City Council for review and discussion. Based on the study reports, comments from affected property owners, and Council discussion, the City Council recommended Comprehensive Guide Plan amendments and/or rezonings for 16 of the 23 study areas. Staff was directed to schedule public hearings for those study areas recommended for plan amendments and/or rezonings. STUDY AREA A: Study Area A consists of two separate parcels separated by one Agricultural -zoned parcel not included in this study area (as it did not meet the study criteria) and not included in this application. Total study area size is approximately 12.5 acres. Both parcels in this study area are currently designated for D -I Single-family Residential (0 to 3 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan; however, the northern parcel is currently zoned R-3 Townhouse Residential and the southern parcel is currently zoned R-4 Multiple Residential. The attached data sheets from the "Draft Report" (July 1989) and exhibits provide additional descriptions of Study Area A. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The City Council recommended consideration of Comprehensive Guide Plan amendments such that the northern parcel of Study Area A would be designated D -II Mixed Residential (0 to 6 units per acre) and the southern parcel would be designated LB Limited Business. Also, the City Council recommended consideration of a rezoning of the southern parcel of Study Area A to LB Limited Business. PROPERTY OWNER COMMENTS RECEIVED: The property owners of the northern parcel, Jeffrey and Cynthia Kennedy, have not been in contact with City staff regarding the recommended changes. The property owner of the southern parcel, Vincent Kennedy, attended the March 27, 1990 City Council workshop regarding the study, but did not comment definitively regarding the proposed changes. LEGAL ISSUES: Study Area A presents circumstances similar to Study Area L which was reviewed at the June Advisory Planning Commission meeting. The nine acre site which is a•portion of Study Area A has recently been levied assessments for street improvements at multi -family rates. A rezoning of the property, albeit to an increased intensity, in this case LB, needs to be reviewed in light of the landowner's investment backed expectations. Thus, if the landowner has significantly invested in the R-4 use classification, a rezoning could lead to a taking despite the fact that the property is rezoned to a higher use. Such a case of taking may in the end be moot if damages can not be proven, but the fact that a potential lawsuit may exist is important to be kept in mind. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON TRIS ITEM: To recommend approval or denial of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 3.5 acres within P.I.D. 10-00800-022-75 from D -I Single-family Residential (0 to 3 units per acre) to D -II Mixed Residential (0 to 6 units per acre) and of approximately 9 acres within P.I.D. 10-00800-023-75 from D -I Single-family Residential (0 to 3 units per acre) to LB Limited Business. Also, to recommend approval or denial of a rezoning of approximately 9 acres within P.I.D. 10-00800-023-75 from R-4 Multiple Residential to LB Limited Business. MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY AREA A Area A consists of two parcels separated by one Agricultural -zoned parcel not included in this study GENERAL LOCATION: Along the east side of Highway 13, north of Yankee Doodle Road, in the SE 1/4 of Section 8 SIZE: 12.5 acres The R-3 parcel, consisting of 3.5 acres, is relatively small. Combination of this parcel with other adjacent parcels not included in this study may provide a wider range of development -intensity options. The R-4 parcel, consisting of 9 acres, is of sufficient size to support a variety of development - intensity options. ZONING: R-3 (3.5 acres) and R-4 (9 acres) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: D -I EXISTING LAND USE: single-family residential (R-3 parcel) and vacant (R-4 parcel) Single-family residential development of the R-3 portion of Area A could incorporate the existing dwelling. Other development types may require removal of the dwelling. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING, AND COMP PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: North - single-family residential; zoned A; designated D -I South - office (Blue Cross); zoned LB; designated LB East - single-family residential; zoned R-1; designated D -I West - mixed industrial/ - PAGE A.1 - /�2 commercial; zoned I-1; designated IND The wide range of uses around Area A, from single-family residential to industrial, indicates that no single land use type will be completely compatible with all surrounding uses. Buffering, possibly through a transitional use, will be necessary. TOPOGRAPHY: The R-3 parcel contains rolling terrain throughout, rising from Highway 13 to the east. Development of this site with higher -intensity uses may require extensive grading. The R-4 parcel has been graded flat. As such, all development types may be suitable for this site. VEGETATION: The R-3 parcel contains significant vegetation with understory throughout, including several mature oaks. Development of this site with higher -intensity uses may require removal of much of this vegetation. Landscaping requirements for any proposed development may mitigate some of the impacts associated with this removal. ACCESS: The R-4 parcel is devoid of vegetation. Development of the site, as such, would not create any impacts to existing vegetation. Both parcels border T.H. 13, a MINOR ARTERIAL. The R-4 parcel also borders Yankee Doodle Road (Co. Rd. 28), a MINOR ARTERIAL. Area A has access generally sufficient to serve most development types, although direct land access to these minor arterials should be prohibited. - PAGE A.2 - N. - 1 83 UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water service is available to the R-4 parcel. These utilities are not immediately adjacent to the R-3 parcel. However, there are lines nearby which may provide service to this area. Utility service to Area A should not be an issue for any type of development. ASSESSMENTS: Both parcels have been assessed at single-family rates for storm sewer trunk improvements. The R-4 parcel has a pending assessment for street improvements at multi -family rates. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Both parcels may receive noticeable traffic noise due to their proximity to Highway 13. Although the noise levels received from this roadway may not be consistently severe, development design should be sensitive to traffic noise generated by minor arterials. In addition, although not technically located within an aircraft noise zone for the airport, Area A may be impacted by aircraft noise. Developments which minimize associated outdoor uses and which utilize noise-attenuable construction may be most appropriate. Future occupants of development in Area A should be inforihed of potential aircraft noise impacts. - PAGE A.3 - �/MEI INN'/ V JOHL 1`1A st�. � SERV LV FOX n D '.*"OACF PARC Ilb- MULTI—FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY N STUDY AREA A PARCELS TL V R. L. � �JOH i Ist COACHMAN j ADD. �\� OAKS I A EN SERV '•I'im `0ACF PARK 1plklc�,"�C// .k. MULTI—FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY N STUDY AREA A EXISTING COMP LAND USE GUIDE PLAN ME t1 i v ' • • R. L. JoH t r neCN Mew SERV P�° ///y I I�KI, ALD Elm 0 ow%l0ACF PARK o .# MULTI—FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY N STUDY AREA A PROPOSED COMP LAND USE GUIDE PLAN �JOH Ist COACHMAN j ADD. �\) OAKS I AL rN • tpm SERV �vnrv�vry � ME NT 2ND AD�% O� I PLAN 9,//- Ah- MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY N STUDY AREA A EXISTING ZONING SERV / �. i L. i.��► n • MEV R. L. FOX RIDGE A LID E P TO, !a �OACi PARK ol% IP,L.Kf,z,._//, .60.. MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY N STUDY AREA A PROPOSED ZONING MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman Gary Graves Advisory Planning Commission Members FROM: Michael G. Dougherty, City Attorney DATE: July 18, 1990 SUBJECT: Advisory Planning Commission - July 24, 1990 Meeting Multi -Family Residential Land Study Items Areas A, Q and W With the Advisory Planning Commission's public hearings scheduled for July 24, 1990, I have reviewed three identified areas within the Multi -Family Residential Land Study which the Pagan City Council desires to consider for Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment and/or rezoning. In terms of the general legal principles involved in the rezoning of parcels, I direct your attention to my memo of May 15, 1990, concerning the four parcels reviewed at the May Advisory Planning Commission meeting (COPY ATTACHED). Under that context, this memo and the information incorporated into the individual staff reports are designed to address specific areas of concern which are raised with the present three parcels to be reviewed by the Advisory Planning Commission in July. MGD/kcm Iq 6) MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman Gary Graves Advisory Planning Commission Members FROM: Michael G. Dougherty, City Attorney DATE: May 15, 1990 SUBJECT: Advisory Planning Commission - May 22, 1990 Meeting Multi -Family Residential Land Study Items For the Advisory Planning Commission's public hearing scheduled for May 22, 1990, I was asked to review four identified areas within the Multi -Family Residential Land Study which the Eagan City Council desires to consider for rezoning. What follows is some generalized statements at to the rezoning process in terms of burdens of proof. Some qualifying factors for each particular parcel which need to be examined in light of the affect of a rezoning have been incorporated into the individual staff reports. As I have previously mentioned, a rezoning by the City Council is an exercise of the City's police power. Thus, the zoning action must reasonably foster the interest of the general public. The general criteria for the City is that their action must not be arbitrary, capricious and unlawful. The action by the Council must bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community. The initial burden of proof on the rezoning action is upon the City to establish by public record that there are legally sufficient reasons to rezone the property and the those reasons are supported by the facts made available to the City Council. Some of the reasons to rezone may include (i) to preserve and protect conservation areas or scenic areas or historic sites or buildings; (ii) to reduce the intensity or density of development to provide a more harmonious environment; (iii) to reduce the demand for new or expanded public facilities; (iv) to lessen the effects of traffic noise, air and water pollution; (v) to comply with Minnesota Statutes 473.865 by eliminating inconsistency between the Comprehensive Guide and zoning ordinances, etc. (Reasons need to be legally sufficient, i.e., promote the general public safety and welfare of the City). Some of the identified areas sought to be reviewed by the Council are made up of several individual tracts of land and include multiple owners. To properly effectuate a rezoning within any of those identified areas, each parcel should be reviewed on its own with findings identified for each of the parcels. The findings should incorporate specific facts which would support the reason for rezoning. There is no magical number as to how many facts are necessary to support a reason but rather, it is the probative value of the fact that determines its weight of support. �y� Chairman Graves May 15, 1990 Page Two Assuming that the City shows the requisite record that would support a rezoning, the City needs to examine the individual affect of the rezoning on the property owner. Basically, a property owner has no "vested" right in the zoning accorded his property unless certain circumstances are present to demonstrate that such a right has, in fact, vested. In analyzing any rezoning action, the Council must be careful not to affect a "taking" in the constitutional sense or interfere with any vested rights of a property owner. A taking will occur when the property is zoned to a category which precludes all reasonable use of the property. A taking does not occur merely because the value of the property is decreased by virtue of the rezoning or the development potential is changed or restricted to a less intense use. Interference with vested rights occurs when, pursuant to the zoning action, the government attempts to change the permitted use of the property or restrict the size or scope of development. Since the contemplated rezonings by the City of Eagan do not preclude all reasonable use of any of the properties, I have not included any discussion on that issue. Rather, the issues incorporated into the individual staff reports are specific items of note which should be taken into account in the determination of whether to rezone any of the four properties scheduled for public hearings before the May Advisory Planning Commission in light of the question of vesting. In those instances where a vesting can be deemed to have occurred, a rezoning by the City may equal a taking and thus expose the City to substantial damages in favor of the property owner. Again, the factors noted above and in the individual staff reports are important in light of the question of whether or not a vesting has occurred, for regardless of whether or not the City has legally sufficient reasons to rezone the property, if upon a challenge, a vesting has been found to have occurred, the City would likely be liable for damages to the landowner. At the public hearing, ample opportunity should be given to the landowner to set forth on the record what additional facts or circumstances may exist that can be shown to be a reliance by the landowner in acting upon the present zoning. Investment backed expectations, which form the basis of the vesting in the property, are not necessarily all known at this point and a fair process would allow the landowner to identify any unknown facts for the decision -makers. MGD/kcm Page 91EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 Trygg moved, Miller seconded, the motion to approve a preliminary plat consisting of approximately 6.6 acres for a municipal firing range located west of Terminal Drive in the south half of Section 8 subject to the following conditions: 1. These standard conditions of plat approval shall apply: A10 B1, C1, C2, C5, D1, E1, F1, G1 and H1. 2. Annual review of the caliber of firearms being used at the range. 3. Compliance with all licensing requirements. 4. The development is required to provide internal storm sewer to serve the entrance drive and parking area. 5. The development is required to connect to the existing sanitary sewer adjacent to the site. 6. Permits are required from MWCC for connection to the sanitary sewer, Dakota County for curb cut on Yankee Doodle Road and from the Lower Minnesota River Water Shed District for the proposed development. 7. The development is required to construct the proposed entrance drive and parking area in accordance with City Code. All voted in favor. �XULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY Assistant City Planner Kristy Marnin gave a brief overview of the City's Multi -Family Residential Land Study. AREA A - MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY Chairman Graves opened the first public hearing dealing with the Multi -Family Residential Land Study and that area designated as Area A regarding a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land lq3 Page 10/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 use designation of approximately 3.5 acres from Single Family Residential to Mixed Residential and approximately 9 acres from Single Family Residential to Limited Business and a rezoning of approximately 9 acres from Multiple Residential to Limited Business. The subject property designated as Area A is located along the east side of Highway 13 north of Yankee Doodle Road in the southeast quarter of Section 8. Ms. Marnin provided a background of Area A and reviewed the staff report for the Advisory Planning Commission. She further reviewed those uses allowed in a Limited Business district for those residents present in the audience. She stated that Limited Business are those uses suitable to surrounding residential use. She further requested that the Advisory Planning Commission give staff direction as to what they would like to see done on the adjacent Agricultural parcels near Area A. Doug Olson (Heritage Lane) recapped his background in City planning. He stated Area A is wooded and used as a farm and that it buffers Highway 13. He felt that the residential neighbors were being squeezed by surrounding high density developments. He recapped problems with the intersection on Heritage Lane. He noted that the property designated Area A was currently posted for sale as Commercial. He wanted the entire area to be R-1 or R-2. Member Miller asked Mr. Olson if he preferred R-4 to Limited Business. Mr. Olson responded that he preferred the present zoning to any Limited Business use. Jim Christensen, owner of the Agricultural parcel between the southerly and northerly portion of Area A, stated that the hole next to him was filled with fly -ash and that problems with following regulations had occurred on the 9 acre parcel. He stated surveyors had been staking his property and that the Area A should remain the way it is. Chairman Graves stated that zoning would allow an R-4 use now and that a Limited Business zoning would prevent that type of use. Member Miller asked which Mr. Christensen preferred, R-4 or LB. Mr. Christensen stated that the site should remain zoned the way it is. Darlene Slater, a neighbor, stated she had lived in the neighborhood since 1970. She was against R-4 or R-3 use and wanted R-1 use, but stated that Limited Business would be better than R-4. Chairman Graves stated that while he welcomed the preferences of the audience, the Advisory Planning Commission would not be voting by consensus of the residents present. /9V Page 11JEAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 A resident requested how the neighbors could initiate rezoning of the property to R-1. Ms. Marnin explained how the City had concluded that R-1 was not 'an appropriate use for the area and why they had concluded that Limited Business for the southern parcel and R-3 for the northern was appropriate. City Attorney Dougherty stated that only the Council or the landowner could initiate rezoning. The neighbor replied that this was a heavily wooded area. Member Voracek stated that this public hearing process was to allow for just that type of interaction as to appropriate zoning. Jean Braman stated that the northern parcel was a farm and should be 6 acres, not 3.5. Ms. Marnin replied that the map shown was schematic only and did not contain exact areas. There was further discussion regarding platted versus unplatted property. Jim Kennedy stated that he had lived in the area since 1950 and that he had found the various Councils to be not sympathetic to the neighborhood. He stated that the Advisory Planning Commission should recommend R-1 zoning and that multiple units would cause safety problems and he was concerned about children's safety. Mr. Olson stated that the setback from Highway 13 for the area was considerable and endorsed Mr. Kennedy's position. Member Voracek asked when the area was zoned to R-4. Ms. Marnin replied that the City records indicated 1973 but that she would research and confirm. Member Gorman stated that LB use was better than R-4. Member Trygg agreed. Member Miller stated that the northerly portion should be changed as recommended but that he would not support the rezoning of the southern portion to Limited Business. Member Merkley stated that there should be buffering next to Industrial use across the street and that Limited Business was better than R-4. He agreed that the northerly portion should be R-3. Member Voracek stated that the parcel was not conducive to R-4 development but that Limited Business may create a use for the property. Member Trygg stated that this was the City's opportunity to rezone as the R-4 use may arise soon and then it would be too late. Assistant City Engineer Mike Foertsch stated that Yankee Doodle was planned to serve as an access to the southerly parcel. Member Miller reiterated his opposition to the rezoning of the southerly i�� Page 12/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 parcel and stated that the rezoning decision was premature. Zember Merkley felt the area would be better off with an LB use and that that also could be changed if found to inappropriate later. Miller moved, Voracek seconded, the motion to recommend approval of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 3.5 acres from D -I (Single Family Residential - 0 to 3 units per acre) to D -II (Mixed Residential - 0 to 6 units per acre) for that property located along the east side of Highway 13 north of Yankee Doodle Road in the southeast quarter of Section S. All voted in favor. Miller moved, Voracek seconded, the motion to recommend denial of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 9 acres from D -I (Single Family Residential - 0 to 3 units per acre) to LB (Limited Business) for that property located along the east side of Highway 13 north of Yankee Doodle Road in the southeast quarter of Section 8. Miller and Voracek voted in favor; Graves, Merkley, Trygg and Gorman voted against. The motion failed. Merkley moved, Gorman seconded, the motion to approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 9 acres from D -I (Single Family Residential - 0 to 3 units per acre) to LB (Limited Business) for that property located along the east side of Highway 13 north of Yankee Doodle Road in the southeast quarter of Section 8 for the following reasons: 1. The high density already present in the area and the resulting public safety concerns. 2. The buffering it would provide between the Industrial use and the Residential uses in the area. Graves, Merkley, Trygg and Gorman voted in favor; Voracek and Miller voted against. The motion passed. Merkley moved, Trygg seconded, the motion to recommend approval of a rezoning of approximately 9 acres from R-4 (Multiple Residential) to LB (Limited Business) for the subject property located along the east side of Highway 13 north of Yankee Doodle Road in the southeast quarter of Section 8. Graves, Kerkley, Trygg and Gorman voted in favor; Miller and Voracek voted against. The motion passed. (16 Agenda Information Memo August 21, 1990 City Council Meeting COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT! MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY AREA O H. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, Area Q/Multi-Family Residential Land Study to Change the Land Use Designation of Approximately 6 Acres from D -III (Mixed Residential, 6-12 Units Per Acre) to D -I (Single Family Residential, 0-3 Units Per Acre). The Subject Property is Located on the South Side of Dif"tley Road, West of Lexington Avenue in the Northeast Quarter of Section 27 --At its regular meeting of July 24, 1990, the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission met and held public hearings on three areas of Multi -Family Residential Land Study. Among these was a public hearing for Area Q which consists of approximately 6 acres located south of Diffley Road, West of Lexington Avenue in the northeast quarter of Section 27. For additional information concerning this item, please refer to the Community D velopment Depa ment and the City Attorney's staff report which is enclosed on pages throug or your review. Also enclosed on page O _ are the Adviso Planning Co mission minutes related to this item. 'the C is recommending approval of the comprehensive guide plan amendment as presented. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the comprehensive guide plan amendment for Area Q of the Multi -Family Residential Land Study as presented. Im Page 13/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 Mr. Kennedy commented that this item was too far back on the agenda and such items should be given priority over other City business due to the inconvenience to the residents. AREA 0 - MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY Chairman Graves opened the next public hearing regarding a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 6 acres from Mixed Residential to Single Family Residential. The subject property being located on the south side of Diffley Road west of Lexington Avenue in the northeast quarter of Section 27 and being labeled Area Q in the Multi -Family Residential Land Study. Assistant City Planner Kristi Marnin presented the background of the site and reviewed the staff report for the Advisory Planning Commission. Trygg moved, Merkley seconded, the motion to recommend approval of a. Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 6 acres from D -III (Mixed Residential - 6 to 12 units per acre) to D -I (Single Family Residential - 0 to 3 units per acre) for subject property located on the south side of Diffley Road west of Lexington Avenue in the northeast quarter of Section 27 for the following reasons: 1. The compatibility of the new guide plan use with the surrounding uses in the area. 2. The access to the site. 3. The terrain of the site. All voted in favor. AREA W - MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY Chairman Graves opened the final public hearing for the evening regarding a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 6 acres from Single Family Residential to Mixed Residential and approximately 2 acres from Single Family Residential to Public Facility and a rezoning of approximately 6 acres from Multiple Residential Planned Development to Townhouse Residential and approximately 2 acres from Multiple Residential Planned Development to Public Facilities. Subject property is located at the northwest corner of Lexington Avenue and Diffley Road in the SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY AREA Q APPLICANT: CITY OF EAGAN LOCATION: ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF DIFFLEY ROAD, WEST OF LEXINGTON AVENUE NE 1/4 SECTION 27 EXISTING ZONING: A AGRICULTURAL DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 24, 1990 DATE OF REPORT: JULY 17, 1990 COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT & CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BACKGROUND: Over the past year, the Community Development Department has been studying multi -family residential land use in Eagan. Multi -family residential development was designated by the City Council as a topic for review for two primary reasons: one, the large amount of undeveloped multi -family zoned/designated land currently available in Eagan, and two, Eagan's higher -than -average percentage of existing multi -family units. Three reports have been prepared as part of this comprehensive review of multi -family residential land. These reports, entitled "Multi -Family Residential Land Study Draft Report" (July 1989), "Update Report" (December 1989), and "Comment Report" (March 1990), are supplementary to this Advisory Planning Commission staff report and should be used for complete information regarding study background and methodology. Each of the three "Multi -Family Residential Land Study" reports were presented to the City Council for review and discussion. Based on the study reports, comments from affected property owners, and Council discussion, the City Council recommended Comprehensive Guide Plan amendments and/or rezonings for 16 of the 23 study areas. Staff was directed to schedule public hearings for those study areas recommended for plan amendments and/or rezonings. STUDY AREA Q: Study Area Q consists of one parcel, P.I.D. 10-02700-012-01 approximately 6 acres in size. This study area is currently designated for D -III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan and zoned A Agricultural. The attached data sheets from the "Draft Report" (July 1989) and exhibits provide III additional descriptions of Study Area Q. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The City Council recommended consideration of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment such that Area Q would be designated D -I Single-family Residential (0 to 3 units per acre). PROPERTY OWNER COMMENTS RECEIVED: The property owners, Remo and Karen Caponi, have not been in contact with City staff regarding the recommended changes. LEGAL ISSUES: Review of the material concerning Study Area Q does not indicate any general or unique legal principles or issues to be resolved with respect to this study area. The general principles outlined in the May 15, 1990, memo should adequately serve as a guide in the potential rezoning of this property. However, it should be kept in mind that since the action being requested deals with a change in a comprehensive plan, that Minnesota law requires the City to bring its zoning into compliance with the change in the comprehensive plan within nine months from the date of the change. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To recommend approval or denial of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 6 acres within P.I.D. 10-02700-012-01 from D -III Mixed Residential (6 to 12 units per acre) to D -I Single-family Residential (0 to 3 units per acre). Althbugh a rezoning of the subject property is not part of this application, should the City approve the action to change the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designation for this property to D -I, the City would be required under Minnesota Statutes 473.865 to bring its zoning ordinance into compliance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan within nine months of the change of the Comprehensive Guide Plan. As such, approval of this application would require a rezoning of the property from A Agricultural to R-1 Single- family Residential within nine months of such action. MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY AREA Q GENERAL LOCATION: SIZE: ZONING: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: EXISTING LAND USE: SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING, AND COMP PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: TOPOGRAPHY: Area Q consists of one parcel South side of Diffley Road, west of Lexington Avenue, in the NE 1/4 of Section 27 6 acres A D -III single-family residential Single-family residential, or other low -intensity development, could potentially incorporate the existing dwelling unit. Other development types may require removal of this dwelling. North - vacant; zoned A; designated D -I South - vacant; zoned P(PD); designated PF East - vacant; zoned P(PD); designated PF West - vacant; zoned A; designated D -I The land immediately surrounding Area Q is currently vacant. However, these surrounding areas are all designated for low - intensity public or residential uses. As such, low -intensity development would be most compatible with potential surrounding uses. The terrain of Area Q rises steeply from Diffley Road to a plateau which runs generally from the center to the south boundary of the site. - PAGE Q.1 - Less -intense developments with smaller building pads should have sufficient space to locate in the levels areas of Area Q, thus minimizing grading requirements. VEGETATION: Area Q is densely wooded, particularly with oaks. Development of any type will likely require the removal of existing vegetation. Landscaping requirements for any proposed development may mitigate the loss of existing vegetation. ACCESS: Area Q has access to Diffley Road, a MINOR ARTERIAL. Access sufficient to serve most development intensities is available to Area Q. Direct land access to Diffley Road should be prohibited. UTILITIES: Area Q is not served by sanitary sewer, storm sewer or water service. These utilities are available to nearby parcels and could potentially be extended to serve Area Q. Utility service to Area Q should not be an issue, although extension of service to this area would be necessary prior to any type of development. ASSESSMENTS: Area Q has not been assessed. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Area Q may be impacted by traffic noise from Diffley Road. Although the noise levels received from this roadway may not be consistently severe, development design should be sensitive to traffic noise generated by minor arterials. - PAGE Q.2 - 1L�7' N e �- ' -111111• .•�• ■n;Ellis. V �; • ■.� M. W?F.181 IT, I A a- NOY 91=011 :11:J a_W41 I a a sw MM P'A ma --.- is ii -i rq ITO-To In.u. cdiumn-10- --- - ftr m -NNW -.44 We r LIit N ■u ■l■o■m■f�,,� �■��+��■ ■■ �_'11�� ■ fin. oil .7 mss. t111► �, ,. mow 10 HA E P . � �•�: ivy '' ■rs 0 iE muwaj A aus i■■!,!fli■ is rf 7l, .31ESIDENTIAL LAND STUD) A. i a s; all 0 `l'mr1 i. -.w1 d►. won!! - r. AL j..9 I1 I 4 ::. '' 'soft ..A■.IM 1:1.1761P.5 End"_ � Q ac MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman Gary Graves Advisory Planning Commission Members FROM: Michael G. Dougherty, City Attorney DATE: July 18, 1990 SUBJECT: Advisory Planning Commission - July 24, 1990 Meeting Multi -Family Residential Land Study Items Areas A, Q and W With the Advisory Planning Commission's public hearings scheduled for July 24, 1990, I have reviewed three identified areas within the Multi -Family Residential Land Study which the Eagan City Council desires to consider for Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment and/or rezoning. In terms of the general legal principles involved in the rezoning of parcels, I direct your attention to my memo of May 15, 1990, concerning the four parcels reviewed at the May Advisory Planning Commission meeting (COPY ATTACHED). Under that context, this memo and the information incorporated into the individual staff reports are designed to address specific areas of concern which are raised with the present three parcels to be reviewed by the Advisory Planning Commission in July. MGD/kcm Z01 AIEAIORAN1)1)All TO: Chairman Gary Graves Advisory Planning Commission Members FROM Michael G. Dougherty, City Attorney DATE: May 15, 1990 SUBJECT: Advisory Planning Commission - May 22, 1990 Meeting Multi -Family Residential Land Study Items For the Advisory Planning Commission's public hearing scheduled for May 22, 1990, 1 was asked to review four identified areas within the Multi -Family Residential Land Study which the Eagan City Council desires to consider for rezoning. What follows is some generalized statements at to the rezoning process in terms of burdens of proof. Some qualifying factors for each particular parcel which need to be examined in light of the affect of a rezoning have been incorporated into the individual staff reports. As 1 have previously mentioned, a rezoning by the City Council is an exercise of the City's police power. Thus, the zoning action must reasonably foster the interest of the general public. The general criteria for the City is that their action must not be arbitrary, capricious and unlawful. The action by the Council must bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community. The initial burden of proof on the rezoning action is upon the City to establish by public record that there are legally sufficient reasons to rezone the property and the those reasons ai e supported by the facts made available to the City Council. Some of the reasons to rezone may include (i) to preserve and protect conservation areas or scenic areas or historic sites or buildings; (ii) to reduce the intensity or density of development to provide a more harmonious environment; (iii) to reduce the demand for new or expanded public facilities; (iv) to lessen the effects of traffic noise, air and water pollution; (v) to comply with Minnesota Statutes 473.865 by eliminating inconsistency between the Comprehensive Guide: and zoning ordinances, etc. (Reasons need to be legally sufficient, i.e., promote the general public safety and welfare of the City). Some of the identified areas sought to be reviewed by the Council are made up of srveral individual tracts of land and include multiple owners. To properly effectuate a rezoning within any of those identified areas, each parcel should be reviewed on its own with findings identified for each of the parcels. Tile findings should incorporate specific facts which would support the reason for rezoning. There is no magical number as to how many facts are necessary to support a reason but rather, it is the probative value of the fact that determines its weight of support. Chairman Graves May 15, 1990 Page Two Assuming that the City shows the requisite record that would support a rezoning, the City needs to examine the individual affect of the rezoning on the property owner. Basically, a property owner has no "vested" right in the zoning accorded his property unless certain circumstances are present to demonstrate that such a right has, in fact, vested. In analyzing any rezoning action, the Council must be careful not to affect a "taking" in the constitutional sense or interfere with any vested rights of a property owner. A taking will occur when the property is zoned to a category which precludes all reasonable use of the property. A taking does not occur merely because the value of the property is decreased by virtue of the rezoning or the development potential is changed or restricted to a less intense use. Interference with vested rights occurs when, pursuant to the zoning action, the government attempts to change the permitted use of the property or restrict the size or scope of development. Since the contemplated rezonings by the City of Eagan do not preclude all reasonable use of any of the properties, I have not included any discussion on that issue. Rather, the issues incorporated into the individual staff reports are specific items of note which should be taken into account in the determination of whether to rezone any of the four properties scheduled for public hearings before the May Advisory Planning Commission in light of the question of vesting. In those instances where a vesting can be deemed to have occurred, a rezoning by the City may equal a taking and thus expose the City to substantial damages in favor of the property owner. Again, the factors noted above and in the individual staff reports are important in light of the question of whether or not a vesting has occurred, for regardless of whether or not the City has legally sufficient reasons to rezone the property, if upon a challenge, a vesting has been found to have occurred, the City would likely be liable for damages to the landowner. At the public hearing, ample opportunity should be given to the landowner to set forth on the record what additional facts or circumstances may exist that can be shown to be a reliance by the landowner in acting upon the present zoning. Investment backed expectations, which form the basis of the vesting in the property, are not necessarily all known at this point and a fair process would allow the landowner to identify any unknown facts for the decision -makers. MGDlkcm ao9 Page 13/EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 1990 Mr. Kennedy commented that this item was too far back on the agenda and such items should be given priority over other City business due to the inconvenience to the residents. AREA 4 — tnMTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY Chairman Graves opened the next public hearing regarding a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 6 acres from Mixed Residential to Single Family Residential. The subject property being located on the south side of Diffley Road west of Lexington Avenue in the northeast quarter of Section 27 and being labeled Area Q in the Multi -Family Residential Land Study. Assistant City Planner Kristi Marnin presented the background of the site and reviewed the staff report for the Advisory Planning Commission. Trygg moved, Merkley seconded, the motion to recommend approval of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 6 acres from D -III (Mixed Residential - 6 to 12 units per acre) to D -I (Single Family Residential - 0 to 3 units per acre) for subject property located on the south side of Diffley Road west of Lexington Avenue in the northeast quarter of Section 27 for the following reasons: 1. The compatibility of the new guide plan use with the surrounding uses in the area. 2. The access to the site. 3. The terrain of the site. All voted in favor. AREA W - MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND STUDY Chairman Graves opened the final public hearing for the evening regarding a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 6 acres from Single Family Residential to Mixed Residential and approximately 2 acres from Single Family Residential to Public Facility and a rezoning of approximately 6 acres from Multiple Residential Planned Development to Townhouse Residential and approximately 2 acres from Multiple Residential Planned Development to Public Facilities. Subject property is located at the northwest corner of Lexington Avenue and Diffley Road in the me