The URL can be used to link to this page

02/02/1982 - City Council RegularAGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL FEBRUARY 2, 1982 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 — ROLL CALL` & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:33 — ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES \ III. 6:34 — TOOTSIE ROLL PROCLAMATION — KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS Q• 2 -IV. 6:37 — RECOGNITION OF FORMER APC CHAIRMAN JOE HARRISON e• V. 6:45 — DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS Q•?'A. Fire Department e.2 C. Park Department Q,7.B. Police Department 'j D. Public Works Department Q' VI. 6:55 - CONSENT ITEMS (One Motion Approves All Items) i P.7 A. Canterbury Forest Addition, City Acceptance of Streets & Utilities B. MnDOT Plans & Specifications Approval, Tree Transplanting (I -35E) i 6 C. Contract 81-8, Change Order #2 (St. Francis Wood, etc., Streets) D. Approve MnDOT Cost Participation Agreement #60808, Traffic Signal e (County Road 26 & T.H. 55) VII. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS p,7 A. Project #351 - Country Home Heights Storm Sewer rt\ B. Project #259 — Final Reassessment. Hearing (Vienna Woods Streets) C. Project #246 & #257 — Continued Reassessment Hearing (Mr. & Mrs. e John Ahnert, 4470 Oak Chase Way, & Thomas A. Buckman, 1405 Waldr.id St.) TSD. Alexander Road Reassessment Hearting (Continued) VIII. OLD BUSINESS p 21e A. Edmund B. Dunn of Blackhawk Park Associates for Rezoning from \ A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development District) to Include Limited Business and Townhouse and Condominium Development and for Preliminary Plat Approval of Knob Hill of Eagan, Consisting of Approximately 40 Acres Located in Part of the SE'g of the SE`y 3 9of Section 21 e• B. Amusement Device Application - Coachman Oaks Apartments Q AIZ C. Proposed Rate Increase for Urban Planning & Design (Planning Consultants) D. Steven J. Flanagan for Preliminary Plat Approval, Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition, Located in the SW'y.of the SE'y of Section 30 0.1-.1 ....• City Council Agenda February 2, 1982 Page Two IX. INEW BUSINESS A. Federal Land Co. for a Preliminary Plat (Bicentennial 8th Addition) 1 Consisting of Approximately 3 Acres of Property Located in OUtlot B, Bicentennial 7th Addition in Section 16 7 B. John Henry Foster Company to Allow an 8' Variance from the 40' P Setback Requirement from a Public Street in a Light Industrial District Located on Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6, Block 4, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #3, Section 11 X. ADDITIONAL ITEMS XI. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) XII. ADJOURNMENT 0 9 MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JANUARY 29, 1982 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of the January 12, 1982 special City Council minutes, the January 19, 1982 regular City Council minutes and the February 25 1982 City Council agenda, the following items are in order. for consideration: TOOTSTE ROLL o PROCL'AMATiIONI The City has been asked by the local chapter of the Knights of Columbus to proclaim April 30 through May 2 as Tootsie Roll Days. The chairman of the Tootsie Roll Drive will be present to receive the proclamation from Mayor Blomquist. The proclamation reads as follows: Whereas, the Minnesota State Council of the Knights of Columbus is conducting its second annual Tootsie.Roll' Drive, and Whereas, the Eagan Council of the Knights of Columbus is conducting the drive in our area, and Whereas, the proceeds from this Tootsie Drive will be disbursed statewide and in accord with an approved list of recipients to help 'retarded citizens, Now, therefore, I, Bea Blomquist, Mayor of the City of Eagan, do hereby proclaim April 30 through.May 2.,_1982: "Tootsie Roll Days" in the City of Eagan and urge all citizens to support this program. There is no action required on this matter. 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Two RECOGNITiIONr OF; FORMER' APC:..CHASRMAN'.JOEi HARRISON Mayor Blomquist is planning to present a key to the City to Mr. Joe Harrison who has served many years as a member and chairman of the Advisory Planning Commission. In addition to the key, a certificate will be presented which will provide the years of service he has contributed to our community. There is no action required on this matter. DEPARTMENT-IHEAD,BUSINESSI. FIRE_DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department -- There are no items for the Fire Department at this time. POLICE_DEPARTMENT B. Police Department -- There are no items for the Police Depart- ment at this time. PARK.DEPARTMENT C. Park Department -- The Advisory Parks & Recreation Committee is continuing to review names of parks which have yet to be offi- cially named. Currently, the City has only seven (7) parks which have received official designation through naming. At the December 10, 1981 Advisory Park & Recreation Committee meeting, the committee took action to recommend to the City Council that River Hills 9 Park be officially named River Hills Park East. This is suggested name from the homeowner's association and is reflected on a pre- viously built park sign. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Parks & Recreation Committee to name the park in the River Hills 9th Addition, "River Hills Park East". Z 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Three 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT A. Public Works Department --- Slaters Road Trunk Water - Main Extension (Winkler/Jackson Addition) -- Enclosed on page + you will find a schematic diagram showing the existing, in p ac—e 12" trunk water main that was constructed under the Cedar Avenue Freeway in 1980. It also shows the existing 12" trunk water main constructed within Slaters Road as a part of the upgrading of Slaters Road frontage road. In 1981, the Winkler/Jackson Addi- tion platted the property adjacent to Slaters Road for a proposed mixture of multiple residential and commercial properties. Sub- sequently, under Contract 81-15 (Project 344), a sanitary sewer lateral was constructed from the Cedar Avenue Freeway to Slaters Road and extended northerly to service this proposed subdivision. After reviewing the trunk water main layout for the southwestern corner of the City and taking into consideration the future 4.0 M.G. water reservoir to be constructed by Safari Estates, this trunk water main connection should be constructed in the near future. This water main construction would be the responsibility of the trunk water utility fund as all area benefiting from this connection has been been assessed for its trunk area water. There- fore, the City solicited from the estimates from the various con- tractors that have open contracts with the City of Eagan to perform this connection. The engineer's estimate to perform this work was approximately $17,800. The contractor performing the sanitary sewer construction under Contract 81-14 in the near vicinity did not submit the low quotation in spite of the fact of his present location of construction equipment. The City did receive a very favorable quote of $14,721 from Erickson Construction Company to perform this work (17.3% under estimate). The staff feels that this would economically be the most feasible time to perform this future trunk water main construction prior to completion of the restoration work associated with the sanitary sewer under Contract 81-14 and in lieu of the favorable quotation received from Erickson Construction Company. Staff is presenting this information to the City Council in order to receive direction as to whether they should proceed with this work at this time by way of a change order to an existing contract with Erickson Construction Company or if this work should be added to a future construction project and solicited through formal bid requests. If added to a future project, the Public Works Director does not believe that a similar favorable quotation could be obtained and the City would not have the advantage of performing this work prior to restoration of the property under the present contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To authorize the prepara- tion of a change order to Contract 81-13 for the connection of a trunk water main to Slaters Road or defer construction until a future contract. 3 Erickson Construction Co. $14,871.00 Richard Knutson, Inc. 18,995.60 Northdale Construction Co. 19,000.00 Barbarossa b Sons, Inc. 19,784.00 Parrott Construction, Inc. 20,878.60 I Engineer's Estimate $17,790.00 Y RD. 3 638 / I.. -WET TAP BURIED UJI CA' w 676 0. U- WET TAP BURIED...-- z WET P 637 �'r. a o o .. U 677' W o�`— .... o W 4z ' �NANC ! a' ER �E' - 3 3 64 �IP14 12 L. tee" 636 77 - - -'YlB T. \ 632 _.. 644' 635 \ -- -- - Y _j o '64 xI I 770 634. ' KING 633 rte, I (7619) QV� - . SEE SMT 1 l7 iJJlll Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Four • •M There are four (3) 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 item in further detail, that item should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Additional Items unless the discussion required is brief. CANTERBURY FOREST ADDITION - ACCEPTANCE OF STREETS & UTILITIES A. Canterbury Forest Addition, City Acceptance of Streets & Utilities -- The City has received verification from the consulting engineering firm that the utilities and streets constructed under private contract for the Canterbury Forest Addition was performed in compliance with the City approved plans and specifications. The utilities and streets were inspected, tested and accepted by City staff personnel. There are a few minor corrective items to structures and a final cleaning of sanitary and storm sewer lines that will be performed by the developer in early spring of 1982. Therefore, based upon information received pertaining to these improvements, staff is recommending that the City Council consider formal acceptance of these streets and utilities for perpetual City maintenance subject to the standard one year warranty period as required under the development agreement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To accept all public streets and utilities constructed within the Canterbury Forest Addition for perpetual maintenance subject to remaining corrective work being performed prior to May 15, 1982 and a one year warranty maintenance period from date of formal acceptance. -5- 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Five MnDOT PLANS - TREES (I -35E) B. MnDOT Plan and Specification Approval, Tree Transplanting (I -35E) -- MnDOT has submitted detailed plans and specifications for formal City approval pertaining to the relocation of existing trees within interstate right of way for I -35E at Lone Oak Road. These trees will be transplanted to I -35E right of way at its inter- section with T. H. 110 in Mendota Heights. This work is being performed to salvage existing landscaping prior to interstate con- struction and to relocate it to completed interstate sections that need additional landscaping. Detailed landscaping associated with the new construction of I -35E within the City of Eagan will be performed when that section of freeway is constructed within the next few years. Because the completion of the interstate funding program is rapidly approaching and there are concerns regarding the ability to complete I -35E within this time frame, staff would recommend that a condition be placed on this approval that, if this section of I -35E is not constructed, MnDOT be required to replace all landscaping removed under this contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To pass a resolution approving detailed plans and specifications for tree transplanting at Lone Oak Road and I -35E under state project 1982-82 (35E = 390) and 1985-79 (494 = 393) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said resolution. CONTRACT 81-8 C. Contract 81-8, Change Order #2 (St. Francis Wood, etc., Streets) -- Contract 81-8 provided for the construction of streets within the St. Francis Wood 2nd Addition under Project 307B and Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition under Project 329B. This change order consists of two parts: Part A: Required additional construction work to correct unstable subgrade conditions in the St. Francis Wood 2nd Addition. (Add $3,577.14) Part B: Provides for the repair of bituminous surfacing that was damaged by development construction traffic within the Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition during the progression of of this contract. This work is the responsibility of the development. (Add $2,119.70) All costs associated with this change order will either be assessed as a part of final construction costs or billed directly to the developer of the respective subdivision for payment in full. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve/deny Contract 81-8, Change Order #2 to MacNamara Vivant Contracting Co. in the amount of an additional $5,696.84. R Agenda Informatior+emo • January 29, 1982 Page Six MnDOT COST PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT -.TRAFFIC SIGNAL D. Approve MnDOT Cost Participation Agreement #60808, Traffic Signal (County Road 26 & T.H. 55) -- The City has received a copy of the cost participation agreement from MnDOT to be approved by the City of Eagan pertaining to cost participation for the installa- tion of a traffic signal at the intersection of Lone Oak Road and T. H. 55. Present county policy requires City cost participation and 50% of the county's share. These costs were estimated in Project 353 which was presented to the Council at the January 19 Council meeting. However, cost estimate under Project 353. was $6,440 for Eagan's share. This has been revised down to $5,360 under this cost participation agreement and actual cost to the City will be based on actual construction costs. This cost partici- pation agreement is in accordance with present City policy per- taining to agreements with the City and MnDOT. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To pass a resolution approving MnDOT cost participation agreement #60808 for the instal- lation of a traffic signal at Lone Oak Road and T. H. 55 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement. PROJECT 351 - COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS STORM SEWER A. Project 351, Country Home Heights Storm Sewer -- In response to a petition received from several property owners within the Country Home Heights Subdivision, the City Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility report which was presented to the Council at their meeting on January 5, 1982 with a public hearing scheduled for February 2, 1982. As the Council may recall, there was discus- sion pertaining to this proposed project at the January 5 meeting pertaining to the assessments associated with the five lots that comprise the Country Home Heights Neighborhood Park. Also, at that time, there was discussion relating to previous lateral storm sewer assessments associated with lots adjacent to Burnside Avenue within Block 7. Extensive research of this 1970 assessment project revealed that these lots were assessed for trunk storm sewer and not laterals, although a small lateral was installed when this section of Burnside Avenue was approved to City standards. In addition, there was also discussion pertaining to future storm sewer requirements on the southeastern corner of Country Home Heights Addition on Egan Avenue just north of Lone Oak Road. Exten- sive research revealed that this previously proposed future storm sewer construction was, in fact, installed when that section of Lone Oak Road just east of Pilot Knob Road was improved with con- crete curb and gutter in 1970. There were no assessment records for the storm sewer installation because it was performed under a private agreement between the county and the property owners in consideration for acquisition of right of way to relocate the intersection of Egan Avenue with Lone Oak Road to provide for a safer right angle "T" intersection. 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Seven While Project 351 provides for lateral storm sewer improvements within the Country Home Heights Subdivision, Project 177 has a pending assessment against the five City owned lots comprising the Country Home Heights Neighborhood Park. Therefore, this report has been revised to spread both the lateral assessments under 351 together with the trunk area storm sewer assessments under Project 177 associated with Country Home Heights Neighborhood Park equitably over all 82 lots located within the Country Home Heights Subdivision area in accordance with existing City policy for special assessments against neighborhood parks. Therefore, the report has been revised from the one used for discussion at the January 15, 1982 Council meeting. The Council will note that the proposed assessment roll associated with Project 351 incorporates the information from the pending assessments associated with Project 177 for the storm sewer installed under Pilot Knob Road. This was done so that all proposed and pending assessments associated with storm sewer against the lots in the Country Home Heights area could be discussed at the public hearing on February 2, 1982. A copy of the feasibility report is enclosed on pages through 20 . It should also be noted that the storm sewer lat6rai extension petitioned for was only for storm sewer to the low point on Egan Avenue on the west side of the park property. The staff expanded. this petition to incorporate all the storm sewer that is ultimately anticipated for the Country Home Heights Addition so that if this project is approved, no future storm sewer will be required to be assessed against any of the properties. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing for Project 351 and approve/deny the installation of lateral storm sewer for the Country Home Heights park area. F&NIsrm REPORT Cell COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT -NO, 351- FOR EAGAN, MINNESOTA 1981 BR 8t Pam4 M&oow"& 6 / I /sor4�.�ieoo, Rode�rc, f�%!z & ri%iocic�,ei, J,cc. o 2335 ?U. 9...A .Vpaa v 36 $L. /)..d, hf:...r.l. 55„3 PA...; 612.636-4600 November 25, 1981 Up 19$6 — U1 — 1981 nniversary Honorable Mayor & Council City of Eagan c`>� 3795 Pilot Knob Road vv00 Eagan, Mn. 55122 Re: Country Home Heights Storm Sewer Improvement Proect No. 351 Our File No. 49245 Revised January 18, 1982 Dear Mayor & Council: IJRn G..1.nr;reaa. Y.E. Rebar IV. Racer, P.E. 1rarFh C. Anderlik. P.L. IlnWlerd A. Lemberg. P.E Ru wrd G. Turrrtr. P.E. Jemn C. Olsaa. P.E. 1:Iron R. Ca.k. P.E. Kroh A. Garden. P.E. Therms E. Hnyrs. P.E. Richard IV. Faster. P.E. Robert G. Srhunirhr, P.E. H.,r ht L. Serrata, P.E. OmmW C. Rnrgardr. P.E. Jerry A. Baurdan. P.E. ,klark A. Haman. P.E. Charles A. Erickson Leo A1. Paw,lsky Isarlan A/. Olsaa 1).Wd E. Ohne Transmitted herewith is our report for Country Home Heights Storm Sewer Im- provement Project No. 351. This report covers storm sewer construction along Egan Avenue from Pilot Knob Road to Country Home Heights Park. We will be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested parties at a mutually convenient time to review this report. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH:li I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am 'a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the tate of Minnesota. Mark A. Hanson Date: U6? - 7- Reg. No. 14260 Approved by omas A. Colbert Director of Public Works Date / — oZ J --fat 7407a /0 9 COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of storm sewer to provide drainage from the low point on Egan Avenue and Country Home Heights Park. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The project is feasible and is in accordance with the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan for the City of Eagan. The project as outlined herein can best be carried out as one contract. DISCUSSION: A. Storm Sewer: A 15 inch storm sewer is proposed to be constructed adjacent to Egan Avenue to its low point at Country Home Heights Park. The storm sewer will continue to the east through the park to the low point at Beam Lane. The 15 inch storm sewer will connect to an existing 15 inch storm sewer stubbed beneath County Road 31 (Pilot Knob Road). The storm sewer stub was construc- ted as part of County Road 31 Street and Storm Sewer Improvements by Dakota County. EASEMENT: It is proposed to acquire a permanent utility easement from Lot 4, Block 5 Country Home Heights (Property Owner, Joe Christenson) to eliminate removal of bituminoussurface and concrete curb and gutter constructed as part of County Road 31 Street and Storm Sewer Improvements. It is anticipated this easement will be acquired at no cost. AREA TO BE INCLUDED: ASSESSMENT AREA Country Home Heights Block 1; Lots 1-5 Block 2; Lots 1-9 Block 3; Lots 1-8 Block 4; Lots 1-3 Block 5; Lots 1, 3-16 Block 6; Lots 3-8 Block 7; Lots 1-14 Block 8; Lots 1-7, 9, 11 Block 9; Lots 1-9 S.W. 1/4 Section 3 Parcel 010-51 Parcel 020-51 Parcel 030-51 Parcel 010-50 Page 1. 7407a �� CONSTRUCTION AREA Country Home Heights Lot 4, Block 5 Country Home Heights Park 0 �1 COST ESTIMATE: A detailed cost estimate is presented in Appendix A at the back of this report. The total estimated project cost is $32,680 for the storm sewer from Pilot Knob Road to Country Home Heights Park. The total estimated costs include contingencies and all related overhead. Overhead costs are estimated at 27% and include legal, engineering, administration and bond interest. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments for storm sewer are proposed to be levied against the benefited property based on the present Special Assessment Policy Guide. This policy guide provides for assessments for improvements to local neighborhood parkland to be spread against the adjacent properties within the subdivision benefiting from the park. It is proposed to assess the total cost for lateral storm sewer as part of this project ($32,680) to only those lots within the immediate drainage area which is 40 lots as outlined on the attached drawing. This includes 5 lots within the City Park. The total estimated assessment is, therefore, $817/lot ($32,680 + 40 lots) which includes the 5 lots within Country Home Heights Park. The five city lots comprising this neighborhood park are responsible for $4,085 of this total ($817/lot x 5 lots) for lateral storm sewer. The total pending assessment for Trunk Storm Sewer against these 5 public lots under Project 177 is $2,475 (5 x $495). It is then proposed to assess this $6,560 ($4,055 + $2,475) for Lateral and trunk storm sewer evenly amongst each of the 82 lots and parcels benefiting from this neighborhood park which repre— sents a cost of $80/lot ($50 lateral + $30 trunk). A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this report deline— ating these costs. Final assessment rates for Project 351 lateral storm sewer will be determined from final construction costs and assessed as discussed to the benefited property. The pending lateral and trunk assessments for Project 177 will remain unchanged at the final assessment hearing. Included as part of the preliminary assessment roll is the proposed trunk and lateral pending assessement for Project 177 County Road 31 Street and Storm Page 2. 7407a 12 0 0 Sewer Improvements. This information was included so that a comprehensive assessment (proposed and pending) roll would be available for discussion at this report's public hearing. A pending assessment for trunk area storm sewer presently exists for the complete subdivision area_ as part of County Road 31 Street and Storm Sewer Im— provements, Project No. 177, excepting those lots within Block 7 adjacent to Burnside Avenue which were previously assessed for trunk storm sewer aT part of Project No. 28 in 1970. REVENUE SOURCES: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows: STORM SEWER: Trunk Fund Project Cost Revenue Balance Lateral $32,680 Lateral Assessment $32,680 TOTAL .............. $32,680 $32,680 — 0 — No revenue is required from the trunk fund to finance this project. PROJECT SCHEDULE Present Feasibility Report Public Hearing Approve Plans & Specifications Open Bids/Award Contract Construction Completion Assessment Hearing First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes 7407a Page 3. 13 January 5, 1982 February, 1982 Spring, 1982 Spring, 1982 Summer, 1982 September, 1982 May, 1983 APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 351 I. COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS PARR STORM SEWER 870 Lin. ft. 15" R.C.P. Storm Sewer @ $20.00/lin.ft. 1 Each Standard manhole w/casting @ $900.00/each 4 Each Standard CB MH w/beehive cstg. @ $800.00/each 100 Ton Class 5 aggregate base @ $6.00/ton LUMP SUM Clear and grub trees @ $200.00/lump sum 400 Sq.yds. Sod w/topsoil @ $3.00/sq.yd. 1.0 Acre Seed w/topsoil @ $1,000.00/acre Total Estimated Construction +5% Contingency +27% Legal, Engrng., Admin. b Bond Interest TOTALSTORM SEWER ................................. Page 4. 7407a 4 1 $17,400 900 3,200 600 200 1,200 1,000 $24,500 1,230 $25,730 6,950 $32,680 COUNTRY HOME HEI(MTS ..� a n•j&§uTiy 1,i X:!1111111 lies••�� Page 5 LEGAL PROD. 351 LATERAL STORM SEWER PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGBORHOOD PARK STORM SEWER ASSFSSMT " TOTAL PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGH- BORHOOD 'PARK+C61 I PROJECT 177 PENDING IAT- ERAL STORM SETAT. PROJECT 177 PENDING TRUNK " STORM. "SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT 351 AN) 177 Blk 1, Lot 1 - Lateral #351/Trunk 177' Storm Sewer ' (314/sa. ft.) (3C/s .ft.) S644.30 $50 $30 $80 - $564.30 Lot 2 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 5 - 50 30 80 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Blk 2, Lot 1 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 5 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 6 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 7 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 8 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 9 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Blk 3, Lot 1 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 COUNTRY HOME BELCAiTS • � � u rS. a. W74Y :u �:�! ID.M LEGAL PROD, 351 LATKRAL STORM SEWER PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK STORM SEWER ASSESSMT' TOTAL PRORATED - SHARE FOR NEIGH- BORHOOD PARK +001 -PROTECT 177 PENDING LAT- ERAL STORM SEW. PROJECT 177 PENDING TRUNK :''STORM 'SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT 351 AM 177 Blk 3, Lot 5 - teral #351/Tr uk 177' ' Storm Sewer - (3C/sa. ft.) (3C/s .ft.) 575.00 50 30 80 - 495.00 Lot 6 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 7 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 S Lot 8 - 50 30 80 - 564.30 644.30 Blk 4, Lot 1 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Blk 5, Lot 1 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 2 - Road righ -of-way - - - - Lot 3 - 50 30 80 514.80 514.80 1,109.60 Lot 4 817,00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 6 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Tot 7 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 8 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 9 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 10 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 _Lot 11 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS Page 7 LEGAL PROJ. 351 LATERAL STORM SEWER PRORA'T'ED SHARE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK STORM SHIER ASSESSMT ' TOTAL PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGH- BORHOOD 'PARK +C01 I PROJECT 177 PENDING IAT- ERAL STORM SEAT. PROJECT 177 PENDING TRUNK ' : " ' STORM SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT 351 AM 177 Blk 5, Lot 12 817.00 Lateral #351/Trunk 177 Storm Sewer (3C/sa. ft.) (3C/s .ft.) 1,461.30 50 30 897.00 - 564.30 Lot. 13 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 17,392.00 Lot 14 - 50 30 80 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 15 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 16 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1;392.00 Blk 6, Lot 1 City park - - - - - _ Lot 2 City nark - - - - - - Lot 3 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 4 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 -. 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 6 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 • Lot 7 - 50 30 80. - 495.00 575.00 Lot 8 - 50 30 80. - 495.00 575.00 Blk 7, Lot 1 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80. - * 80.00 Lot 3 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80. - * 80.00 Tot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 *previ ly assessed under Pro? 28 70 COUNTRY HCME HEIG RTS IsMol"ITu116/_unlE 17� Page 8 LEGAL PROJ. 351 LATERAL STORM SEWER PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGBORHOOD PARK STORM SEWER'ASSESSMT' TOTAL PRORATED SHARE. FOR NEIGH- BORHOOD'PARK+Col 1 PROJECT 177 PENDING IAT- ERAL'STORM SEW. PRD= 177 PENDING TRUNK 'S'TORM SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT 351 AM 177 B1k 7f Lot 6 - Lateral #351/Trunk-177 Storm Sewer (3C/sa. ft.) (3t/s .ft.) 80.00 50 30 80 - * Int 7 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 8 - 50 30 80. - * 80.00 Lot 9 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 10 - 50 30 80.00 - * 80.00 Lot 11 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 12 - 50 30 80.00 - * 80.00 eq Lot 13 - 50 30 80.00 - * 80.00 Lot 14 - 50 30 80.00 - * 80.00 Blk 8, Lot 1 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 3 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Int 6 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 7 817:00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 8 City park - - - - - - Lot 9 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 508.85 1,406.85 *p viously ass sed under P 7ect COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS �!k4lnlbllklkla.� i� u • o Page 9 PRAT. 351 LATERAL STORM SEWER PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK STCWl SMER ASSESSMT' TOTAL PRORATED - SHARE FOR NEIGH- BORHOOD'PARK+C01 - PROJECT 177 PENDING LAT- ERALL-STORM SERI. PRaTBCP 177 PENDING TRUNK :" STORM SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PRaTECT 351 Am 177 d8,T-,ot City park Lateral #351/ rook 177 Storm Sewer (3C/sa. ft.) (3fi/scr.ft.) - - - - - - 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,39:00 City park - - - - - - • Blk 9,Lot 1 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 - 1,070.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 4 817.00 50 30 897.00 _ - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 6 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 7 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 8 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 gh Lot 9 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 SECTIO] 3 010-50 - 50 30 80.00 - 495.00 575.00 010-51 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 020-51 - 50 30 80.00 371.25 371.25 822.50 030-51 - 50 30 80.00 371.25 371.25 822.50 GRAND TO'T'AL $28,595.00$4,100.00 $2,460.00 $35,155.00 6,207.30 $36,625.05 77,987.35 • Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Eight PROJECT 259 E B. Project 259, Final Reassessment Hearing (Vienna Woods Streets) -- As the Council may recall, the City of Eagan entered into an agreement with the Unisource Corporation (Mr. Marvin Bump) to pro- vide for the respreading of the assessments associated with the street construction against the three lots under the ownership of Mrs. Carol Lindo. These assessments were to be respread over all lots in the Vienna Woods subdivision under the ownership of Marvin Bump. Staff has been unsuccessful in getting Mr. Bump to agree to paying these assessments associated with street construction over Mrs. Lindo's three lots to alleviate the necessity to respread these costs. Mrs. Lindo has indicated that these assess- ments have not been paid and she continues to incur interest and penalty charges for non-payment of these assessments. Therefore, the staff presented the proposed reassessment roll to the City Council at the January 5th meeting and scheduled the final reassess- ment hearing to be held on February 2, 1982. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners pertaining to the additional assessment associated with the installation of gravel base, bituminous surfacing and curb and gutter. It should be noted that, while interest and penalty charges were being accrued due to non-payment of the assess- ments associated with Mrs. Lindo's lots, the staff feels that Uni- source Corporation should not be responsible for any penalties assessed. However, the staff feels that interest from the date of the original assessment hearing should be levied and still the responsibility of Mr. Bump, just as if this assessment were respread at the original assessment hearing in accordance with the agreement. It should be noted that Mr. Bump has not yet paid the first install- ments on the street assessments associated with the remaining lots in the Vienna Woods subdivision. Therefore, the inclusion of this past interest would have occurred if it had been assessed in accordance with the original agreement. Enclosed on page 2 2 is a summary sheet indicating the totals associated with this reassessment hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the final reassess- ment hearing and, if no written objection is received, to approve the assessment roll and authorize staff to certify the roll to the Dakota County Auditor. (If written objections are received, it is recommended that the public hearing be continued to allow staff to follow required court procedures.) Z. 1 1 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 259 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Vienna Woods FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING: February 2, 1982 September 24, 1980 (Previous assessment Hearing) IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: WATER RATES pArea ri Laterals pService Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area Laterals SANITARY RATES QArea Laterals Service *, Ej Lat. Benefit/Trunk:. -.. STREETS Gravel Base Surfacing 110.87 per lot Res. Equiv. 1 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 89 Lots NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED:__ $ Years (1983 - 1991) RATE OF INTEREST: 1980 - 2%. 1981 - 8%. 1982 - 8% 198 8° etc TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $9867.43 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 79-5 and 79-15 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 12 1978 -22- • Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Nine PROJECTS 246 & 257 11 C. Projects 246 & 257, Continued Reassessment Hearing (Ahnert & Buckman) -- On January 12, 1982, the City Council held a formal public hearing to discuss proposed assessments associated with the individual properties for which written objection was submitted at the December 1, 1981 public hearing. Two property owners re- quested a continuance at that time due to their inability to attend the January 12 meeting. The following information is presented for each of those two individuals for Council consideration: 1. Mr. & Mrs. John Ahnert, 4470 Oak Chase Way (Lot 4, Block 2, Oak Chase 3rd Addition) -- This parcel contains 46,501 square feet which qualifies it for the large lot storm sewer assessment policy, which resulted in a $460 assessment to which was applied a $24 credit for previous improvements by the developer resulting in a net assessment of $436 in May of 1980. This assessment was revised to include addi- tional costs incurred to $503.82 before the same $24 credit was applied, resulting in a net reassessment figure of $479.82 which was presented at the public hearing on December 13 1981. The City Appraiser has determined a before valua- tion of $85,356 with an after valuation of $92,906 for a determined benefit of $7,550 which exceeds the proposed assessment of $479.82. Because Mr. Ahnert is unable to attend the February 2 Council meeting, he has submitted his objections and information for consideration by the Council in a letter that is enclosed on page 24 for your information. 2. Thomas A. Buckman, 1405 Waldrid Street (Lot 1, Block 4, Evergreen Park) -- This parcel contains 20,000 square feet which qualifies it for the large lot storm sewer assessment policy, which resulted in a $430 assessment to which was applied a $67 credit for previous improvements by the developer resulting in a net assessment of $363 in May of 1980. This assessment was revised to include additional costs incurred to $470.96 before the same $67 credit was applied, resulting in a net reassessment figure of $403.96 which was presented at the public hearing on December 1, 1981. The City Appraiser has determined a before valuation of $72,060 with an after valuation of $76,766 for a deter- mined benefit of $4,760 which exceeds the proposed assessment of $403.96. Mr. Buckman was sent a letter informing him that his item would be considered before the Council at the February 2nd meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing for Lot 4, Block 2, Oak Chase Addition, and Lot 1, Block 4, Ever- green Park Addition. 2 0 Thomas A. Colbert Director of. Public Works 3795 Pilot Knob Road P.O. Box 21199 Eagan, Minnesota 55122 0 4470 Oak Chase Way Eagan, Minnesota 55123 January 24, 1982 RE: Project 257, Thomas Lake and Oak Chase Pond Drainage Basin Storm Outlet. Lot 4 Block 2 Oak Chase 3rd Addition Dear Sir: Because I will be on extended mi'.i.taty duty ccring the: next two meetings of the- city council, I will present my dissent to the above assessment by this letter. 1) My house is 36 feet above the water level of the pond behind my residence. Whether the pond level is raised or lowered.during rainy periods is of little consequence and of no value to my resi— dence and property. 2) For the past three years the quality of the water in the pond has steadily declined. Originally one could see children swimming, as'well As waterfowl and fish utilizing the pond. Now the pond is basically dead with no waterfowl observed, no fish seen, and a heavy, green scum aboudaag.. during the summer. I originally bought my lot because of the quality of water in.the pond. The value of my house and property has declined because of the use of this pond as a storm sewer holding pond. Thank you. Sincerely, Com, /l (2 John 0. Ahnert 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Ten PROJECT 247 E D. Project 247, Alexander Road Reassessment Hearing (Continued) -- On December 15, 1981, the public hearing was convened to consider the reassessment of costs associated with the construction of Alexander Road to the R. L. Johnson Subdivision. At that time, there was indication from the City Attorney's office that there was a potential for a negotiated settlement pertaining to this revised assessment. Subsequently, the public hearing was continued until February 2, 1980. In the interim period, the City Attorney's office has proposed a draft agreement between the City and the owners of the property proposed to be assessed under this project which would provide for the following three main points: 1. The assessments would be spread over a fifteen year period. 2. The assessments would be pro rated based on acreage of the lots involved rather than the front footage adjacent to Alexander Road. 3. If, and when, development of Lots 1 and/or 2, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park, does occur in the future taking road access from Alexander Road, the City will refund to R. L. Johnson any assessments received by the City for these two lots. At the time of the preparation of this agenda information memo, the executed agreement has not been received by City staff. If it is not received by the time of the final assessment hearing on February 2, 1982, it is recommended that the hearing be continued to a future date. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To continue the final reassessment hearing or, if the executed agreement is received, to close the reassessment hearing, approve the assessment roll and authorize certification to the County Auditor for collection in accordance with the terms of the executed agreement. a5 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Eleven ., OLD,`, BUSINESS;, PRELIMINARY_PLAT_FOR_KNOB_HILL A. Ed Dunn of Blackhawk Park Associates for Rezoning from A to PD to Include Limited Business, Townhouse and Condominium Develop- ment & for Preliminary Plat Approval of Knob Hill, Consisting of 40 Acres -- A public hearing was held before the APC at their Novem- ber 24, 1981 meeting and, due to a continuance, was again considered at the December 22, 1981 APC meeting. The APC is recommending approval of the rezoning and preliminary plat subject to a number of conditions outlined in the attached minutes. This item was considered by the City Council at the January 19, 1982 meeting and continued until the February 2, 1982 meeting to allow the City staff to address several additional questions. The City Administra- tor prepared a memorandum outlining five (5) questions to the City Planner. The questions as prepared by the City Administrator and addressed by the City Planner are enclosed in a memorandum found on pages _,J -_ through _:3-1_. Also enclosed on pagesthrough -35-- is a memorandum prepared by the City Planner and a e January IV -,-1982 that addresses some questions that were raised by Mayor Blomquist prior to the City Council meeting. These two memorandums offer additional information on the applications to be considered for the Knob Hill project. Also enclosed is a copy of the APC minutes on pages -'3-(,--through _$.. For additional information, refer to the City_P`I`anner's repo which was copied on pages 103 through 116 of the January 19, 1982 City Council packet. And in addition to the information, a booklet was prepared by the applicant which was also included for review by the City Council with the last agenda packet. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to approve the Knob Hill preliminary plat and rezoning. 2%o Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Eleven OLD BUSINESS;; PRELIMINARY_PLAT_FOR_KNOB.HILL A. Ed Dunn of Blackhawk Park Associates for Rezoning from A to PD to Include Limited Busidess, Townhouse and Condominium Develop- ment & for Preliminary Plat Approval of Knob Hill, Consisting of 40 Acres -- A public hearing was held before the APC at their Novem- ber 24, 1981 meeting and, due to a continuance, was again considered at the December 22, 1981 APC meeting. The APC is recommending approval of the rezoning and preliminary plat subject to a number of conditions outlined in the attached minutes. This item was considered by the City Council at the January 19, 1982 meeting and continued until the February 2, 1982 meeting to allow the City staff to address.several additional questions. The City Administra- tor prepared a memorandum outlining five (5) questions to the City Planner. The questions as prepared by the City Administrator and addressed by the City Planner are enclosed in a memorandum found on pages --a7- hrough Also enclosed on pages�'�. through _35_ is a memorandum prepared by the City Planner and 3aCed January 3T;--1982 that addresses some questions that were raised by Mayor Blomquist prior to the City Council meeting. These two memorandums offer additional information on the applications to be considered for the Knob Hill project. Also enclosed is a copy of the APC minutes on pages -S-f,--through _S$.. For additional information, refer to the City--PT—anner's repo which was copied on pages 103 through 116 of the January 19, 1982 City Council packet. And in addition to the information, a booklet was prepared by the applicant which was also included for review by the City Council with the last agenda packet. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to approve the Knob Hill preliminary plat and rezoning. 2b TO: THOMAS L. R=S, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FPO,,: DALE C. RUN=, CITY PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 28, 1982 RE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR KNOB HILL DEVELOPMENT At the January 19, 1982 City Council meeting, the City Council had five' questions which they requested additional information for. I will try to state each question and provide a response to each. 1. Please review with the MWCC and/or Metropolitan Council how they will treat a change from an R-2 to an R-3 zoning as it relates to sanitary sewer flow. Will this zoning change jeopardize the amount of sewer flow allocated in the future? RESPONSE: In a memo to Tom Hedges dated January 19, 1982, part of this question I think has been answered. In the Comprehensive Guide Plan for Eagan, the Metropolitan Council has reviewed the estimated sewer flaw projections for 1980 and 1990. In the 1980 metered flaw of sewage for Eagan, it was 2.47 million gallons per day. In 1990, it is projected by the Metropolitan Council to be 4.10 million gallons per day for ap- proximately.14 million gallons per day lower than what the City has projected. The Metropolitan Council has approved Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan and sewer flaw projections for 1990 stating that .14 million gallons above the Metropolitan Council's figures are not significant at this point in time. Torn Colbert has received a letter from McCombs - Knutson, the engineers for the Knob Hill development,and has the projeo- tions for sewer flaw for this development. I believe Ton Colbert is ad- dressing the exact amount of increase this development would have with the townhouse and condominium project vs. all townhouse in this area. In regard to part of the question regarding the change from the R-2 to R-3, I have contacted Barbara Senness of the Metropolitan Council's staff and have discussed the increased density for this development pro- posal. 'The response staff has received regarding this development pro- posal is that the Metropolitan Council is looking at the gross number of units and does not want to become involved with net density increases. It had been explained to Ms. Senness that the net density for Knob Hill was 7.8 units per acre. The Comprehensive Guide Plan indicates that this parcel should develop at a density of 3-6 units per acre. The Knob Hill development on a gross basis is approximately 6.5 dwelling units per acre, or approximately .5 dwelling units per acre above what is indicated on the Comprehensive Guide Plan. The response from Ms. Senness was that the City of Eagan does not even have to send an amend- ment to the Metropolitan Council to be processed for this slight increase in density. Therefore, if the City of Eagan approves the development proposal, there will be no approval needed by the Metropolitan Council. Ms. Senness did indicate if the City continues to have projects or pro- posals continually increasing the density allowed on the Comprehensive Guide Plan, they would start to look into it in the future. However, this particular project would not irrpact any of the Metropolitan systems. a7 Knob Hill of Eagan - January 28, 1982 Page two Therefore, it is so minimal that no amendment would be needed for this particular development proposal. 2. Please examine the grading plan for Knob Hill as it compares to James Refrigeration. The concern the City Council has is that aesthetically the intersection will become unbalanced if James Refrigeration is lower than the Knob Hill Development. RESPONSE: I believe Ton Colbert, Public works Director, is examing the grading plans of James Refrigeration and Knob Hill and will be responding to this issue. 3. Please meet with a representative of McCarthy's to review a possible extension to the north of the Knob Hill Development for a road from this project. RESPCNSE: Staff has tried to contact Mr. McCarthy in regard to this re- quest. At the present time, staff has not been able to contact Mr. McCarthy, and hopefully, prior to the February 2nd meeting, staff will have a reponse from the McCarthy's. Staff has been looking into providing a connection to the north. In the existing development proposal, the only possible exten- sion would be where the condominium building is on the north of this site. This would be the only possible extension, and if this road extension was, to be put in, major alterations would have to be done to the condominium site. Staff is looking into this area in detail and will have a response for the Council in the February 1 Administrative agenda packet. 4. Drainage of the entire property should be studied and those concerns addressed for the City Council. RESPONSE: Tom Colbert, Public works Director, is reviewing this question. 5. Explain in further detail the parking place reduction and whether that involves width and/or length and why there should be a parking place reduction for this development, when, in fact, there was no place re- duction for Shannon Glen Apartments. RESPONSE: Again, staff has mentioned part of this question in the January 19, 1982 memorandum to Tom Hedges. In 1981 and 1982, staff received a num- ber of development proposals for condominiuun units. Every proposal the developer has indicated that 2.5 parking spaces are in excess of the park- ing requirements for a condcminumm unit. Staff has started to look into this issue to see if the developer's concerns are, in fact, correct. In reviewing many of the surrounding amities, parking space remairements in most coimnmities require 2 parking spaces for every type of dwelling unit from single family to multiple. Eagan and Apple Valley appear to be the only two communities which have a parking space requirement of 2.5 spaces per townhouse or condominium unit. Since development proposals have been processed in Eagan, the only condominium project which has been approved and constructed is Shannon Glen Condominium. For the past week, staff has worked with the Eagan Police Department to monitor the Shannon Glen parking area. Mr. Jay Berthe has had the patrols reviewing the parking area for Shannon Glen at different times during the day. The report RE Knob Hill of Fagan - January 28, 1982 Page three that Mr. Berthe has commented to the Planning Department is it appears that 2.5 parking spaces are in excess of the parking that is required for Shannon Glen. There appears to be excess parking for the vehicles that were in the parking lots during different times of the day. The Police Department has indicated that it appears reducing the parking spaces from 2.5 to 2 parking spaces, there still would be adequate parking for the Shannon Glen Condominiums. Since the time staff has processed the Knob Hill Development proposal, an application from Mid - Continent has been processed by the Advisory Planning Commission. Mid - Continent Builders has also constructed a condominium project in Appld' Valley. This particular condominium project did a parking study in Apple Valley and the parking for that particular condominium project required 1.75 parking spaces per dwelling unit vs. the 2.5 which Apple Valley was originally requiring. Since the time that the project has been constructed and complete, the parking is in excess what is needed by the condominium development, and it is Eagan's understanding that some of the parking spaces for the condominium project in Apple Valley are presently being rented by an office facility across the street. Therefore, the parking requirements for that particular development were in excess. All in all, the City staff has not done a detailed study. .However, we are aware of the parking concerns by the developers. In reviewing the Shannon Glen Condominiums, it appears 2 parking spaces would be adequate, and instead of putting an excess amount of parking spaces or blacktop, that more green area be preserved for a better develop- ment proposal for the City. Therefore, at this time, the developers of Knob Hill have indicated again that 2.5 parking spaces are in excess. They are proposing 1.75 spaces. However, if the City chooses, they could reduce the parking fron 2.5 to 2 units per acre at 10' wide spaces, and if parking was congested, or additional parking would be needed, then the 10' wide spaces could be reduced to 9' wide spaces which could add additional parking spaces in the parking areas which have already been developed. Hopefully, this will provide some insite on the parking areas for condominium developments. At the present time, the City has not done a formal study. We understand the con- cerns of the developer and also agree that 2.5 parking spaces are in excess for condominium units. DCR/jach 29 TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: JANUARY 28, 1982 RE: PRELIPUNARY PIAT - KNOB HILL OF EAGAN (ED DUNN) In response to your metro to Dale Runkle on January 21, 1982, I will be addressing numbers 2 and 4 of the Council's concerns pertaining to this proposed development. ITEM NO. 2 The proposed grading for the overall development of the James Refrig- eration conditional use permit on the east side of Pilot Knob Road north of County Road 30 provides for lowering the existing topography by approximately 8-10 feet to accommodate the future design center- line elevations of County Road 30 and 31 upon the proposed relocation of the intersections of these two County roads in the future. After elevating the approved grading plan for the James Refrigeration site and the proposed centerline elevations of these County roads, it ap- pears that there will be approximately 2.5 acres in the extreme south- east corner of this proposed development that should have the grades revised from those that were submitted to provide for an elevation to be compatible with the proposed grading plan of James Refrigeration and future elevations of County Road 30 and 31. A quick review in- dicates that maximum cut required in this corner would be approxi- mately 6-8'. The developer should be required to resubmit a grading plan showing these required lower elevations in this quadrant of this proposed development. ITEM NO. 4 As the Council's concerns pertain to drainage of the entire property, I make reference to the staff report prepared by myself on November 19th for the Advisory Planning Commission a copy of which is attached to this mono for further review. In summary, all drainage will be conveyed to the existing ponding area located within this plat in the northwestern corner which presently has a positive gravity storm sewer outlet to handle this drainage through the Blackhawk Lake drain- age basin to the Minnesota River. Therefore, there should be no pro- blems associated with the drainage generated from this proposed devel- opment. If the volume of run-off is increased due to a change in den- sity, it would only impact the flood elevation of the internal pond which would require the developer to reserve additional land for ponding easement. IMI NO. 3 I will be reviewing the possible extensions of public roadways through McCarthy's property with Dale Runkle and our omumnts will be incor- porated in a future nero to your attention. If you would like me to expand further on any aspect of this development, please inform me. TAC/jach 1 30 TO: ADVISORY PLANNING CON1MISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FROM: THO'vAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: NOVEMBER 19, 1981 RE: PRELI!1INARY PLAT - KNOB HILL OF EAC,AN (THE DUNN =ANY) The Public 1,brks Department has the following items to be considered by the Planning Commission for their review of the proposed above -referenced pre- liminary plat: UTILITIES Sanitary sewer and watermain of sufficient size and capacity is available adjacent to this property to provide the required service anticipated by this proposed development. The property generally slopes to the north and west towards the existing drainage basins located in the north central portion of this proposed plat. These drainage basins presently have existing storm sewer outlet available which provides positive storm sewer drainage from this site to the Minnesota River by way of the Blackhawk lake trunk storm sewer which has recently been completed. All drainage generated from this plat will be conveyed by way of an internal storm sewer system into these internal drainage basins prior to discharging into the referenced storm sewer system which is located in the northwest corner of this plat. A detailed grading plan has not been submitted. There appears to be some minor grade differentials created along the westerly boundary and the north- east corner that will require slope easements from the adjacent property ow- ners based on preliminary spot elevations submitted on their preliminary grading plan. Based on these proposed spot elevations, it appears that the maximum grade of any street located within this proposed plat would not ex- ceed 5% which is well within the subdivision ordinance requirements. SITE PLAN The proposed layout of the internal public streets takes into consideration the separation between the convercial and residential uses of this property in addition to the differential in the topography elevations between the southeast corner and the northwest corner of this property. Knob Drive, which provides the internal access for the proposed commercial use of this property, has its northerly entrance opposite Berry Ridge Road at its inter- section with Pilot Knob Road. This is in conformance with the proposed major intersection access north of the future intersection of Pilot Knob Road with Diffley Road. The southerly intersection of Knob Drive with County Road 30 is approximately 480' west of the intersection of the two County roads in the southeast corner. This is adequate for future improvements to County Road 30 in addition to maintaining adequate site distance for this intersection. Engineering Report - Knob Hill of Eagan November 24, 1981 Page two Knob Lane has its proposed intersection lined up with the existing Heine- Strasse Road and provides for a continuation through the property adjacent to and westerly of this proposed plat. Until such time as Knob Lane can be continued to the west, there is adequate room for maintenance vehicles to turn around with the proposed location of the private drives in the north- west corner of this plat. EASFPH US AND RIGHTS -0F -WAY A 55' half right-of-way must be dedicated adjacent to County Road 31 to pro- vide for the future upgrading of Pilot Knob Road. When County Road 30 is upgraded in the future, its present intersection with County Road 31 will be relocated approximately 80' north of this existing location. This will require the dedication of a 155' half right-of-way adjacent to Countv Road 30 to provide for this proposed future relocation of County Road 30 to the north. Internal easements necessary for a utilitydistribution system will have to be determined upon the final detail design of this system. Upon completion of that design, the required easements will be dedicated as a part of the final plat. A ponding easement must be dedicated around the internal ponding areas of sufficient dimension to incorporate the 886.0 high water elevation and/or 5.0 acre feet of storage capacity above the 882.0 controlled water elevation provided by the existing storm sewer outlet for this drainage basin. ASSESSMENTS This property has previously been assessed for trunk area sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer assessments. However, it was assessed at the existing Agricultural zoned use. With the proposed development of this property to its anticipated zoning, the difference in trunk area assessments should be collected as a condition of preliminary plat approval. In addition, lateral benefit from trunk sanitary sewer will have to be assessed based on benefit received of the existing trunk sanitary sewer located adjacent to the west property line. Lateral benefit from trunk water will have to be assessed due to benefit received from the existing trunk watermain located within County Road 30 adjacent to the southerly boundary of this proposed plat. In addition to these referenced assessments, this property will be responsible for all costs associated with providing internal lateral utility distribu- tions to service this plat. In addition, a condition of the development agreement should provide for the acceptance of future assessments associated with the upgrading of County Road 30 and/or County Road_31. I will be available to discuss in further detail any questions associated with this plat at the Planning Commission Meeting of November 24, 1981. Respectfully submitted, Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. 3 Director of Public Pbrks TAC/jack S TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FRCM: DALE C. RUNFLE, CITY PRIER DATE: JANUARY 19, 1982 RE: ADDITIONAL'iLFORlATION FOR BURET REALTY PYLON SIGN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR KNOB HILL OF EAGAN In revieAng the two items which you have requested information, the .. first being a pylon sign for Burnet Realty, your question in regard to signs for the two additional buildings: Ordinance 16.05, the Sign Ordinance, allows building mounted business signs. Ordinance 16.05 states "no more than one business sign for each major street frontage shall be permitted on a building for each business located within such building. Design similarity. All business signs mounted on a build- ing shall be similar in design. Sign Area. .No signs or combination of signs mounted upon a building shall cover in excess of 208 of the gross area of side. SignProjection. No sign mounted upon a builcl- ing is allowed to project more than 18 inches from the vertical sur- face of the building and no sign mounted upon a building is allowed to project above the highest outside wall or parapet wall." Therefore,. Ordinance 16.05 would allow building mounted signs for the other two office buildings which will be constructed in this area. The Park Committee at its December meeting made a recommendation for the preliminary plat which would consist of the following: A cash dedication per dwelling unit. 2. A tot lot be provided with the assurance that the amenities the developer is proposing with the gazebos and open space also be provided. 3. The developer install the trails on Pilot Knob Road and County Road 30 at the developer's expense. The reason for this Park recommendation is that the Park committee noted that the park dedication for this neighborhood would be to the north and east of the subject site. Therefore, no land dedication would be requir- ed with this development proposal. The second item regarding Knob Hill of Eagan was the sewer capacity for the proposed development. The first response to the sewer capacity is presently Eagan's 1980 metered flow of sewage was 2.47 million gallons per day. In 1990, it is projected by the Metropolitan Council to be 4.10 million gallons per day, or approximately .14 million gallons per day lower than what the City of Eagan has projected. Therefore, sewer pro- jections as a whole, or increasing the project by approximately 34 units, would not increase the sewer flaw substantially between the proposed 33 Knob Hill of Fagan January 19, 1982 Page two R-2 and the R-3 designation. Getting to more specifics regarding the site, it is my understanding that sewer pipes are always oversized and that an additional 34 units of flow would not hinder the capacity of the pipes which would be installed. A mire detailed analysis could be explained by Tom Colbert, Public Works Director, in regard to this speci- fic project. In reviewing the land use change, or land use from R-2 to R-3, the land use plan projections were based on a gross acreage. Therefore, in doing the rough calculations for population saturation, staff did not work with net acreage or trying to deduct road right-of-ways which would not be constructed on. The intent was just to guide the area for types of use. Once a detailed development plan is proposed, then staff will deduct the rights-of-wav and do the calculations on a net acreage basis. In review- ing this site plan, the net density of the development would be 7.8 dwell- ing units per acre. In reviewing the gross density, the development is between 6.4 and 6.6 dwelling twits per acre which is just slightly above the 3-6 density range. In reviewing the R-2 land use, the 3-6 dwelling units per acre, this 3-6 dwelling units per acre could incorporate single family units at the lower end of the scale or around 3 dwelling units per acre, up to townhouses which would fit into the 6 dwelling units per acre range. Therefore, the R-2, Mixed Residential, 3-6 dwelling units per acre could incorporate single family through townhouses on the proposed site. If the property is zoned R-3, Townhouse District, the density for town- houses would be 6,000 square feet per dwelling unit, or 7.3 dwelling twits per acre. The development proposal has a net density of 7.8 units per acre, or .5 dwelling units per acre above the R-3 category. The reason- ing the developer has given for this increased density is that to provide a mix between townhouse units and condominium units provides a better mar- keting tool in the type of unit an individual would want to purchase vs. not having a choice and being allowed to purchase only a townhouse unit. The last item which was brought up is in regard to the parking spaces being reduced from 2.5 spaces per unit to 1.75 spaces per unit. During the past several months, staff has been processing development proposals which are either condominium or townhouse projects. The parking require- ment presently is 2.5 spaces per unit. The developers have indicated that 2.5 parking spaces per unit is in excess of what is needed to provide adequate parking for these types of dwelling units. The City of Apple Valley had conducted a study on a condominium project which indicated that 1.75 spaces is adequate for a condominium unit. Most cities in the Metropolitan area presently require 2 parking spaces per any type of dwelling unit. Therefore, it appears 2.5 spaces per unit is in excess of what is really needed to provide adequate parking. Staff, at this time, has not had a chance to do a detailed study of the other commmities to determine what parking standards they should use for townhouse and condo- minium units. However, staff is in agreement that 2.5 parking spaces is in excess of the parking needs. The parking spaces that have been pro- vided are still the 10 x 20 foot parking space. Therefore, the spaces, or sizes of the spaces, have not changed. It is just a reduction of the 34 Knob Hill of Eagan January 19, 1982 Page three number of spaces the applicant is proposing to provide. The other item staff would like to point out is the more parking spaces that are required, the more you disturb the natural amenities, and the more blacktop you pro- vide with each devvlopment proposal. Therefore, if the additional parking spaces are not needed, then the more green area could be provided for each development. 3S 0 0 APC Minutes December 22, 1981 KNOB HILL OF EAGAN - REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT The continued hearing regarding the application of Edmund B. Dunn of Blackhawk Park Associates to rezone approximately 40 acres from A (Agri- cultural) to PD (Planned Development) with 10.5 acres of limited business and 19.7 acres of residential acreage, together with application for preliminary plat with 11 lots with 5 lots for limited business and 6 lots residential, was next convened by Chairman Joe Harrison. Mr. Dunn was present as was Greg Frank of McCombs Knutson Engineers, Jack Boarman, Architect, and Barton Dunn. Mr. Dunn and Mr. Boarman explained the changes in the plan since the last hearing and also distributed a hand out dated December 15, 1981. Mr. Boarman stated that the right of way configuration for Diffley Road will be revised to accomodate the proposed widening of Diffley Road and that the balance of the area for the right of way will consist of outlots. The Developer indicated that he would expect to be credited against park contribution for construction of the trail, but later, stated that because of the policy of the City in and adjacent to commercial areas, that the developer would pay for the cost of the trail without a credit for park purposes. Mr. Boarman further stated that the request for a variance for 5 stories would not be made at the present time and further, that the developer is recommending 1.5 parking spaces per condominium unit, which is less than the 2.5 spaces required by ordinance. The housing density was of prime concern to the planning commission members and it is noted the density has been reduced from 9.4 dwelling units per acre to 7.7 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Boarman also stated that there is interest in acquiring or constructing two office buildings at the southeast corner of the property and the planning commission members were concerned about architec- tural uniformity of the office building. Mr. Dunn and Mr. Boarman stated that the developer would insist on architectural uniformity. Member Wilkins ex- pressed her opinion that the office buildings in the area were not conducive to the residential character of the neighborhood, including Diffley Road and Pilot Knob Road, and also felt that the density was still too high. There was also discussion concerning private recreational areas within the development and the public and private streets shown on the plan. Mr. Runkle stated that 1.5 parking spaces per unit is too low for condominiums and 1.7 to 1.75 units per acre are more appropriate, which later amount was agreed upon by Mr. Dunn. There was also discussion on whether the neighborhood business district zoning had been moved from the Thomas Lake Road area to the northwest quadrant of Pilot Knob Road and Diffley Roads, requiring further study. Mr. Boarman argued that for financial purposes, the density for condominiums is necessary and desirable. Krob moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application to rezone 40 acres from Agricultural to Planned Development, with 10.5 acres of limited business, and 19.7 acres of residential, including 60 condominium units and 93 townhouse units, pursuant to the following condi- tions: 1. A planne� development agreement and development agreement shall be completed prior to the starting of the lst Addition. The planned development agreement shall not exceed an 8 year term. 2. Homeowner's association articles and by-laws where applicable, shall C_ be reviewed by the City for each phase of development. 3 36 APC Minutes December 22, 1981 3. A staging plan shall be required to determine how the area is to be developed. All voted in favor except Wilkins who voted no. Krob then moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application for preliminary plat according to the following conditions: 1. Outlots shall be established on the plat for the additional right of way which is to be acquired by Dakota County for the upgrading of County Road 30, Diffley Road. 2. The plat shall be subject to Dakota County Plat Commission's review and comment because the plat abuts two County roads. 3. A detailed landscape plan shall be provided with each phase and a landscape bond amount approved by the City provided for each final phase of the development. 4. The development shall provide all the parking spaces that have been stated in the planner's report under required parking unless otherwise approved by the City Council, with staff to recommend to Council and Couuncil to approve the parking spaces per unit. 5. The plat shall be subject to the Park Committee's recommendations and comments for park dedication on the proposed development. 6. The developer shall re -design the parking layouts on Lot 7, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 in order to provide for the additional parking spaces required. 7. All other City ordinances shall be applicable to the overall de- velopment plan. 8. All L B buildings shall be architecturally compatible. 9. That up .to 75 foot half right of way shall be dedicated adjacent to County Road 31 and up to 75 foot half right of way shall be dedicated adja- cent to County Road 30, Diffley Road as finally requested by Dakota County with the balance of the proposed Diffley Road right of way in outlots. 10. A ponding and drainage easement shall be dedicated providing for a highwater elevation of 886.0 and/or 5.0 acre feet of storage capacity for the drainage basin referenced as DP -27- 11. A detailed grading and drainage plan shall be submited for formal approval prior to final plat application. 12. All easements required by the installation of an internal utility distribution system shall be dedicated as a condition of final plat approval. 4 37 0 0 APC Minutes December 22, 1981 13. The owners of the property shall accept the additional as:jessments associated with the upgrading of the zoning of this property for trunk area utilities. They shall also agree to acceptance of the future assessments asosciated with the upgrading of County Roads 30 and 31. 14. An 8 foot bituminous trailway shall be constructed within a 10 foot strip inside of the anticipated future dedication of public right of way along County Road 30, Diffley Road, and County Road 31, at the sole cost of the owner at the location finally determined by the City. All voted yes. KATHLEEN SCHVAHZ — CONDITIHAL USE PERMIT FOR BEAUTY PARLOR The hearing regarding the application of Kathleen M. Schwanz, of 4283 Stirrup Street for conditional use permit for beauty parlor in a residential district was then considered by the planning commission. Ms. Schwanz was present as was one objecting property owner who submitted a Petition indica- ting 25 homes with 18 contacts, 7 opposing, 5 approving and 6 with no opinion. / There were concerns about traffic, alleged reduction in house values, possible danger to children with more traffic, etc. The commission members reviewed the ordinance restrictions on home occupation in a residential district. After discussion, Turnham moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application, subject to the following conditions: 1. Hours of opeartion will be from 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. only. 2. The only employee shall be an occupant of the household. 3. Customer parking must be on site and limited to two (2) customer autombiles. 4. There shall be no commercial signs advertising the business. 5. There shall be no over the counter sale of merchandise. 6. The permit shall be granted on an annual basis. 7. All other applicable ordinances must be followed. All voted yes. 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Twelve AMUSEMENT DEVICE_APPLICATION _COACHMAN.OAKS_APARTMENTS B. Amusement Device Application for Coachman Oaks Apartments - An application for an amusement device license for Coachman Oaks Apartments was continued at the January 19, 1982 City Council meeting to allow the City staff to address specific questions that were raised regarding the hours amusement device machines could be operated at the Coachman Oaks Apartments. The Administrative Intern, Dave Osberg, has reviewed the application with the applicant and enclosed on page -,�Q- is a copy of his memorandum that outlines the hours of operation and other considerations if the application is to be granted. Also enclosed on page _� is a copy of a sketch indicating where the amusement devices are to be located at the apartment complex. The location of these amusement device machines, if granted by the City Council, will be difficult for enforcement by the Police Department. It would mean the Police Department would have to enter the apartment complex as well as the recreation room before they can adequately police this operation on a periodic basis. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the amusement device application submitted by Coachman Oaks Apartments. 37 0 0 MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT OSBERG DATE: JANUARY 29, 1982 SUBJECT: COACHMAN OAKS APARTMENTS AMUSEMENT DEVICES At the January 19, 1982 City Council meeting, the application for allowing three amusement devices to be located in the Coachman Oaks Apartments was continued until the February 2, 1982 meeting. Since the January 19 meeting, I have had several conversations with the people at the Coachman Oaks Apartments in an effort to get a better understanding of the amusement device situation. As I understand it, the present application before the City Council is for three amusement devices. The Planning Department has also received an application from the Coachman Oaks Apartments for licensing to allow more than three amusement devices. This applica- tion is temporarily scheduled for the February Advisory Planning Commission meeting. The applicants are proposing to open a recreation room.in the apart- ment complex, and the amusement devices will be located in the recreation room. Initially, there would be three amusement devices in the recreation room with an additional 10 to 12 to be placed in the recreation room if the licensing is approved. The applicants are proposing to have the recreation room open seven days a week between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Ordinance #73, Amuse- ment Devices, states that, "Mechanical amusement devices shall not be operated after 10:00 p.m. except by permission of the City Council." Therefore, the applicant is complying with this section of Ordinance #73. However, there is no mention in Ordinance #73 of the hours in which the machines may begin operating. This is something the City 'Council may wish to discuss if they feel 7:00 a.m. is too early for amusement devices to be in operation. There are several issues in regard to the supervision of the recre- ation room. Ordinance #73 states that, "Adult supervision shall be present where a mechanical amusement device is located at all times the device is in operation." The ordinance also states that, "The use of such device by a person under the age of 18 years and unaccompanied by his parents or guardian shall constitute a conclu- sive presumption that the same is being used with the permission or at the sufference of the licensee and person, firm or corporation upon whose premises it is located." The supervision for the recrea- tion room will be somewhat unique in that there will be a lock on the door of the recreation room with keys to be distributed only to the tenants of Coachman Oaks Apartments. A sign will also be placed in the recreation room stating that children will not be allowed in the room unless they are accompanied by an adult. Attached to this memo is a proposed plan submitted by the applicant outlining the recreation room as it will be with the amusement devices. 5S 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Thirteen PROPOSED_RATE.INCREASE_-_URBAN_PLANNING_&_DESIGN C. Proposed Rate Increase for Urban Planning & Design (Planning Consultants) -- At 'the direction of the City Council at the January 19, 1982 meeting, the City Administrator did address the concerns the City Council had about the amount of the proposed rate increase for the planning consultant. Urban Planning & Design did lower their rate per hour for principal planner, planner II and landscape architect I. The only two positions used by the City on a regular basis are the prin ipal planner and secretary. Enclosed on pages .2 through --�} - is a copy of a letter from Urban Planning & �e`s"ign, the new rate schedule and the original rate schedule. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the revised rate schedule as submitted by Urban Planning & Design, Inc. 4I 0 ,oN PLANNING ` DESIGN, INC. January 25, 1982 2800 East Cliff Road • Suite 140 • Burnsville, Mn. 55337 • (612) 890-2320 Mr. Thomas Hedges, Administrator City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Dear Tom, John S. Voss, President As I indicated to you by telephone today, our proposed rate increase was primarily determined by two factors. First, we have incurred substantial overhead increases during the past two years; particularly for auto expenses (25%) and rent (22%). Secondly, our fees have lagged behind those of our competitors for several years. At the same time, I am sympathetic to the desires of the City Council to keep -ex- penses down as much as possible at this time. Therefore, I am sending herein a revised rate schedule which keeps the overall rate increase at about 10% for 1982. rs ! tr ly, S Joh S. Voss JSV/bav Enclosure: Revised Rate Schedule VAN PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE DESIGN 0 0. -- RATE SCHEDULE -- Effective March 1, 1982 URBAN PLANNING & DESIC-P;, INC. STAFF Principal Planner (1) Planner II (2) Landscape Architect I (3) Landscape Architect II (2) Draftsman Secretary Research Assistant Mileage (per mile) Materials RATE PER HOUR $ 50.00 38.00 33.00 25.00 20.00 10.50 20.00 .24 Cost (1) "Planner -In -Charge" as designated by the State of Minnesota for 701 Planning and minimum five (5) years experience. (2) Masters or undergraduate degree and minimum three (3) years experience. (3) Minnesota Registration by State Board and minimum five (5) years experience. IM 0 0 -- RATE SCHEDULE -- Effective March 1, 1982 URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN, INC. 1°!8Z l48\ STAFF RATE PER HOUR Principal Planner (1) $ 55.00 $45.00 Planner II (2) 40.00 35:00 Landscape Architect I (3) 35.00 30.00 Landscape Architect II (2) 25.00 22.00 Draftsman 20.00 18.00 Secretary 10.50 9.50 Research Assistant 20.00 18.00 Mileage (per mile) .24 •20 Materials Cost Cost (1) "Planner -In -Charge" as designated by the State of Minnesota for 701 Planning and minimum five (5) years experience. (2) Masters or undergraduate degree and minimum three (3) years experience. (3) Minnesota Registration by State Board and minimum dive (5) years experience. Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Fourteen CEDAR_CLIFF_COMMERCIAL_ADDITION D. Steven J. Flanagan for Preliminary Plat Approval, Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition -- The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing at their October 27, 1981 regular meeting to consider an application submitted by the developer, Mr. Steve Flanagan, for a preliminary plat of "Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition" con- sisting of 15.8 acres and containing sixteen commercial lots in the Cedar Cliff Planned Development. The APC recommended approval of the preliminary plat to the City Council. At the November 17, 1981 City Council meeting, the preliminary plat was considered and continued until the City staff could review alternative align- ments to a proposed road through the subdivision. At the December 1, 1981 City Council meeting, proposals by the City staff concerning the road alignment were considered. Please refer to pages [}7_ through4q-- for a copy of the memorandum that pertains oche City stafr s consideration of alternative road alignments. The City Council, after reviewing alternative road alignments, asked the City staff to prepare a letter to the Dakota County Plat Commission, requesting their comments and indication of approval for the road alignment planned for the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addi- tion as favored by the City Council. The City Planner discussed this matter with a representative of the County Plat Commission who responded in a letter dated December 9, 1981 to the land owner of the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition, Mr. Joe Ryan. A copy of this letter in enclosed on page _ -So-- Also enclosed on pages ,�( through _.__,� 3 _ are some a i conal comments from the City Pier regar ind g crarification of the county's view regarding the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition pertaining to the aforementioned letter. At the January 5, 1982 City Council meeting, the City Administrator was asked by the City Council to draft a letter to the Dakota County Plat Commission and to take a firm position on behalf of the City as to which street and road alignment the City Council prefers if the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition is to be further considered A copy of this letter is enclosed on pages _ $� through _ $S_. The City Administrator specifically requested a response by �e February 2, 1982 meeting and, therefore, anticipa- ting a letter from the County placed this item on the February 2, 1982 agenda. To date, there has not been a response from the Dakota County Plat Commission. The City Administrator has contacted the plat commission and, apparently, Mr. Larson was ill when the plat commission met and he is attempting to review the matter with the various commission members, and, hopefully, a letter will be received Monday, February 1, 1982 so this item can be considered at the meeting Tuesday. If a letter is not received on Monday, the City staff will contact the residents adjoining the Cedar Cliff Addition and also the applicant suggesting a continuance until the February 16, 1982 meeting. For additional information on this item refer to the original City Planner's report, a copy of which 46 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Fifteen is enclosed on pages _S_6 _ _ through --b-7. For a copy of the APC minutes of October 27,x- refer to page --�5-. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the preliminary plat as recommended by the APC. 40 Agenda Information Memo November 24, 1981 Page Twelve CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT E. Steven J. Flanagan for Preliminary Plat Approval of Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition -- On November 17, 1981, the City Council for- mally reviewed the preliminary plat application for the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition. During the review of this preliminary plat, there was considerable discussion pertaining to the alignment of the proposed road through this subdivision. The Council continued consideration of this item until the December 1 meeting to allow staff time to research the following concerns: Costs associated with relocating Scott Trail to the eastern edge of the proposed plat; 2. Traffic implications of off -setting the proposed inter- section with Erin Drive at Nicols Road on the west edge of this proposed plat. A location map referencing the street patterns north of Cliff Road adjacent to Nicols Road is enclosed on page S 3 A for Council infor- mation. In order to relocate Scott Trail From its present inter- section with Cliff Road to the eastern boundaries of this plat, it would require a considerable amount of fill to be placed in this low area. This fill would be required to be placed whether this road were relocated or•not. However, the developer has in- dicated that he does not intend to develop the eastern edge of this plat until a later date. The total cost to perform the removal of the existing Scott Trail and to construct its relocation adjacent to the eastern boundaries of this proposed plat has been calculated and broken down as follows: Item Const Street $31,100 Fill 75,000 Est. 27% O.H. Total $ 8,400 $39,500 20,250 95,250 4 �' TOTAL $134,750 L. 0 0 C' Agenda Information Memo November 24, 1981 . Page Thirteen Although the total construction cost seems considerably high, it should be noted that approximately 71% of the cost is associated with the necessary fill to construct this roadway to proper align- ment and grade. This fill would be required irregardless kf• the road is constucted in this location or not. The estimated price of this fill was based on the premise that no material was available on site and it would have to be brought on site from another loca- tion. This relocated entrance road could serve as a central access point for the property located to the east of this proposed plat. As such, the Council could consider sharing a portion of this cost on an assessment basis against the adjacent property for its benefit received. Pertaining to the proposed relocation of the westerly intersection of this proposed interior road with Nicols Road, it was originally intended to line up with the existing intersection of Erin Drive and Nicols Road, providing a four way intersection approximately 740 feet north of the center line of Cliff Road. The attached C exhibit shows a proposed relocation of this westerly intersection with Nicols Road which would result in a center line to center line offset north of Nicols Road of approximately 430 feet. This would provide for approximately 310 feet between the center line of this proposed intersection with the existing center line of Erin Drive at Nicols Road. Both off -set dimensions are acceptable from engineering standards. However, in looking at the overall relationship of the roads in the Mari Acres Addition to the Cedar Cliff Addition, it would provide a continuation of off -set intersec- tions that would vary from 300 to 550 feet.. This is not desirable in trying to provide proper traffic control for the anticipated turning movements associated with the future development of the commercial property within the Mari Acres Addition on the west side of Nicols Road. If these intersections were off -set, it would eliminate any feasible alternative for providing signalization at the intersection of existing Erin Drive in the future as traffic may warrant. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the preliminary plat for Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition with the appro- priate conditions as recommended by the Advisory Planning Commission and City Council. M i I4 r..� � CL l�mt t,l' ¢kt it N:,'Af k•: ":AL � � T FC \. I a � • Y.Y I s'w ear ptp alai I P�f* A . 3. �I� =f=v�a ••S Nilw .! 'J b 1 r� ., 4 - !� tp�• ______ :.If nIP _ $41 - ,!. 1P ¢ t' �e 4 a- tea. Q: O 4t •.z+. >�- <. -�Rly/ • t Aad. - o`'q, I t<� '_q`JJ\ by A ,� t -4 _ - _ _ _ ; �..^ _ ''�tt +�. �, � r P Y pN.>�f ¢ �g8\. a%5P r Lec,f , F p � :I�p'� y r+• �J d� a t "i± F m (f ri'Ifej.. +Sry+ 3Y �•' N Jhi,� �'�� k r4.4 `J.✓�. tl :P z��i_,. I ! K t / .b St�i *• 8 hh f pP\ 1• :`� jl?u �`! -I _ !I' L�� i 1• Z•(yY `a •/r Ii r V��IA b h-af•I'4 _ �• �� -Vi.� 11. f{t ° Ir, "1 i r7d�.- �k :'%.f �• d <iT9 t '{'> �;. , I��E el m l • f Lfi A .s A ,lP I I- . -ql m �.1 y t.e e4s ••Y A ��;•Ir �N ix °v - W- :� ( r�> . ��A lna.! oief 9 •'-•-0^ ,° Y ." by -U y • / o ; . ¢ +va• _ N1H9 FL -ili - J- UIO-seau ar - - _•^^.+- •,ll --a .c.-cv- -.. .. . .NiC `"_. -r: iY �Ai1•r,. s9�vr..saca:.a..vAaYy. 'ud L�'a�n�"r�'v�y' MARI Lm MA RI AG RES AN _ ;'a1` u) .,QCT e•fl M1b'w Sloe OUT LOT J Il i ERINi bwNl F�Atrli5 �' v ,(- Imo. .� s • fie+ • . p LOTenl- O`� V Lore I I n��L' v xw.''I�01rj .L_I .y •,p* _—. I Ya Q� t� Y� yl - LOT 1 F- 4 • • 170BER f P. SANDEEN. P.E. CUUNTY ENGINEEN DA ® ®A 0 7%® C'0 11 N TY T[I EFLIG N E: 512.43]-0396 -DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 1560 HWY. 55 HASTINGS. MINNESOTA 55053 December 9, 1981 Mr. Joe Ryan St. Paul Land Resources Inc. 385 Washington Street St. Paul, MN 55102 Dear Mr. Ryan: In preliminary review of alternate proposals for development of the NE corner of Nicols and Cliff Road we recommend the following: 1. The CSAR 23 access (Scott Trail) already approved by the County Plat f Commission be preserved. 2. Access to Lot 6 and 7 be permitted off of Scott Trail and not Cliff Road. 3. Access from Nicols Road (CSAH 23) could be permitted 355' north or 700 ft. north of Cliff Road would be permitted but we prefer the more northerly access. Sincerely, L rry G. Figgins, P.E. Administrative Design Engineer LGF/ar A SO AN EQUAL OPPORTUN11Y EMPI.OYCR C 0 0 TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DIVE: DECEMBER 23, 1981 RE: CLARIFICATION OF THE MEMO STATING THE At the December 15, 1981 City Council Meeting, staff submitted a metmrandum to the City Council regarding comments of the prelimi- nary review of the Dakota County Plat Commission for Cedar Cliff Comrercial Addition as revised by the City Council. The comments submitted by Dakota County are as follows: 1. The CSAH 23 access, Scott Trail, already approved by the Dakota Plat Commission be preserved. It is staff's understanding of this comnent that the Plat Omission will not accept a plat that will have additional access onto CSAH 23, or Nicols Rd., than what has already been granted. The Plat Commission re- cognizes 'that there is presently a 60' access provided at the north end of Outlot G and that this should provide access from Nicols Road to the comrercial lots, or to this portion of the plata It is staff's understanding that direct access onto Nicols Road would not be permitted at this time. 2. Access to Lots 6 and 7 be permitted off of Scott Trail and not Cliff Road. It is staff's understanding regarding this comment that it is in regard to the additional cul-de-sac provided west of Scott Trail to provide additional access to this commercial area. It is staff's understanding that the cul-de-sac should be provided off of Scott Trail rather than Cliff Road. Staff also understands that no other access other than Scott Trail will be allowed west of Scott Trail to the intersection of Cliff Rd. and Nicols Rd. 3. Access from Nicols Road CSAR 23 could be permitted 355' north or 700' north of Cliff Road, but we prefer the more northerly access. It is staff's understanding that the access onto Nicols Road presently is at the very northerly 60' of Outlot G. The County is indicating that they would prefer this access to be. the access onto Nicols Road. However, if the City would want to realign the access into this Addition, this access could shift southerly but no closer than 355' from the intersection of Cliff Road and Nicols Road. Therefore, if the Council wanted to shift the access southerly to provide more space between the road and the duplexes, this shift would be allowed. However, the County recognizes the fact that the present access does line up with Erin Lane, and there would be a 4 -way intersection at this pre- sent location. S1 Thomas L. Hedges Memo Re: Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition Deoanber 23, 1981 Page two 4. The last ccmnent staff would like to make which was not incorporated into the letter is that the County has also looked at the possibili- ty of vacating the southern portion of Scott Trail and relocating it easterly to the east property line of the plat. The County, at this time, ,has indicated that the present alignment of Scott Trail is fine and that shifting it easterly would not provide adequate spac- ing to the access on the southside of Cliff Road to the Driver's Test Center. Therefore, the County at this time would prefer the existing location of Scott Trail proposed to the relocation of Scott Trail. Hopefully this memorandum will clarify the concerns that the County had when they reviewed the revised Cedar Cliff Conniercial Addition. If the Council would like to re -schedule the hearing for Cedar Cliff Comrercial Addition, staff can then get direction as how to proceed with the Cedar Cliff Commercial preliminary plat. Hopefully, this memorandum provides a clearer explanation of the concerns and ccmTents that Dakota County had in reviewing this plat. DCR/jach ;•!r/6•r J/H eid.i J[V fl.Y K.W )P aN at lirU f -tL lfd y-`vOrn .... •.L�. ^' I- yj I ..- foL It '" ^-rli:�( iir" �1 /-sI`e-I-"ss `f -Ji -e `1--ait-'r-.iil-�; ••• I:JN ••• :I n.v . \ - .. W T L AN D S•' ^ : 1 Li ,e 3 L,y,' i� Ci i� a �> 4 S: �} L AALS rI 4d .,w cq fn /S r tltL O_ : v/ N1 i_aw_1 �_Nw_J L;__„i-.;, 3 �.� �• ` �0 8. a1FFWEW -_urs ��- VVa _'. • ~ �---riiA-�-ldrr.-Jri -'`i ��di9___O •::• i _�} r' sAnY '•. I Br arL r . .• r 8 it r .� 4'. �.� S d",. ... ^rr.. 7 O. h. Qj lbSrrF•''....."'�r Air l` 12. �,'r 13 a�nS;.`� '\:.�. •'Pi•'''' •.nr .+I•nnB. • / � 11 V / 4 J � .rfldlL i += r/^ - ',ii�.r.'._.:':r� N.. sn 'y: _ I�fC9 ♦1 r! .«y'r ."001 •I 7,9 li`S l{ yam;•-. �..3' r �� ^``;- b ` `'� `� �'? .`+ � ,',i : Cr— � G lei .,, ' n � e; N %(�:'t a ��. 9. Z•. • �1 r�•GG. 9Y `� �... rp r�¢v N,t, 2 aP ` 3� .O•I S M1 � �, �` Sj "`I o•SI R 5 Q lets>s"t ^nn,l I,p: 5 A, iy rgirja_ J �� i rsrluv i h 1 I o:: W a z w f .e z n" P � .aarNr✓1 � W r _ I. g rrarul. � �• I .rerrai/ i, ; L ,x ~ I IL ) Lor 1;i •{ � � int I=+,i � . •� i� ra i t •`c� O r X r I � I• L_ lan 4. sow nA ..•44IaC W.� , STATE t•I :AID ;: HIGHWAY N0.23•--�••l'. ____-•-------:..; .3r --- TATE------- -- I •-Z)9/f1-- "Alt) Nlu ins✓A KW Y.V✓JJ0%" WS. m til ywlr, n Ff.4•HY M1i? Z: �...•• I SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS BEA BLOMOUIST MAYOR THOMASEGAN CITY OF EAGAN JAMES A. SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER,y.7795 PILOT KNOB ROAD COUNCIL MEMBERS P.O. BOX 21199 "'EAGAN, MINNESOTA SS197 . PHONE 454.8108 January 12, 1982 v ' DAKOTA COUNTY PLAT COMMITTEE J DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER`, 1560 W HWY 55 HASTINGS MN 55033 0 Re: Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition Preliminary Plat Dear Sirs: THOMAS HEDGES CITY ADMINISTRATOR EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE CITY CLERK In official action that was taken by the Eagan City Council at a regular City Council meeting held on December 1, 1981, approval was given to the staff and applicant to prepare Cedar Cliff Com- mercial Addition with a cul-de-sac adjacent to Cliff Road and two access points for parking and commercial development off Nicols Road. Please make reference to the attached drawing entitled "Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition". The Eagan City Council has spent considerable time reviewing this parcel of property and feels this proposal is the best method for platting the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition parcel. The residential integrity of Cedar Cliff Third Addition will be least impacted by this drawing. Traffic volumes on Cliff Road and Nicols Road should not affect the three proposed access points to the property (a cul-de-sac on Cliff Road and two entrances from Nicols Road) due to the Cedar Avenue Freeway and I -35E which are both close to this property. Any revisions to the proposed preliminary plat as prepared would be expensive, realising the topography adjacent to Scott Trail. The City of Eagan would like a formal response from the Dakota County Plat Committee regarding the pro- posed Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition before any further work is performed by the developer. The City of Eagan is planning to discuss this item at the February 25 1982 City Council meeting, and, therefore, a response prior to that meeting would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Qvvvx d Thomas L. He geS U City Administrator 15-4 TLH/hnd cc: Dale Runkle, City Planner; JohnVoss, Dakota County Commis - THE LONE OAKSTREEen (�THE SYMBOL OF;ySTRENOTH AND GROWTH IN OURCompanies COMMUNITY. ^- r9e.00 NH9.4o YiE i n s $e 5H9•AO'94"w 1 oyE+g x WATI Mo° }dacoo % BBdr U` II b 171py \\� I I I I J•�—�_ p � �-,. Gee / -xe'r �- ee r 6 �r�t 11I II II II �I r'e•„�I 2 ti;` ^ }'� �i' $ .A •.. �. •.z .�I I II I II , I r I xsq I nm i,_nea _ � xro �vrc :� ;e II II �I 4 {'• .#i S S/ . \ I ia� \ \. ° ”' yee ! I x S "' ♦60P/ i II \ G � •+qV�'Y _ � ),5I - I-�.. IF ri�°i rq_ I r '. t � y�Y ••�l�+�A� \ r r`\n `•J`'� �~�Y .rM Yrc��A. - rt nqr l.c xro �t .�':�rn �7 2\- ,r^p 2 J III a'^ '",mow a J �•=_ rt- rrnvv I B' i.. NI@ w.8: �I 18 @ • t'- I rom _ gg pin ,ex u?:' I x css(�.- ia6 $: [ 15 t s . s e"^ 2 � " 'i !�'�•--�r[re-' e 9 It —Im. ax yam �za• no aaas yuye =/:+R` a rMpaY -Ar _ i4�.j =Mir @ IA 10Rf •, t __ + ... i/lAlf•+6 4FF.H(6Lq; aw• a '.�. e* e B �•D !�y', i .n✓ir/ Iso.0 J eacp z>.m ram m.ae o noa • 'r e« y ti. w y2 ' 12 e 6 6 lk R IIS y B 8 mi 1 I =¢ s •S s °rw _ ..R L II _ rrrarn -saa•a:l: c x n 'g= b4 �` 6 R +. 'aT 6• - ___rr+� -�. s w was sat . sso ao • [ra• AS�. i �� 10 :.e..r @ 4. 1101.i ao e. ex »m »oo nee n�Ixl�arr_••' '/ ; • @12�,3@ : , � w•x » ra raaa irsre xeYf.'xY L = . +�i 5 8 O♦ R°F 11 n4 ]o ori ltlm; 8 ro, 4 � ✓i ° g - s + °troth • rr�f•'. Ifl.P =°g° sa ra n AAtsyrro .+•s a 4d8 4d'...., Tb aW•8 _g 8 l+.[- 1j.yb x' xsP'• IYae �' I �' 1+$ :+'zti •'•i s.'•e il*+i•X naa•xniaB a,e•r '.y ejGC�1.4}2xm`Lri f° y•g�a..[� � eapao- r.• • r r �'q/, ha "'\SCOTT ".+'.'8'� 'r y 3r1�� qr ay'.• paras 6l y++ 10 O,j °' e4 '.,:;!"'�' eour.r.m: �anl e° ao »air r.�+..-:. - w ;[i +. 6, i� b'axz�ga'°.+ W•�r 8 `DAR I a °,: +$r• �8 s T CE�0° r$ x aaa•aa'na g xa�l .e: — n "a°p sto x.v ON'�'N•U��e pBCCa; 3 N a p m ° $ ..� T ° ...wo.,. _.._ ^- r9e.00 NH9.4o YiE i n s $e 5H9•AO'94"w 1 oyE+g x WATI Mo° }dacoo % BBdr U` II b 171py \\� I I I I J•�—�_ p � �-,. Gee / -xe'r �- ee r 6 �r�t 11I II II II �I r'e•„�I 2 ti;` ^ }'� �i' $ .A •.. �. •.z .�I I II I II , I r I xsq I nm i,_nea _ � xro �vrc :� ;e II II �I 4 {'• .#i S S/ . \ I ia� \ \. ° ”' yee ! I x S "' ♦60P/ i II \ G � •+qV�'Y _ � ),5I - I-�.. IF ri�°i rq_ I r '. t � y�Y ••�l�+�A� \ r r`\n `•J`'� �~�Y .rM Yrc��A. - rt nqr l.c xro �t .�':�rn �7 2\- ,r^p 2 J III a'^ '",mow a J �•=_ rt- rrnvv I B' i.. NI@ w.8: �I 18 @ • t'- I rom _ gg pin ,ex u?:' I x css(�.- ia6 $: [ 15 t s . s e"^ 2 � " 'i !�'�•--�r[re-' e 9 It —Im. ax yam �za• no aaas yuye =/:+R` a rMpaY -Ar _ i4�.j =Mir @ IA 10Rf •, t __ + ... i/lAlf•+6 4FF.H(6Lq; aw• a '.�. e* e B �•D !�y', i .n✓ir/ Iso.0 J eacp z>.m ram m.ae o noa • 'r e« y ti. w y2 ' 12 e 6 6 lk R IIS y B 8 mi 1 I =¢ s •S s °rw _ ..R L II _ rrrarn -saa•a:l: c x n 'g= b4 �` 6 R +. 'aT 6• - ___rr+� -�. s w was sat . sso ao • [ra• AS�. i �� 10 :.e..r @ 4. 1101.i ao e. ex »m »oo nee n�Ixl�arr_••' '/ ; • @12�,3@ : , � w•x » ra raaa irsre xeYf.'xY L = . +�i 5 8 O♦ R°F 11 n4 ]o ori ltlm; 8 ro, 4 � ✓i ° g - s + °troth • rr�f•'. Ifl.P =°g° sa ra n AAtsyrro .+•s a 4d8 4d'...., Tb aW•8 _g 8 l+.[- 1j.yb x' xsP'• IYae �' I �' 1+$ :+'zti •'•i s.'•e il*+i•X naa•xniaB a,e•r '.y ejGC�1.4}2xm`Lri f° y•g�a..[� � eapao- r.• • r r �'q/, ha "'\SCOTT ".+'.'8'� 'r y 3r1�� qr ay'.• paras 6l y++ 10 O,j °' e4 '.,:;!"'�' eour.r.m: �anl e° ao »air r.�+..-:. - w ;[i +. 6, i� b'axz�ga'°.+ W•�r 8 `DAR I a °,: +$r• �8 s T CE�0° r$ x aaa•aa'na g xa�l .e: — O I sto Is 4 ....10 �,. II _ $ ..� ,. ...wo.,. _.._ I� fl I R 7 ♦ f'. Ic 1 I Nh& CUFF +. S5� E x} Z O I h IIMMER[IAL � I I� fl I R 7 1. 1 I I I S5� �3s- T S TA DEPARTMEWTT& NSPORTATION RIGHT, �1"1PLAT`N0:19=10:_ee'ars=`:;u�.:'-:r;c.:u;�•.I::-2-a-�'.. -. 00 Vv%ta C Agenda Information Memo C November 13, 1981 Page Twelve WN SBU$0 5 0 PRELIMINARY-PLAT.--CEDAR-CLIFF-COMMERCIAL-ADDITION A. Steven J. Flanagan for Preliminary Plat Approval, Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition -- A public hearing was held by the APC to consider an application submitted by the developer, Mr. Steve Flana- gan for the preliminary plat of "Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition" consisting of 15.8 acres and containing sixteen commercial lots in the Cedar Cliff Planned Development. There was considerable discussion regarding this preliminary plat as well as alternate designs review by the APC. The APC is recommending approval of the preliminary plat to the City Council. For additional informa- tion on this item, please refer to the City Planner's report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages --+t- through For action that was taken by the APC, refer to a copy ofth5 minutes, a copy of which is enclosed on page „ ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve the preliminary plat entitled Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition. r. ,S' 0 CITY OF EAGAN 0 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT --CEDAR CLIFF COvINIERCIAL ADDITION APPLICANT: STEVEN] FIANAGAN LOCATION: OUTLOTS G & H, CEDAR CLIFF PLANNED DEVELOPPfENT EXISTING ZONING: OFFICE M14ERCIAL UNDER A PLANNED DEVELOMENT. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: OCTOBER 27, 1981 DATE OF REPORT REPORTED BY APPLICATION SUBNaTIEED OCTOBER 21, 1981 (UPDATED) An application has been submitted reamsting a preliminary plat, Cedar Cliff Conmiercial Addition, which consists of approximately 15.8 acres and contains 16 commercial lots. ZONING AND LAND USE Presently, the parcel is zoned camercial under the Cedar Cliff Planned Devel- opment. The Planned Development contract specifically states that the entire area shall develop solely as an office complex facility unless otherwise ap- proved by the Eagan City Council. As you recall, the original request made by Mr. Flanagan was to revise the zoning to allow retail commercial and a prelimi- nary plat. The Advisory Planning Commission denied the rectuest for the rezon- ing which was upheld by the Eagan City Council. Therefore, the 15.8 acres can only develop as an office complex. As you may recall, on August 25, 1981, the Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a revision to the Cedar Cliff Planned Development and a preliminary plat, Cedar Cliff Cammercial Addition. The Advisory Planning Commmdssion recommended to deny the rezoning to allow retail use within this area. The preliminary plat was recommended for approval to the City Council. The City Council denied the application to rezone the property to retail commercial ` and requested that the Planning Commission again review the preliminary plat re- garding access and circulation of the cammercial district. Since the time the Eagan Citv Council requested additional review of the prelim- inary plat, staff has been in contact with Dakota County regarding additional access points to this addition. It is staff's understanding_ that when the or- iginal plat for the Cedar Cliff lst Addition was filed with the County, there was a restricted access easement over the entire area west of Scott Trail to Nicols Road. There was also a restrictive access easement from Cliff .Rd up to the norhterly 60' of Outlot G. In reviewing this restricted access easement with the 66 a CITY OF EArAN PRELIMINARY PIAT - CEDAR CLIFF COMMIAL ADDITION OCTOBER 27, 1981 PAGE W10 County, the County has indicated that this easement has alreadv been granted to the County and to have this restricted access removed, the City would have to demonstrate the need for any additional access points. A copy of the letter from the Dakota County Plat Commission has been included for vour review. The Council also indicated that.the plat,as designed, would have all the build- ings backing onto Cliff Road and Nicols Road, and that either a service road or another means of access should be looked at in the overall design. Another factor which was brought out at the public hearing at the Advisory Planning Commission Meeting and City Council Meeting was the concern from the neighbors regarding traffic going through the Cedar Cliff neighborhood shortcutting the stop light at Cliff Road and Nicols Road. Since the time the plat had been reviewed by the Advisory Planning Commission and City Council, new Cedar Ave- nue has opened. Since the opening of new Cedar Avenue, staff has reauested that the police monitor the through -traffic on Scott Trail in regard to the neighborhood concerns. Since the opening, staff has had a report that on two different days after Cedar Avenue had opened, that there is veru little com- muter traffic turning onto Scott Trail going through the Cedar Cliff Addi- tion to Nicols Road vs. going out to the new Cedar Avenue. In reviewing the overall layout and design, staff originally worked with the Cedar Cliff 1st Addition of how access would be provided tc Outlots G and H of the Cedar Cliff Addition. The original plat shows one access off of Cliff Road which is Scott Trail, and the second access being the northerly 60' of Outlot G which abuts Nicols Road. This northerly 60' ties in exactiv to the southerly access of Mari Acres, or Erin Drive directly west. It had always been the original intent that a looped street, or a connecting street, from the northerly access on Nicols Road would tie in to Scott Trail for the over- all circulation plan for the commercial development, which in turn has been related to the preliminary plat which Mr. Flanagan had originally submitted. In reviewing alternatives to the design, staff has looked at the possibility of providing direct access to approximately 4 lots off of Nicols Road and pro- viding a secondary access to Cliff Road. Staff has also looked at the possi- bility of providing a frontage road so no lots would be backing onto Cliff Road or Nicols Road. In reviewing the alternatives, it appears the most feasi- ble way to develop the property is that the original design appears to pro- vide the best access to the individual lots and provides for good access to the overall commercial area from either Niools Road or Cliff Road. In reviewing the overall plan of the Cedar Cliff Addition, you can see has Scott Trail curves through the development in order to not provide direct ac- cess between Cliff Road and Nicols Road. The commercial Addition, as stated earlier, contains approximately 15.8 acres, or approximately 1 acre +/- per lot,which appears to be a reasonable size lot for an office complex. The lot lines between preliminary plat and final plat could shift slightly in order to meet the setbacks for individual buildings prior to submitting the final plat. Once the final plat has been recorded, the applicant will have to replat or go through the waiver process in order to change any of the designated lot lines. ".%. C 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN PRELIMINARY PLAT - CEDAR CLIFF CUTERCIAL ADDITION OCICBER 27, 1981 PACE THREE At the present time, it is staff's understanding that Por. Flanagan does not have any clients lined up to develop any portion of the overall development. Therefore, he is just preparing the lots in approximately 1 -acre sizes which would adequately acccnvcdate buildings and selling the individual 16 lots for strictly office use. Staff has enclosed two exhibits of alternate ways the site could be developed. However, the original application which has been submitted seems to be the most feasible and best designed for an overall development plan. If approved, the plat should be subject to the following conditions: 1. A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by the City for Lots 1-5, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 3, because this area will abut the residents in Cedar Cliff Addition. This landscaping is the main buffering area between the office and the residential lots. An adequate landscape bond shall also he provided and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. 2. A landscape plan shall accommodate all of the other lots as develop- ment occurs. An adequate landscape bond shall also be required for each lot and not released until one year after the landscaping has been camleted. 3. The plat should be subject to Dakota County Plat Commission's review and comments. 4. There shall be no other access allowed other than Scott Trail and the access proposed on Nicols Road. 5. There shall also be a restrictive access on the southerly 80' of Lot 7, Block 2 and Lot 4, Block 3 in order to provide adequate stacking distance onto Cliff Road. There shall also be a restrictive access on Lot 1, Block 2 in order to provide stacking distance onto Nicols Road. 6. All buildings shall require the same architectural and building ma- terial on all sides of the building when proposed in order that the building will not have an unattractive side. 7. All trash receptacles shall be incorporated in the side of the build- ing or attached to the building and maintained with the same archi- tectural characteristics of the building. DCR/jach ST • CITY OF EAGAN CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION AUGUST 25, 1981 PAGE THREE ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS s 1. ALL STORM WATER SURFACE DRAINAGE MUST BE CONTAINED WITHIN THE PERIMETER OF THIS PROPOSED PLAT AND DIRECTED BY WAY OF GRAVITY STORM SEWER TO.THE MARI ACRE POND (AP -9). 2. A 36', 9 -TON STREET WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN ERIN DRIVE. 3. A 5' CONCRETE SIDEWALK SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF ERIN LANE AND,THE WEST SIDE OF SCOTT TRAIL WITHIN THIS PLAT. TAC/JAC sq c a 0 TO: ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FROM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: AUGUST 20, 1981 RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT - CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION (STEPHEN FLANAGAN) THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS TO OFFER FOR CCN - SIDERATION OF THE ABOVE -REFERENCED PLAT: UTILITIES SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN OF SUFFICIENT CAPACITY AND ELEVATION IS AVAILABLE ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF CLIFF ROAD ADJACENT TO THIS PROPOSED PLAT. GRADING AND DRAINAGE BLOCK 1 AND 2 OF THE PROPOSED PLAT WILL DIRECT ALL SURFACE DRAINAGE TO A LOW POINT LOCATED IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS PARCEL. BECAUSE THE EXISTING TRUNK STORM SEWER LOCATED ALONG CLIFF ROAD IS NOT DEEP ENOUGH TO ACCOMMO- DATE THIS PROPOSED LOW POINT ELEVATION, THIS PROPERTY WILL REQUIRE THE INSTALLATION OF APPROXIMATELY 1,400 FEET OF STORM SEWER WHICH WILL PRO- VIDE A DIRECT OUTLET INTO THE MARI ACRE POND (AP -9) LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF NICOLS ROAD NORTH OF ERIN DRIVE. THE PROPOSED DRAINAGE FOR BLOCK 3 DIRECTS ALL SURFACE WATER TO THE EAST LINE OF THIS PROPOSED PLAT INTO THE EXISTING LOW DRAINAGE BASIN. THERE IS PRESENTLY NO FEASIBLE WAY TO PROVIDE POSITIVE GRAVITY STORM SEWER OUTLET FOR THIS LOW DRAINAGE BASIN WITHOUT A SIGNIFICANT EXTENSION OF THE TRUNK STORM SEWER SYSTEM FROM THE EAST. SUBSEQUENTLY, BLOCK 3 WILL HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED DIRECTING ALL SURFACE DRAINAGE ONTO SCOTT TRAIL AND INTO THE REQUIRED STORM SEWER SYS- TEM MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY. THIS WILL NECESSITATE APPROXIMATELY 13-16 FEET OF FILL WITHIN BLOCK 3. STREETS THE PROPOSED CONFIGURATION OF THE INTERNAL STREET TO SERVICE THIS PRO- POSED PLAT FOLLOWS THE ORIGINAL DESIGN CONCEPT WHEN THE CEDAR CLIFF PUD CONCEPT WAS SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL. THE SETBACKS FROM NICOLS ROAD AND CLIFF ROAD ARE ADEQUATE. THIS INTERNAL ROAD SHOULD BE NAMED ERIN DRIVE TO PROVIDE THE CONTINUITY OF THE 4 -WAY INTERSECTION WITH NICOLS ROAD. A CONDITION SHOULD BE PLACED ON LOT 4 OF BLOCK 3 REQUIRING THAT DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO SCOTT TRAIL BE CONFINED TO THE NORTHERLY 35' TO PROVIDE THE PROPER SETBACK FROM THE MAJOR INTERSECTION WITH CLIFF ROAD. ALL OTHER LOTS SHOULD HAVE RESTRICTED ACCESS TO THE NICOLS ROAD AND CLIFF ROAD THEREBY REQUIRING ALL ACCESS TO BE TAKEN FROM SCOTT TRAIL AND/OR ERIN DRIVE. BECAUSE THIS IS AN INTERNAL MINOR COLLECTOR FOR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT A 36' WIDE STREET WITHIN THE 60' RIGHT-OF-WAY BE REQUIRED. I WILL BE AVAILABLE TO DISCUSS IN FURTHER DETAIL ANY ASPECT OF THIS RE- PORT WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THEIR MEETING ON AUGUST 25, 1981. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 60 Proposed.• CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION FOR: JCHN FLANAGAN fOUTLora a W H. clwR CLIMI I .! r/�/4 ni.ii iHr 1.�4 rlF, p fi/ l{njr rl WET L A NO Q VICINITY MAP —SURVEYORS— ' X Sec 30• Twy.27 R 23 :'Na•u'JlS^: ` .. 1 j it llr-rreo�j tiu-"i//�%/tQ i11-arm'`!'%i4 ;/_�KK-�r-Nl-� ... tiW .•. N.y.. .ii 1 1 1. r S _.� ` r94 < 3�ia, Cli I PaG I N I 2 ,iEI tl Z S 1Ifw� , r .I `.2. .1 rYl r`as 4 ', �f. .•O• Cs z L!iK,iJ{@_,:i!0K_.l_NPo_ LOW-�l,t_� j1` �S i.? �/t • �' Y ^r MpA. AIFFVIEW unr /. O V �•' " 1 �F:: yL �? �.. iWi rruuy�R•� ya ._ _ 1 ,rvA--. l f- jrrm _-l� - rTiD -.• •'_C 1 =• +Y I .�/wY,t' I 1 1 w�"'••) •.8 I'H �rrr%� r' Z _ `2 r1'i?yYurl�°�r ``'rx �`;6;fVd{/ r�.,/J;`. rti �4i1•,1 13 iLt�.PB;.. ` `'s 'Ni�'•. , �`o rs�rr,-/ . _ sw..r. L.—LJU it/c q IC TRAIk, I10 12 r,t< ryj/pQ . . ' 11. ."•^ 10 ``.�' ,Jr"'� "l:�/' `'9. dna,. "Y: 4L CD 7 +iy; //\..•'�'}B a:Z'Vy3;.• \ �� i 0�: y r� A1,�n at j ,a 5�ii 9' ?niwav __ICG+ ` 111f11j95 k 0 �8vbm,*rmy� Ia q '� ••• i lobfNl: r 1— Rm � •8 ;a a � ;� p L- i8 h e it x i• z al `I J �. v w ♦y 1__!'or L,i:!_j IL .J2rilY J $ ___1I Q o°~ ti x ,rNwl, ti 1 _..nalNrr/•W I J _l.,m, A a V � web'-� l '� � Srom-=1 LOT 11 1 AT I 1 Y I `� 'a' O 1 .t STATE llw.lw. I AID r ' ll�I.HIGHWAY •, I uM i. ...te�•'HP STATE •-zlrica--,/AID w'rll.,.rlH,K,lx./x.ux wrA.la r,.rrMruFiIGHW;4)' ;:ii l3._....- •' • •.YO ill/ -L••' SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS VIL;Ifql I T MAt� I wna— See.30, Tv* 27, PAY an i rr.0 III'll Ji r, 1z". Ij -wo— r Fiv -, I - � - I ,, r --wo WET 4_4 .4 oo w 4 ND S. M 4 z- :, 4 :1 k IFMi 4,� 3 2 3 ........ ... It Z -�6 4U lti�_ ii oq. -CLIFFVIEW 17 -W z I Wit" 10 pl; ZO 4L Cr— ca -zo 4ki, 411 -5 a 7 4 < Iy z > 4 4 J 2e is A 3 28 2 2 : F 7HM V) i I !A1 LIJ IL Z) z D A 0 (L) r - OI� LOT I LOT 6 L HIGHWAY STATE AID — — — — — —NQ S TATF Z.J. �'-��SHEET 2 OF �2SHEEETS 114IN ONES SINGLE FAM I LY HnMES T TWIN M wirl HC ES OFFICE OFFICE COM E MERCIAL I f a �.... I SCALE-* DATE= .or�. pon�_ Aaacrram =crgra .aea a �.... I 'DAKOTA COUNTY .DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTE13 1560 HWY. 55 -HASTINGS. MINNESOTA550J3 September 22, 1981 City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Attn: Planning Department Dear. Sirs: B E{112 LARSON D A.IOT� COJIiTV SURVEYOR V TELERn OnE; 612.437.020 The Dakota County Plat Commission met on September 22, 1931, to consider the proposed plat of CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION. Said plat is adjacent to County Road 423 and County Road 432 and is therefore subject to the Dakota County Contiguous Plat Ordinance. This plat appears to satisfy the provisions of the ordinance with one exception. Adjacent to the right-of-way lines on both County Road 32 and 23 shall be a restricted access ease- ment dedicated to the County of Dakota on the final plat. Upon satisfaction of this item, the plat commission will recommend approval to the Dakota County Board of Commissioners when submitted for recordation. Sincere yours, Ber and H. Larson Dakota County Surveyor BML/ej c: C. R. Winden & Associates COMMISSIONERS - IST :ISTRICT21,0 DISTRICT JOSEPH A. HARRIS GERALD E_ HOLLENKAMP HASTINGS SOUTH ST. PAUL 6S 3RO DISTRICT 4TH DISTRICT STM DISTRICT JOHN S. VOSS GENE ATKINS RUSSELL STREEFLAND BURNSVILLE INVER GROVE HEIGHTS BURNSVILL� 04 ZLI wp ROALL R-11) )R) E P R R4 R -IV R&D -IV ER� R-1 Y, Ind R-11 p LB R-11 is p R4 cscT L P LB R-1 cJ R -I nRI 1 3,3 R-1 R-11 :ALLEY M .In Ind )AInd RMVLEIZ 4 ... .. Elnd. —NE3---- PF NB AcrR-4 N V � t . �•. Y i r n —4 m i f1 tAl Rr.JEC DAR- RDVf' 4 MARI ya:`t.�.. _; PF R-,4 CSC �` V n Sym _ . QJ. 4•' SGL C S C IY ✓.�� J1 ,-�� ! �.b s�r�.► -LE ZNB RIVER R B l A A A A z' I TE5T ' II ` A. LB �. ��; ENTER R-2 R— I,"- A RB._ RIR( F£LI fN A ADQ�TI(ZJV ff�t LL A 1 Cy `/ � ' yy �` :.ti"`>_ ).�:,�Z�• 3y�J� M14i_�j '�. ani:✓'� �-`.,i SA 6kQ-j _ i "`1 �'ti�..i:`yrs-"i•s: '� ��.•.o,.L� JJ') i;�1 3, iJJ:. --1- '. )_ } ESiA�'EvS i - '.Js : � ' : � ,:>-). s.L ).'}•rte . ,_ :J� l: +.J.•' sir,. .J. - j: +�;,�� ♦]1 v, 1. �%'< .•,) _ i'.. APC Minutes October 27, 1981 • CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION The application of Steven Flanagan for preliminary plat approval of Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition was next heard by the Planning Commission. The 15.8 acre parcel would contain 16 commercial lots for office buildings only. Mr. Flanagan was present as were a large number of affected residents from the area. An application had been heard before the Planning Commission on August 25, 1981 to consider revision to the Cedar Cliff Planned Development to pro- vide for some retail -commercial use in a portion of the development. The Council denied the application to rezoning for commercial use. There was discussion concerning access and several alternate schemes for the development were submitted for review by the Planning Commission. The staff recommended the original proposed preliminary plat and also the recommendations made by the Planning Commission concerning the layout of the plat and the development. Steve Darling, a neighboring resident, stated the most important objection is the connecting of the access to Scott Trail from the office area and it was suggested by certain residents that Erin Drive be cul de sated to prevent additional excessive driving through the residential area in the Cedar Cliff Addition. It was noted the maximum cul de sac allowed without variance, is 500 feet under the City ordinance. Estimates were made of the number of persons who would use the professional buildings if the land was used to the ultimate with approximately 10,000 square foot buildings on each lot. There were concerns about the trash containers, that berming should be well designed and that the exterior lighting not affect the neighboring residents. Harrison moved to refer the application to the City Council with no further recommenda- tions from the Advisory Planning Commission. Krob seconded the motion. All voted in favor. LAWRENCE MILLER - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - A h W RESTAURANT The public hearing regarding the application of Lawrence Miller and Gary Lowe for conditional use permit to allow more than three amusement devices in a general business district located at 3998 Sibley Memorial Highway at the A & W restaurant was next convened. Mr. Miller and Mr. Lowe were present and stated that the reason for the application is that the restaurant has lost 40% of its business due to the revision of access in the Cedarvale Shopping area. The proposal is for a familiy restaurant with adult supervision, no smoking in the amusement area and further, that it was intended that there be more than 15 amusement devices. There were questions concerning the curfew time and the applicants indicated they would conform with the City ordinances in that respect except to permit the restaurant to remain open until 12:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday evenings. After discussion, Hall moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application, subject to all applic- able ordinances except that the establishment would be allowed to stay open until 12:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday nights, further, that the Council grant approval for a period of 5 years, subject to annual review with the Council authorized to revoke the license in the event that there Are viola- tions of any applicable ordinances. All voted in favor except Krob who voted no. 3 G% 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Sixteen 0 PRELIMINARY-PLAT---BICENTENNIAL-8TH-ADDITION A. Federal Land Company for Preliminary Plat of Bicentennial 8th Addition, Consisting of Approximately 3 Acres -- The Advisory Plan- ning Commission held a public hearing on December 22, 1981 to con- sider a preliminary plat application for approval of Bicentennial 8th Addition which consists of approximately 34,322 square feet or 3.08 acres and contains two (2) commercial lots. At that APC meeting, the item was continued to allow City staff to address some additional items as well as suggest additional conditions if approval was considered. The APC again reviewed the application at the January 26, 1982 APC meeting and is recommending approval of the preliminary plat subject to the conditions as referenced in the APC minutes. There was considerable discussion regarding the site plan as to how the two lots of Bicentennial 8th Addition would develop. Lot 1 would consist of a 92 unit motel and Lot 2 a 5,000 sq. ft. office building. The Planning Commission was concerned about the 22 foot variance request for the setback at the motel. The APC also discussed the motel being three stories versus the rest of Bicentennial being all two story buildings. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's reports found on pages _ _'-70_ _ through __ A copy of the APC minutes of the January T6 -,-T9-92 meeting concerning this item will be included with the administrative packet on Monday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve the preliminary plat. ME „b, CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - BICENTENNIAL 8TH ADDITION APPLICANT: FEDERAL LAND COMPANY - MARTIN & VERNON COLON LOCATION: OU'II.IJT B, BICENTENNIAL 7TH ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: al ERCIAL UNDER A PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: DECEVBM 22, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: DECEMBER 16, 1981 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting preliminary plat approval of Bicentennial 8th Addition which consists of approximately 134,322 square feet, or 3.08 acres and contains 2 cormercial lots. LAND USE AND ZONING: Presently, the site is zoned coimiercial under a Planned De- velopment District. This is the only area left to be platted in the Bicentennial Planned Development.. The land use on this particular parcel is designated NB' (Neighborhood Business District) for the two lots. The overall planned development which was approved, shows this general location as a motel site for the Bicentennial Planned Development. IXIMIENTS: As stated earlier, the preliminary plat, Bicentennial 8th Addition, is the last Addition to be platted in the Bicentennial Planned Development. The appli- cant proposes to locate a motel on Lot 1 and an office on Lot 2. The preliminary plat is somewhat confined to the boundaries for Lot 1 and Lot 2 due to Washington Drive being constructed to the north and west of the plat, and the right-of-way for 35E abutting the south and east portion of this plat. Therefore, the restraints as to the depth of the parcel have been determined by the factors mentioned above. Therefore, the Colons' are platting the remainder of their par- cel into the two lots. At the present time, Federal Land Ccupany does not have site plans for either of the two lots. Staff, at this time, cannot address parking, setbacks, or lot cover- age because site plans have not been prepared. The applicant will have to meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance in preparing the site plan. If the applicant cannot conform to setbacks or lot requirements, a separate vari- ance will then have to be submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Due to the uniqueness of the two lots and the confined depth of the lots, the applicant may not be able to meet all of the zoning ordinance criteria. If the applicant cannot meet this criteria, then they will have to sub- mit a separate application for the variances which they cannot meet. _7Q CITY OF EAGAN BICENTENNIAL 8TH ADDITION DECEMBER 22, 1981 PAGE TWO If the preliminary plat is approved, it should be subject to the following condi- tions: 1. The sidewalk should.be constructed along the east side of Washington Drive on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Bicentennial 8th Addition. 2. Access or curb cuts should be coordinated wherever possible to curb cuts which already exist on the west side of Washington Drive. 3. The plat should be reviewed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation because the plat abuts State right-of-way. 4. The landscape plan and landscape bond for the two lots shall be determined at the time the site plans are reviewed for each of the particular Pots. At the present tire, the City does not have a landscape plan to base the landscape bond on. Or, if the City elects, they could establish a $2,000 landscape bond for each of the two lots with the final plat. 5. All easements shall be dedicated as required by City staff. DCR/jach 71 s YAN99 DOODLE ROAD p• � moi: QTTTfTTf�f ...� g., {� III OH+fH+r H+N-�H-O OIH+�N-IN+I+, • .®�' 1llWlll lllllllWllL --- --- -- -- YANKEE SDUAflE: PHri5E:1r.+.: _V-11A5£r��,..`S;r.: •.., �,,;.;< 11 I ouu..0 of x "OTFFMm i 0 D YANKEE SQUARE o........... i ru........ on........ n.x. FEDERAL LAND COMPANY wur.o .mu. nduou . I. MEND07.. ,1 •1 ' GB Ind• Ind.,. — � � � COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT lild P Ro ll Ind ; ,!.. GB c1 R l I a• _I�i Ind RBD R IV In r 'L r— d. LII i .- NB o LB, -' c I RIII y -0, '::. R -III -. - R -III R_� (�� '-C GOLF • .--R.p-- '. .n nd. � RII LB R-111 - .. a �'� R•.i_. 4 /r. I'vl�• '� r, , v �•�' R•II' ',�'I ,•�` RII '-P RIII �. x,}e10 R -I Ind :..r-'� �ilY, j�j ' Q C . v r. ftR•II• 1.w� O-�:� (�J �R-II R -I e i ...'R -IV �.:�E I eiq+{n � I +.l '1r;,u,•k': r I' �1 ��-III/ R' •lJly ,.,"d '� �l,>, ��`' ,HALL RII \\ R -I RII R -II IN P F: I .. R -II HS �. P i IH 11 r� nr�.; R -II - Q ',• � <� ' I _4 .� '... �/n R-111 Q RII LB 7 N R1 Rill R IU RIII• RIII l��'� ,A'�- RI ili CSC/GB/SLB R -t R -III ;!•-: R -I I i -II R -II �.P,... .. .'•w ii�i,.`i ® R -II, P JB CsC R I LB R I,. /�• __� LB c1% ; R -I P ' I� R -I JJ `, lal R -I J R-1 P; nwl� ' R -II i •l /�� R -II �.5,au r .y ..9, `Q• I' :i;, � � RII _�� - R -I P tZ(. - R -II VALLEYT..,lil _-, � li J• •.L I -73 ^—i MSEMOUN�� n ^s _ 1 Y LI �� r INPQi 40' c a aw.: = PFS � EADOR_3 �° LI _',, PF — .. vir JCIflI r tt ICS ft -4 R-4 SI EY T MINA R D u I�I• L I R -I —_ R-!4 j INPUSiRIA PARK A R_ R-4 I LI o r No ry 3 ac3 A RIDGE P'K A A94cia R-4 I R-4 NB NB A 3R[ -4 ?V- GB LR t _ p_ 4 . r � HE1l`irt . pF 75-3 R-4 A v�. A 4 1 f T LB tro -I I_D_G,VIW p+ ,C , TAf K — ? i — BL A(K yp'S \ Q PGRES ] / ADDITION ---- r R-4 JONN /�L ACKli . — - - RC - ACRES �I ; R -I - _ I 1 HI<_LIS T I _ I i Q�. ; T ) R•4 \�. _ R �� I' �� I _.,PF E —%�—J. R—I I yQs, i-; �,• R�dG`icK�1cH�E, 74 / / K :,tib ,•.�.r-i .(1% ` "' :.PAwK.',=..':`,: P Y n Tlx: ADVISORY PLANNING COPMSSICN FROM: DALE C. RUN=, CITY PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 19, 1982 RE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR BICENTENNIAL 8TH ADDITION As you recall, at the December 22, 1981 Advisory Planning Cammission Meet- ing, the APC tabled the preliminary plat, Bicentennial 8th Addition,. in order to receive a site plan for Lot 1 and Lot 2 to see that the proposed motel and office would fit on the two lots which are being platted. At the present tine, the applicant has submitted a detailed site plan for the proposed office and motel complex. The site plan does not exactly follow the configurations of the plat. However, the overall site plan for the two lots make sense in site planning to design the entire area instead of trying to create two individual parcels. The first thing staff would like to point out is that Lot 1 on the plat contains approximately 89,871 square feet. The site plan for Lot 1 contains approximately 101,600 square feet. Lot 2 contains 44,551 square feet and is shaped like a stove- pipe which provides public access to Washington Drive. The site plan for lot 2 consists of approximately 32,000 square feet. The difference be- tween the square footages of the two lots from the site plans is approx- imately 12,000 square feet. This difference is that the applicant is using part of the northerly 60' of Int 2 to provide parking for the site plan on Lot 1. As stated above, the applicant has submitted a detailed site plan for the two lots. The motel which is located on Lot 1 of the plat is proposed to incorporate all of Lot 1, 89,871 square feet, plus the northerly 60' of Lot 2 which is an additional 12,000 square feet for a total site plan of 101,600 square feet. The proposed motel will consist of a 3 -story build- ing and contain 92 units and have a gross building square footage of 34,000 square feet, or approximately 11,333 square feet per floor. The parking for the facility requires 104 parking spaces. According to the proposed plat, the lot coverage would be 128, but the applicant would be short ap- proximately 11 parking spaces. The site plan which incorporates the nor- therly 60' of Lot 2 provides the additional parking spaces plus provides access to the north end of the parking lot. Therefore, a better circula- tion has been provided for the parking area for the motel complex. The only requirement the applicant cannot meet on the proposed site plan is the 50' setback requirement from the east lot line which abuts I -35E right-of-way. At the present time, the applicant is proposing a 30' set- back, or would require a 20' variance from the setback abutting I -35E. In looking at the elevation for the motel, it appears that the motel will sit approximately 10' higher than the off ramp of I -35E. Therefore, berm- ing or a good landscaping plan could provide the buffer area needed in- stead of the 20' additional setback which is required. Lot 2 on the plat contains approximately 44,400 square feet. The site plan shows approximately 32,700 square feet, or a reduction of approxi- mately 12,000 square feet. The proposed site would consist of a 1 -story office building which would contain 5,000 square feet of gross floor area. -75 CITY OF EAGAN PRELIMINARY PLAT - BICFSI MIAL 8TH ADDITION JANUARY 19, 1982 PAGE 'IUD The lot coverage on the site plan would be approximately 15% and increasing the site plan to conform to the platting of Lot 2, the lot coverage would be reduced to 11%. Both site plan and plat of the proposed building would be under the 20% lot coverage requirement. The proposed parking for the office building would be 29 parking spaces. The site plan indicates 29 parking spaces for the office building even with the reduction of the 12,000 square feet. The applicant meets all ordinance requirements for the proposed office building on Lot 2 with the exception of the 60' of frontage on a public street. Therefore, the applicant has platted the stovepipe lot, or the 60' strip, to Washington Drive to provide proper access to the office building. The last item staff would like to bring to the Advisory Planning Commission's attention is the proposed hotel that is a 3 -story building. In review- ing Ordinance 52, if this planned development is considered a Neighbor- hood Business, than the maximum height requirement in a Neighborhood Busi- ness is 2 stories, or 201. In Ordinance 52, any other commercial category, Limited Business, General Business, Roadside Business, Commmunity Shopping Center, all have a 30' height limitation, or would allow a 3 -story build- ing. Therefore, staff would like to clarify the applicant has submitted a proposal for a 3 -story building and a determination should be made that either a 3 -story building is allowed, or is not allowed, within this plan- ned development district. If approved, the site plan should be subject to the following conditions: 1. All driveway access to Lot 1, Block 2 should be a minimum of 241. 2. A 20' setback variance would be required for the motel from the east property line. However, berming or landscaping could be done in this area to offset this setback requirement. 3. A determination should be made if a variance would have to be granted for the 3 -story motel, or as a part of the planned devel- cpment, the 3 -story building would be an allowable use. 4. A cross easement shall be required in order to provide parking spaces for the motel on Lot 2 or the office building lot. The cross easement should be on the westerly 180' and northerly 60' of Lot 2. 5. The parking areas should contain an asphalt surface and concrete curbing around the perimeter of the parking areas. 6. A detailed landscaping plan shall be approved for each lot and a landscape bond shall be submitted and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. DCR/jach -7(o 1 N S . ITE PLAN S rte FROP"'41 bFFICE e� LOT 2 /SITE DATA LOT 1 BLDG. TYPE HOTEL 3 STORY 83 UNITS I R/}V INE _ 61TE AREA 3.33 ACRES ITA NWT. 101.600 SOFT APPOX. I BITE GREEN AREA 39S BLOG. SITE COVERAGE 111 GROSS BLDG. AREA 54.000 60 FT REQUIRED PARKING 104 SPACES PROVIDED LOT 2 BLDG. TYPE OFFICE - 1 STORY SITE AREA .76 ACRES 32,700 80 FT APPROX. SITE GREEN AREA 16% BLDG. SITE COVERAGE 13.3 % GROSS 81.00. AREA 6000 SO FT NET BLDG. AREA 4360 SO FT REOUIRED PARKING 22 SPACES PROVIDED rrruu r�rrr�� O ;i;•�'IFL=_:Nsi� ?.Hi?•d Aiil'T•G'! PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 1 BICENTENNIAL EIGHTH ADDITION otnlw.:V lru. G4:f,YT�pi., i.i.=✓:: ?tr;Y I •r I I \-ei�., NYrerH .•'NRf'IDOf£'. I flY4I7/r-J...r— '.ueyl- .r,,. I 'nul' II I' AM-ROW •../ •�' �. r.....n,..nr,...iic.<rir4�'- -}''dr w III h I. r- c.l 1, \\ //�•�'.` '>�- LOT d—1i'I IIIA It I' c � I I I � I —+ .`;_;•'r ��•� ! � �,<'.1, � BL�K � �!•, Ie .- � � •;: III .= r ` IN Iti .,. .. __ _ISL 1 ��:�� ,,,��r•�'>!u.,� ,, r ��II:,I� F�'=" .,_. ____L_____ I I I : I_ I ., n �-- I n•,••.$' �/ l� ••`� �• � +`'% , I d! //, %' " •n.� `'1'i i '..� t- [�' 1 Itll � I ao-. e..-t[G[� ��w_.. L_.—__ - - � IIL��"'7�r� /•f/tee � % 1;,�/X % //,/I`� i��.r, I IIS I c.o..+. .� wo-.... IF _ .._. _ —L._.A `"•,�-� -a i � � III ' . / .' � \ ._.I' j d,rwln'e •-1 '' ' I I �:r w.a:.. ma. e.,r...:....�. Y ': 1. i.�1 s.wr �r6�y.I.M ,..J'•' I \I`. I� I I�.' / / ' / I Y' __ r� I. - _. _ .. , - /•I r.,,ii lll� `= __� �� .i..//� II ,� / Tj I- ,:.•. aZ=___L'.r.Tll—_—.i%_---__—_ —�— L.,. il. L' rte Np till i 1 LNN J Ai S."z Fri/ B r.Ls 0 _ y . N CAw Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Seventeen VARIANCE_FOR_JOHN_HENRY_FOSTER_BUILDING B. John Henry Foster Company to Allow an 8' Variance from the 40' Setback Requirement from a Public Street in a Light Industrial District -- The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing at the January 26, 1982 meeting to consider an application submitted by the John Henry Foster Company for an 8' variance from the 40' setback requirement from a public street for a light industrial building. The APC is recommending approval of the variance to the City Council. For additional information on the item, refer to the Planning Intern's report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages _ _ _ through _-' — _ A copy of the minutes on this item will be included in the administrative packet on Monday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the requested variance for John Henry Foster Company. slThomas_Li $ed es ty ministrator 71 0 0 TO: THE ADVISORY PLANNING CCMISSION, C/O DALE RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FRCM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: JANUARY 21, 1982 RE: JOHN HENRY FOSTr'2i BUILDING - VARIANCE REQUEST (IAT 3, BLOCK 4, EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK #3) The Engineering Department has some background that may be beneficial in consideration of this variance request. At the time of platting of Eagandale Center Industrial Park #3, there had not been determined a need for the future Mike Collins Drive at that time. Subsequently, the location of Mike Collins Drive through this 3rd Addition had not been dete=ned. When the Eagandale Center Industrial Park #4 was platted, utilities were installed within this public right-of-way and an easement was acquired from Lot 2, Block 4, 3rd Addition. Subsequently, when Mike Collins Drive was physically constructed through a City contract, it did not follow the alignment of the easement that had been previously acquired for the utilities. The actual alignment of the curb and gutter in relationship to the east property line of Lot 3 (John Henry Foster Building) is located within the shaded portion of the attached site plan. Subsequently, when Jim Donicht of Bales Building Systems acquired a build- ing permit for the construction of this facility, they constructed the footings in accordance with the required 40' setback from the existing east property line without knowledge that an additional street easement would have to be acquired to incorporate the existing alignment of Alike Collins Drive. After reviewing the existing alignment of Mike Collins Drive and determi- ning that an absolute minimum of 7.5 feet of boulevard is necessary to allow for sufficient snow storage and private utilities (telephone, gas, electric, etc.), it requires the dedication of a minimum 9.26 foot public street and utility easement over the easterly line of Lot 3, Block 4, Eagandale Center 3rd Addition. Before this determination had been made, the footings and foundation for the proposed facility had already been constructed. This additional easement requirement eliminated the previous 40' setback and reduced it to a 32 +/- foot setback as referenced on the attached site plan. Subsequently, the builder was informed of his require- ment to proceed with a variance request to the required 40' setback. The builder has agreed to dedicate the necessary street and utility ease- ment to incorporate the existing alignment of P ke Collins Drive. These documents are presently being prepared and processed for the property ow- ner's execution and ultimate recordation at Dakota County. Therefore, the Engineering Department would recommend consideration of approval of this variance request in consideration of receiving the necessary street and utility easements as previously discussed, and also due to the fact that this variance request was through no fault of the developer based on the information that he had available at the time of the construction of his footings and foundations. TAC/jack $ 0 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT LOCATION EXISTING ZONING DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: DATE OF REPORT: REPORTED BY APPLICATION SUBMITTED: 0 JOHN HENRY FOSTER BUILDING - JIM DONICHT PART OF THE NEI -4 OF THE NE; OF SECTION 11 L -I (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) JANUARY 26, 1982 JANUARY 18, 1982 DAVE OSBERG, PLANNING ASSISTANT The .application submitted is for an 8' variance from the 40' setback requirement from a public street for a Light Industrial building. Staff has worked with the applicant in the past on the location of the building. Prior to submittal of the variance application, the applicant thought he was complying with all zoning ordinance requirements. However, it was brought to the applicant's attention that the building was only 32' from Mike Collins Drive, or 8' closer than the zoning ordinance allows. Due to the unique location of the road, staff mistakenly allawed the building to be constructed too close to the road. The applicant is seeking the variance to cmpensate for the error by staff. DMO/jack a M,:i Y I n) 'ST SEWER NI.::. b,.,. '79.80 i– .)M: :Ices C. .. I.lve n•q b4 —NORTH _ NORTHEAST CORp;F LOT L LINE OF ,� im-©u,o. OF LOT 3 '� Iryy e3934 _ M31c r Oi 2� u Q t r 2 -- \ °61 TTG �• 332 x563 (b 6 co 1 IrNll'` POSED' .,BUILDING c)'- ism" .sm" e, - L �. � J I •� f I .6633 462.56 ` •6653 I 0L17,11 7 0<0 929 / 1 s �•• L ihl �A• eS- C ! —9613 t1 1c aE41, �• E - Ix662 r-.. I �. 9>Gi H B64 \ s _ �.. bG19 x ri . PROPOSEDI \ .860.4 y;1.5PARKING LOT .962�9s :1 C\ \' •�1 �1 9�{ x6S9A ` .eF2< 2T � 9531�• 959=--. �_ M, CURB SED e 35;`w36 \ BS7n ` FYI .i \ Fdl fi \ .S56G Z PROPOSED / � ,9c•� 1 \ 15"R.C.P STORM \0o S SEWER w Os yY �10.0 1a3 '\,\ •B'w I - \ SOUTHLINE $e", Y' fJ 4\ \ af•:f sourllE; E%2 OF LOT 45Yti EXISTING SIORM SEWERCC IL •eoo ^ ,wx �__' row m>.tL�.f` ( 1• b * j b� i, ,I, , .. � � I '•x,90 � , ( 7 �, 1 MM .•� T. �ry, 11 r�' Y: •1 n�5� � DIY e]'�� f nee 'rnn _—' AA »Jeu' ♦ \ rD '_b_]C.\' �»nROAD .. - _ ., w .•i: �, � . •� �. _ �' i _ syr - � .r.. We•� I � :. zip y • � D ♦ ne L _ I � � 1 y _ ',e�)i ieOlO .. ) HTS � C .]']e ! _�_..'�� '• .. i POND ,'S%�s ze' ` - - '�kY , 4 3.i a t]- ts• Ji'--_\� y i' fie' .yr .— .. s 1 t t I Jlk 24 22 % QpVN 01 CIS j •' ]• J , '/ A-_ •J 20 4D 111Ae.) - rte.. - — -- I. j• .[� R-111 B VALLEY :"D A -AR U N GB RB Ind. Z= COMMERCIAL :Zjrl . ........ P, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Ind a.r R lot:: R11 Ind.. R-11 G 8 RE Ind. R&D-: R-111 RA Ind.. 1 nR LBj r 01 —R-111 E4 RF -19 - '-find. R-11 R -'I'l -czz: GOLF —R 11 p �U R -I R-11 RE' Rill R I I Ind r7"". —ZN. P R-1 jo HALL INC N`7 R 11 R-11 R RIj_ R-111 n is 1 P R-11 '-sit "R LB h, !11 p FR .. 7 R -1b NB 7. 69 R-111 ,X/IRB� 7 R-111 R-1 CSC./GB/LB R-111 RL R -I C -E' ...... P 2 _..777R-1111 R-11 P csC o • 74-0 7 11 �\ gra •, LEX 1 fi0 I D RSC C F ;. LII R-4 GB LI LONE OAK ROAD A }: A iFilhA rr\ Ll AUDITOR'sA -- GB Rsue - ` - ;.. �19iPC'd� G B a Rnio 3 1 R-1 .� F c R L I PLnRIAL PA, .a I s--"j tr.�L 74- - � L I M I R- R-2 Gbp. R-3 P LB NiI�iL ScoT�-4 LI' HILL > / LI L1 WE960TT / P D CARRIAGE / HILLS 76-1 GOLF - C PIE�' FSE GARDEN L TS \ LPA . 1v�..a-+- w%r+ti•.�x- ww..a Y _ _ a_ .. .. % :. i•'_ _r....---, .a�..a.•_ Ss. _....e+.aG(a' .. ._..y..a+P .. `, .jSy •+P ^C 'Ff^ µ .r:. MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JANUARY 29, 1982 SUBJECT: INFORMATIONAL Fire Department At the direction of the City Council when meeting with the Relief Association during the fall of 1981, a draft procedural manual has been prepared that outlines the constitution, bylaws and procedures and policies taken from minutes for operation of the Eagan Volunteer Fire Department. A copy is enclosed for your review. The City Administrator has asked the Fire Chief to review the policies and procedures as drafted and provide any changes so a final draft can be prepared, adopted and used as a guideline of operations by the Fire Department. The City Administrator met with Gus Welter, secretary of the Minnesota Volunteer Firemen's Association, Roger Katzenmaier, the City's auditor, Fire Chief Childers and John Flood and Darrell Haines of the Relief Associa- tion Pension Committee on Thursday, January 28, 1982. The purpose of the meeting was to continue discussions on tax consequences of various pension funds and, more importantly, to explore pension options available to the City and Fire Department to provide a pension fund for the volunteer firemen. The City Administrator feels the meeting was successful in that both Mr. Welter and Mr. Katzenmaier were directed to prepare a memorandum that outlines tax consequences and the various plans in detail and to further prepare for a work session between the City Council and Relief Association within the next two to three weeks. Such a work session would not be regarded as negotiations or as a time to make decisions on a pension program for the Fire Department. This first work session would be a fact finding session at which time Mr. Welter and Mr. Katzenmaier would be present to share in the information and answer questions from the City Council and volunteer fire fighters. Information will be sent out in advance of the meeting so questions can be drafted by everyone concerned. After the work session is held, a decision could then be made at a later date by the City Council. Again, I felt this meeting was beneficial and brought the City and fire fighters closer to an understanding of all the facts per- taining to further discussion on the pension matter. Planning Commission Officers Chuck Hall was elected chairman; Lloyd Krob, vice chairman; and Doris Wilkins, secretary as officers of the Advisory Planning Commission for 1982. The height subcommittee appointments were Chuck Hall and Doris Wilkins. The Cable Television Subcommittee representative was Lloyd Krob and the Assessment Committee representative was David Bohne. 0 0 Informative Memo January 29, 1982 Page Two History Committee The City Administrator, at the request of the City Council, did notice Mr. Frank Dembroski that the City Council would like an update on the history and, more importantly, assurance that the history will be completed and published prior to the opening of the library facility which may occur late this fall. Mr. Dembroski did respond to a letter from the City Administra- tor and the City Administrator, after reviewing the amount of data that has been prepared by Mr. Dembroski, is quite confident that the history will be completed and published in accordance with the City Council's desires. The history committee is meeting on Tuesday, January 2, 1982, in the City Administrator's office and will be making a report to the full City Council at the first meeting in March, March 2, 1982. Paratransit Enclosed on pages Tcf through `l0 is a copy of the letter the City Administrator sent to the project manager of the paratransit study with the Metropolitan Council. Betty Schaumberg delivered the letter prior to her meeting with Mr. Diaz and the rest of the paratransit committee. Mrs. Schaumberg also indicated that a film on paratransit is available for review by the City Council. The film would take approximately ten to fifteen minutes. If members of the City Council would like to see the film, the City Administrator will arrange for its viewing in conjunction with a special meeting sometime during the month of February. Virginia Harrington A letter was sent to the Mayor and City Councilmembers from Virginia Har- rington who resides at 1420 Skyline Road that reads as follows: "I wish to compliment the snow removal crew of Eagan for the fine job done on Wednesday, January 20th. The record breaking snowfall was handled better than any other time I can remember in the 30 years I've lived in Eagan. It was a pleasing surprise to find Skyline Road plowed by 4:00 when 1 returned from work. Please extend my satis- faction and praise to the persons on that department. Sincerely, Virginia Harrington" People's Natural Gas Company Enclosed on page 71 is a letter that serves as notification of a rate increase for natural gas service to the general domestic and commercial customers. I believe that most of you have received your gas bills and you will find that this rate is in effect on the current billing. Apparently, and according to Mr. Lee of People's Natural Gas, the customers living in Eagan will receive credit sometime in the near future for the first rate increase that was placed into effect. Apparently, the entire amount was not approved by the Public Service Commission. HE Informative Memo January 29, 1982 Page Three Engineering Information - Teleprompter The City will have its consulting attorney draft a letter to Teleprompter authorizing that cable company to gather information for the purpose of conducting an engineering study of the City of Eagan at no cost or obliga- tion to the City of Eagan. Work Program Memo The City Administrator is drafting a work program memo that includes a time table for the City Hall, addresses modifications to the 1982 budget and several other issues that will need to be addressed by the City Council in the near future. This memorandum will be available in eight to ten days. ityvAdministrator a • O BEA BLOMOUIST MAYOR 7MOMp5 HEDGES •'1 CITY ADMIRISTRATOR THOMAS EGAN CITY OF EAGAN EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE CITY CLERK JAMES A. SMITH JERRYTHOMASACHT THEODORE WACHTER ""_x:57195 PILOT KNOB ROAD ' K COUNCIL MEMBERS-P.O; BOX ]1199 - EAGAN, MINNESOTA January 19, 1982 _+r PHONE 454-8100 y NATALIO DIAZ PROJECT MANAGER METROPOLITAN COUNCIL .. 300 METRO SQUARE BUILDING 7TH & ROBERT STS ST PAUL MN 55101 ." Dear Mr. Diaz: I am writing this letter on behalf of the Eagan City Council to request specific information regarding the goals, objectives and status of the pro- posed paratransit system. According to our records, a preliminary applica- tion that was made by the Metropolitan Council on behalf of the Cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville and Eagan in early 1978 read as follows, "to demonstrate a paratransit system that would serve the communities of Apple Valley, Burnsville and Eagan which would provide local circulation needs and provide a collection and distribution system for regular route transit, in a manner consistent with the paratransit development guide plan." This study was later expanded to include the Cities of Lakeville, Rosemount and Savage. The objectives of the study further indicate that the para - transit project was to: Improve accessibility to regular route transit; 2. Determine what regular route transit is unable to provide that could be provided through paratransit; 3. Determine if the paratransit system would be utilized by drivers and passengers and at what price the service would be used. The original project description suggested van service for shopping and major employment centers throughout the six cities. In addition, the para - transit proposal was intended to compliment the existing MTC regular route system. It is the City of Eagan's understanding that the paratransit study will be completed by the consulting firm of Cambridge Systematics, hired by the Metropolitan Council. The City of Eagan is concerned that many of the objectives and the project description as originally proposed for a para - transit study have been changed during the past two years. Apparently, a bus service is now under consideration that would act as an alternative to the MTC bus service. The City of Eagan realizes legislation exists that allows this alternative; however, a full fledged bus service was never con- sidered as an alternative. sq THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. 4 ! . • I City of Eagan/Paratransit January 19, 19882 Page Two The City of Eagan has several concerns it would like to have addressed before the paratransit study proceeds too much further: 1. What exactly are the goals and objectives of the paratransit study? 2. What are the various alternatives for financing the paratransit system? 3. How will ,transportation be provided to those individuals who need to get to and from the Minneapolis and St. Paul areas? 4. What happens if one of the six cities wants to opt out of the para - transit system? 5. Does the paratransit sutdy/system have any priorities? If so, what are they? The City of Eagan is very concerned that the paratransit study has expanded into more than originally planned without adequate communication between the Metropolitan Council and the six communities. By addressing the concerns I noted previously, I feel the Eagan City Council would have a better understanding of what is happening with paratransit. Sincerely, (�Vjt"�C4 " Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator TLH/hnd cc: Betty Schaumberg Ed Brunkhorst d Peoples Natural Gas Company January 22, 1982 To The Honorable Mayor and City Council Eagan 55122 Attention: City Clerk This letter will serve as notification of a rate increase for natural gas service to the general domestic and commercial customers in your community effective with bills rendered on and after January 19, 1982. This rate increase reflects the increased gas costs from our wholesale supplier, Northern Natural Gas Company, based on its annual purchase gas adjustment filing which was effective December 27, 1981. Pursuant to the Cost of Gas Adjustment Provision (Original Sheet No. 74) of our Tariff on file with the Minnesota Public Service Commission, Peoples will place into effect the rate increase of $.06951 per hundred cubic feet of gas to reflect the change in wholesale cost. All general service customers will be individually notified of this rate increase by a billing insert that will be included with customer bills rendered at the increased rate. If any portion of the above filed increase is changed by Federal Power Commission Order, we will notify you of corresponding adjustments in our rate for your community. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact our local office or the undersigned. Sincerely, PEOPLES NATURAL GAS COMPANY District Manager C? I AGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL FEBRUARY 2, 1982 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 — ROLL CALL` & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:33 — ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES \ III. 6:34 — TOOTSIE ROLL PROCLAMATION — KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS Q• 2 -IV. 6:37 — RECOGNITION OF FORMER APC CHAIRMAN JOE HARRISON e• V. 6:45 — DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS Q•?'A. Fire Department e.2 C. Park Department Q,7.B. Police Department 'j D. Public Works Department Q' VI. 6:55 - CONSENT ITEMS (One Motion Approves All Items) i P.7 A. Canterbury Forest Addition, City Acceptance of Streets & Utilities B. MnDOT Plans & Specifications Approval, Tree Transplanting (I -35E) i 6 C. Contract 81-8, Change Order #2 (St. Francis Wood, etc., Streets) D. Approve MnDOT Cost Participation Agreement #60808, Traffic Signal e (County Road 26 & T.H. 55) VII. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS p,7 A. Project #351 - Country Home Heights Storm Sewer rt\ B. Project #259 — Final Reassessment. Hearing (Vienna Woods Streets) C. Project #246 & #257 — Continued Reassessment Hearing (Mr. & Mrs. e John Ahnert, 4470 Oak Chase Way, & Thomas A. Buckman, 1405 Waldr.id St.) TSD. Alexander Road Reassessment Hearting (Continued) VIII. OLD BUSINESS p 21e A. Edmund B. Dunn of Blackhawk Park Associates for Rezoning from \ A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development District) to Include Limited Business and Townhouse and Condominium Development and for Preliminary Plat Approval of Knob Hill of Eagan, Consisting of Approximately 40 Acres Located in Part of the SE'g of the SE`y 3 9of Section 21 e• B. Amusement Device Application - Coachman Oaks Apartments Q AIZ C. Proposed Rate Increase for Urban Planning & Design (Planning Consultants) D. Steven J. Flanagan for Preliminary Plat Approval, Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition, Located in the SW'y.of the SE'y of Section 30 0.1-.1 ....• City Council Agenda February 2, 1982 Page Two IX. INEW BUSINESS A. Federal Land Co. for a Preliminary Plat (Bicentennial 8th Addition) 1 Consisting of Approximately 3 Acres of Property Located in OUtlot B, Bicentennial 7th Addition in Section 16 7 B. John Henry Foster Company to Allow an 8' Variance from the 40' P Setback Requirement from a Public Street in a Light Industrial District Located on Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6, Block 4, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #3, Section 11 X. ADDITIONAL ITEMS XI. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) XII. ADJOURNMENT 0 9 MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JANUARY 29, 1982 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of the January 12, 1982 special City Council minutes, the January 19, 1982 regular City Council minutes and the February 25 1982 City Council agenda, the following items are in order. for consideration: TOOTSTE ROLL o PROCL'AMATiIONI The City has been asked by the local chapter of the Knights of Columbus to proclaim April 30 through May 2 as Tootsie Roll Days. The chairman of the Tootsie Roll Drive will be present to receive the proclamation from Mayor Blomquist. The proclamation reads as follows: Whereas, the Minnesota State Council of the Knights of Columbus is conducting its second annual Tootsie.Roll' Drive, and Whereas, the Eagan Council of the Knights of Columbus is conducting the drive in our area, and Whereas, the proceeds from this Tootsie Drive will be disbursed statewide and in accord with an approved list of recipients to help 'retarded citizens, Now, therefore, I, Bea Blomquist, Mayor of the City of Eagan, do hereby proclaim April 30 through.May 2.,_1982: "Tootsie Roll Days" in the City of Eagan and urge all citizens to support this program. There is no action required on this matter. 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Two RECOGNITiIONr OF; FORMER' APC:..CHASRMAN'.JOEi HARRISON Mayor Blomquist is planning to present a key to the City to Mr. Joe Harrison who has served many years as a member and chairman of the Advisory Planning Commission. In addition to the key, a certificate will be presented which will provide the years of service he has contributed to our community. There is no action required on this matter. DEPARTMENT-IHEAD,BUSINESSI. FIRE_DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department -- There are no items for the Fire Department at this time. POLICE_DEPARTMENT B. Police Department -- There are no items for the Police Depart- ment at this time. PARK.DEPARTMENT C. Park Department -- The Advisory Parks & Recreation Committee is continuing to review names of parks which have yet to be offi- cially named. Currently, the City has only seven (7) parks which have received official designation through naming. At the December 10, 1981 Advisory Park & Recreation Committee meeting, the committee took action to recommend to the City Council that River Hills 9 Park be officially named River Hills Park East. This is suggested name from the homeowner's association and is reflected on a pre- viously built park sign. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Parks & Recreation Committee to name the park in the River Hills 9th Addition, "River Hills Park East". Z 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Three 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT A. Public Works Department --- Slaters Road Trunk Water - Main Extension (Winkler/Jackson Addition) -- Enclosed on page + you will find a schematic diagram showing the existing, in p ac—e 12" trunk water main that was constructed under the Cedar Avenue Freeway in 1980. It also shows the existing 12" trunk water main constructed within Slaters Road as a part of the upgrading of Slaters Road frontage road. In 1981, the Winkler/Jackson Addi- tion platted the property adjacent to Slaters Road for a proposed mixture of multiple residential and commercial properties. Sub- sequently, under Contract 81-15 (Project 344), a sanitary sewer lateral was constructed from the Cedar Avenue Freeway to Slaters Road and extended northerly to service this proposed subdivision. After reviewing the trunk water main layout for the southwestern corner of the City and taking into consideration the future 4.0 M.G. water reservoir to be constructed by Safari Estates, this trunk water main connection should be constructed in the near future. This water main construction would be the responsibility of the trunk water utility fund as all area benefiting from this connection has been been assessed for its trunk area water. There- fore, the City solicited from the estimates from the various con- tractors that have open contracts with the City of Eagan to perform this connection. The engineer's estimate to perform this work was approximately $17,800. The contractor performing the sanitary sewer construction under Contract 81-14 in the near vicinity did not submit the low quotation in spite of the fact of his present location of construction equipment. The City did receive a very favorable quote of $14,721 from Erickson Construction Company to perform this work (17.3% under estimate). The staff feels that this would economically be the most feasible time to perform this future trunk water main construction prior to completion of the restoration work associated with the sanitary sewer under Contract 81-14 and in lieu of the favorable quotation received from Erickson Construction Company. Staff is presenting this information to the City Council in order to receive direction as to whether they should proceed with this work at this time by way of a change order to an existing contract with Erickson Construction Company or if this work should be added to a future construction project and solicited through formal bid requests. If added to a future project, the Public Works Director does not believe that a similar favorable quotation could be obtained and the City would not have the advantage of performing this work prior to restoration of the property under the present contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To authorize the prepara- tion of a change order to Contract 81-13 for the connection of a trunk water main to Slaters Road or defer construction until a future contract. 3 Erickson Construction Co. $14,871.00 Richard Knutson, Inc. 18,995.60 Northdale Construction Co. 19,000.00 Barbarossa b Sons, Inc. 19,784.00 Parrott Construction, Inc. 20,878.60 I Engineer's Estimate $17,790.00 Y RD. 3 638 / I.. -WET TAP BURIED UJI CA' w 676 0. U- WET TAP BURIED...-- z WET P 637 �'r. a o o .. U 677' W o�`— .... o W 4z ' �NANC ! a' ER �E' - 3 3 64 �IP14 12 L. tee" 636 77 - - -'YlB T. \ 632 _.. 644' 635 \ -- -- - Y _j o '64 xI I 770 634. ' KING 633 rte, I (7619) QV� - . SEE SMT 1 l7 iJJlll Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Four • •M There are four (3) 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 item in further detail, that item should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Additional Items unless the discussion required is brief. CANTERBURY FOREST ADDITION - ACCEPTANCE OF STREETS & UTILITIES A. Canterbury Forest Addition, City Acceptance of Streets & Utilities -- The City has received verification from the consulting engineering firm that the utilities and streets constructed under private contract for the Canterbury Forest Addition was performed in compliance with the City approved plans and specifications. The utilities and streets were inspected, tested and accepted by City staff personnel. There are a few minor corrective items to structures and a final cleaning of sanitary and storm sewer lines that will be performed by the developer in early spring of 1982. Therefore, based upon information received pertaining to these improvements, staff is recommending that the City Council consider formal acceptance of these streets and utilities for perpetual City maintenance subject to the standard one year warranty period as required under the development agreement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To accept all public streets and utilities constructed within the Canterbury Forest Addition for perpetual maintenance subject to remaining corrective work being performed prior to May 15, 1982 and a one year warranty maintenance period from date of formal acceptance. -5- 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Five MnDOT PLANS - TREES (I -35E) B. MnDOT Plan and Specification Approval, Tree Transplanting (I -35E) -- MnDOT has submitted detailed plans and specifications for formal City approval pertaining to the relocation of existing trees within interstate right of way for I -35E at Lone Oak Road. These trees will be transplanted to I -35E right of way at its inter- section with T. H. 110 in Mendota Heights. This work is being performed to salvage existing landscaping prior to interstate con- struction and to relocate it to completed interstate sections that need additional landscaping. Detailed landscaping associated with the new construction of I -35E within the City of Eagan will be performed when that section of freeway is constructed within the next few years. Because the completion of the interstate funding program is rapidly approaching and there are concerns regarding the ability to complete I -35E within this time frame, staff would recommend that a condition be placed on this approval that, if this section of I -35E is not constructed, MnDOT be required to replace all landscaping removed under this contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To pass a resolution approving detailed plans and specifications for tree transplanting at Lone Oak Road and I -35E under state project 1982-82 (35E = 390) and 1985-79 (494 = 393) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said resolution. CONTRACT 81-8 C. Contract 81-8, Change Order #2 (St. Francis Wood, etc., Streets) -- Contract 81-8 provided for the construction of streets within the St. Francis Wood 2nd Addition under Project 307B and Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition under Project 329B. This change order consists of two parts: Part A: Required additional construction work to correct unstable subgrade conditions in the St. Francis Wood 2nd Addition. (Add $3,577.14) Part B: Provides for the repair of bituminous surfacing that was damaged by development construction traffic within the Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition during the progression of of this contract. This work is the responsibility of the development. (Add $2,119.70) All costs associated with this change order will either be assessed as a part of final construction costs or billed directly to the developer of the respective subdivision for payment in full. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve/deny Contract 81-8, Change Order #2 to MacNamara Vivant Contracting Co. in the amount of an additional $5,696.84. R Agenda Informatior+emo • January 29, 1982 Page Six MnDOT COST PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT -.TRAFFIC SIGNAL D. Approve MnDOT Cost Participation Agreement #60808, Traffic Signal (County Road 26 & T.H. 55) -- The City has received a copy of the cost participation agreement from MnDOT to be approved by the City of Eagan pertaining to cost participation for the installa- tion of a traffic signal at the intersection of Lone Oak Road and T. H. 55. Present county policy requires City cost participation and 50% of the county's share. These costs were estimated in Project 353 which was presented to the Council at the January 19 Council meeting. However, cost estimate under Project 353. was $6,440 for Eagan's share. This has been revised down to $5,360 under this cost participation agreement and actual cost to the City will be based on actual construction costs. This cost partici- pation agreement is in accordance with present City policy per- taining to agreements with the City and MnDOT. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To pass a resolution approving MnDOT cost participation agreement #60808 for the instal- lation of a traffic signal at Lone Oak Road and T. H. 55 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute said agreement. PROJECT 351 - COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS STORM SEWER A. Project 351, Country Home Heights Storm Sewer -- In response to a petition received from several property owners within the Country Home Heights Subdivision, the City Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility report which was presented to the Council at their meeting on January 5, 1982 with a public hearing scheduled for February 2, 1982. As the Council may recall, there was discus- sion pertaining to this proposed project at the January 5 meeting pertaining to the assessments associated with the five lots that comprise the Country Home Heights Neighborhood Park. Also, at that time, there was discussion relating to previous lateral storm sewer assessments associated with lots adjacent to Burnside Avenue within Block 7. Extensive research of this 1970 assessment project revealed that these lots were assessed for trunk storm sewer and not laterals, although a small lateral was installed when this section of Burnside Avenue was approved to City standards. In addition, there was also discussion pertaining to future storm sewer requirements on the southeastern corner of Country Home Heights Addition on Egan Avenue just north of Lone Oak Road. Exten- sive research revealed that this previously proposed future storm sewer construction was, in fact, installed when that section of Lone Oak Road just east of Pilot Knob Road was improved with con- crete curb and gutter in 1970. There were no assessment records for the storm sewer installation because it was performed under a private agreement between the county and the property owners in consideration for acquisition of right of way to relocate the intersection of Egan Avenue with Lone Oak Road to provide for a safer right angle "T" intersection. 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Seven While Project 351 provides for lateral storm sewer improvements within the Country Home Heights Subdivision, Project 177 has a pending assessment against the five City owned lots comprising the Country Home Heights Neighborhood Park. Therefore, this report has been revised to spread both the lateral assessments under 351 together with the trunk area storm sewer assessments under Project 177 associated with Country Home Heights Neighborhood Park equitably over all 82 lots located within the Country Home Heights Subdivision area in accordance with existing City policy for special assessments against neighborhood parks. Therefore, the report has been revised from the one used for discussion at the January 15, 1982 Council meeting. The Council will note that the proposed assessment roll associated with Project 351 incorporates the information from the pending assessments associated with Project 177 for the storm sewer installed under Pilot Knob Road. This was done so that all proposed and pending assessments associated with storm sewer against the lots in the Country Home Heights area could be discussed at the public hearing on February 2, 1982. A copy of the feasibility report is enclosed on pages through 20 . It should also be noted that the storm sewer lat6rai extension petitioned for was only for storm sewer to the low point on Egan Avenue on the west side of the park property. The staff expanded. this petition to incorporate all the storm sewer that is ultimately anticipated for the Country Home Heights Addition so that if this project is approved, no future storm sewer will be required to be assessed against any of the properties. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing for Project 351 and approve/deny the installation of lateral storm sewer for the Country Home Heights park area. F&NIsrm REPORT Cell COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT -NO, 351- FOR EAGAN, MINNESOTA 1981 BR 8t Pam4 M&oow"& 6 / I /sor4�.�ieoo, Rode�rc, f�%!z & ri%iocic�,ei, J,cc. o 2335 ?U. 9...A .Vpaa v 36 $L. /)..d, hf:...r.l. 55„3 PA...; 612.636-4600 November 25, 1981 Up 19$6 — U1 — 1981 nniversary Honorable Mayor & Council City of Eagan c`>� 3795 Pilot Knob Road vv00 Eagan, Mn. 55122 Re: Country Home Heights Storm Sewer Improvement Proect No. 351 Our File No. 49245 Revised January 18, 1982 Dear Mayor & Council: IJRn G..1.nr;reaa. Y.E. Rebar IV. Racer, P.E. 1rarFh C. Anderlik. P.L. IlnWlerd A. Lemberg. P.E Ru wrd G. Turrrtr. P.E. Jemn C. Olsaa. P.E. 1:Iron R. Ca.k. P.E. Kroh A. Garden. P.E. Therms E. Hnyrs. P.E. Richard IV. Faster. P.E. Robert G. Srhunirhr, P.E. H.,r ht L. Serrata, P.E. OmmW C. Rnrgardr. P.E. Jerry A. Baurdan. P.E. ,klark A. Haman. P.E. Charles A. Erickson Leo A1. Paw,lsky Isarlan A/. Olsaa 1).Wd E. Ohne Transmitted herewith is our report for Country Home Heights Storm Sewer Im- provement Project No. 351. This report covers storm sewer construction along Egan Avenue from Pilot Knob Road to Country Home Heights Park. We will be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested parties at a mutually convenient time to review this report. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH:li I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am 'a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the tate of Minnesota. Mark A. Hanson Date: U6? - 7- Reg. No. 14260 Approved by omas A. Colbert Director of Public Works Date / — oZ J --fat 7407a /0 9 COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of storm sewer to provide drainage from the low point on Egan Avenue and Country Home Heights Park. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The project is feasible and is in accordance with the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan for the City of Eagan. The project as outlined herein can best be carried out as one contract. DISCUSSION: A. Storm Sewer: A 15 inch storm sewer is proposed to be constructed adjacent to Egan Avenue to its low point at Country Home Heights Park. The storm sewer will continue to the east through the park to the low point at Beam Lane. The 15 inch storm sewer will connect to an existing 15 inch storm sewer stubbed beneath County Road 31 (Pilot Knob Road). The storm sewer stub was construc- ted as part of County Road 31 Street and Storm Sewer Improvements by Dakota County. EASEMENT: It is proposed to acquire a permanent utility easement from Lot 4, Block 5 Country Home Heights (Property Owner, Joe Christenson) to eliminate removal of bituminoussurface and concrete curb and gutter constructed as part of County Road 31 Street and Storm Sewer Improvements. It is anticipated this easement will be acquired at no cost. AREA TO BE INCLUDED: ASSESSMENT AREA Country Home Heights Block 1; Lots 1-5 Block 2; Lots 1-9 Block 3; Lots 1-8 Block 4; Lots 1-3 Block 5; Lots 1, 3-16 Block 6; Lots 3-8 Block 7; Lots 1-14 Block 8; Lots 1-7, 9, 11 Block 9; Lots 1-9 S.W. 1/4 Section 3 Parcel 010-51 Parcel 020-51 Parcel 030-51 Parcel 010-50 Page 1. 7407a �� CONSTRUCTION AREA Country Home Heights Lot 4, Block 5 Country Home Heights Park 0 �1 COST ESTIMATE: A detailed cost estimate is presented in Appendix A at the back of this report. The total estimated project cost is $32,680 for the storm sewer from Pilot Knob Road to Country Home Heights Park. The total estimated costs include contingencies and all related overhead. Overhead costs are estimated at 27% and include legal, engineering, administration and bond interest. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments for storm sewer are proposed to be levied against the benefited property based on the present Special Assessment Policy Guide. This policy guide provides for assessments for improvements to local neighborhood parkland to be spread against the adjacent properties within the subdivision benefiting from the park. It is proposed to assess the total cost for lateral storm sewer as part of this project ($32,680) to only those lots within the immediate drainage area which is 40 lots as outlined on the attached drawing. This includes 5 lots within the City Park. The total estimated assessment is, therefore, $817/lot ($32,680 + 40 lots) which includes the 5 lots within Country Home Heights Park. The five city lots comprising this neighborhood park are responsible for $4,085 of this total ($817/lot x 5 lots) for lateral storm sewer. The total pending assessment for Trunk Storm Sewer against these 5 public lots under Project 177 is $2,475 (5 x $495). It is then proposed to assess this $6,560 ($4,055 + $2,475) for Lateral and trunk storm sewer evenly amongst each of the 82 lots and parcels benefiting from this neighborhood park which repre— sents a cost of $80/lot ($50 lateral + $30 trunk). A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this report deline— ating these costs. Final assessment rates for Project 351 lateral storm sewer will be determined from final construction costs and assessed as discussed to the benefited property. The pending lateral and trunk assessments for Project 177 will remain unchanged at the final assessment hearing. Included as part of the preliminary assessment roll is the proposed trunk and lateral pending assessement for Project 177 County Road 31 Street and Storm Page 2. 7407a 12 0 0 Sewer Improvements. This information was included so that a comprehensive assessment (proposed and pending) roll would be available for discussion at this report's public hearing. A pending assessment for trunk area storm sewer presently exists for the complete subdivision area_ as part of County Road 31 Street and Storm Sewer Im— provements, Project No. 177, excepting those lots within Block 7 adjacent to Burnside Avenue which were previously assessed for trunk storm sewer aT part of Project No. 28 in 1970. REVENUE SOURCES: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows: STORM SEWER: Trunk Fund Project Cost Revenue Balance Lateral $32,680 Lateral Assessment $32,680 TOTAL .............. $32,680 $32,680 — 0 — No revenue is required from the trunk fund to finance this project. PROJECT SCHEDULE Present Feasibility Report Public Hearing Approve Plans & Specifications Open Bids/Award Contract Construction Completion Assessment Hearing First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes 7407a Page 3. 13 January 5, 1982 February, 1982 Spring, 1982 Spring, 1982 Summer, 1982 September, 1982 May, 1983 APPENDIX A COST ESTIMATE COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 351 I. COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS PARR STORM SEWER 870 Lin. ft. 15" R.C.P. Storm Sewer @ $20.00/lin.ft. 1 Each Standard manhole w/casting @ $900.00/each 4 Each Standard CB MH w/beehive cstg. @ $800.00/each 100 Ton Class 5 aggregate base @ $6.00/ton LUMP SUM Clear and grub trees @ $200.00/lump sum 400 Sq.yds. Sod w/topsoil @ $3.00/sq.yd. 1.0 Acre Seed w/topsoil @ $1,000.00/acre Total Estimated Construction +5% Contingency +27% Legal, Engrng., Admin. b Bond Interest TOTALSTORM SEWER ................................. Page 4. 7407a 4 1 $17,400 900 3,200 600 200 1,200 1,000 $24,500 1,230 $25,730 6,950 $32,680 COUNTRY HOME HEI(MTS ..� a n•j&§uTiy 1,i X:!1111111 lies••�� Page 5 LEGAL PROD. 351 LATERAL STORM SEWER PRORATED SHARE FORTOTAL NEIGHBORHOOD PARK STORM SEWER ASSES -%V' " PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGIi- BORHOOD 'PARK+C61 PROJECT 177 PENDING IAT- ERAL STORM SETAT. PROJECT 177 PENDING TRUNK " STORM. "SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT 351 AN) 177 Blk 1, Lot 1 - Lateral #351/Trunk 177' Storm Sewer ' (314/sa. ft.) (3C/s .ft.) S644.30 $50 $30 $80 - $564.30 Lot 2 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 5 - 50 30 80 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Blk 2, Lot 1 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 5 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 6 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 7 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 8 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 9 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Blk 3, Lot 1 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 COUNTRY HOME BELCAiTS • � � u rS. a. W74Y :u �:�! ID.M LEGAL PROD, 351 LATKRAL STORM SEWER PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK STORM SEWER ASSESSMT' TOTAL PRORATED - SHARE FOR NEIGH- BORHOOD PARK +001 -PROTECT 177 PENDING LAT- ERAL STORM SEW. PROJECT 177 PENDING TRUNK :''STORM 'SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT 351 AM 177 Blk 3, Lot 5 - teral #351/Tr uk 177' ' Storm Sewer - (3C/sq. ft.) (3C/s .ft.) 575.00 50 30 80 - 495.00 Lot 6 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 7 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 S Lot 8 - 50 30 80 - 564.30 644.30 Blk 4, Lot 1 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80 L- 495.00 575.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Blk 5, Lot 1 - 50 30 80 - 495.00 575.00 Lot 2 - Road righ -of-way - - - - Lot 3 - 50 30 80 514.80 514.80 1,109.60 Lot 4 817,00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 6 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Tot 7 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 8 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 9 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 10 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 _Lot 11 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS Page 7 LEGAL PROJ. 351 LATERAL STORM SEWER PRORA'T'ED SHARE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK STORM SHIER ASSESSMT ' TOTAL PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGH- BORHOOD 'PARK +C01 I PROJECT 177 PENDING IAT- ERAL STORM SEAT. PROJECT 177 PENDING TRUNK ' : " ' STORM SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT 351 AM 177 Blk 5, Lot 12 817.00 Lateral #351/Trunk 177 Storm Sewer (3C/sa. ft.) (3C/s .ft.) 1,461.30 50 30 897.00 - 564.30 Lot. 13 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 17,392.00 Lot 14 - 50 30 80 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 15 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 16 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1;392.00 Blk 6, Lot 1 City park - - - - - _ Lot 2 City nark - - - - - - Lot 3 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 4 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 -. 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 6 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 • Lot 7 - 50 30 80. - 495.00 575.00 Lot 8 - 50 30 80. - 495.00 575.00 Blk 7, Lot 1 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80. - * 80.00 Lot 3 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80. - * 80.00 Tot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 *previ ly assessed under Pro? 28 70 COUNTRY HCME HEIG RTS IsMol"ITu116/_unlE 17� Page 8 LEGAL PROJ. 351 LATERAL STORM SEWER PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGBORHOOD PARK STORM SEWER'ASSESSMT' TOTAL PRORATED SHARE. FOR NEIGH- BORHOOD'PARK+Col 1 PROJECT 177 PENDING IAT- ERAL'STORM SEW. PRD= 177 PENDING TRUNK 'S'TORM SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT 351 AM 177 B1k 7f Lot 6 - Lateral #351/Trunk-177 Storm Sewer (3C/sa. ft.) (3t/s .ft.) 80.00 50 30 80 - * Int 7 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 8 - 50 30 80. - * 80.00 Lot 9 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 10 - 50 30 80.00 - * 80.00 Lot 11 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 12 - 50 30 80.00 - * 80.00 eq Lot 13 - 50 30 80.00 - * 80.00 Lot 14 - 50 30 80.00 - * 80.00 Blk 8, Lot 1 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 3 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 4 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Int 6 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 7 817:00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 8 City park - - - - - - Lot 9 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 508.85 1,406.85 *p viously ass sed under P 7ect COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS �!k4lnlbllklkla.� i� u • o Page 9 PRAT. 351 LATERAL STORM SEWER PRORATED SHARE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK STCWl SMER ASSESSMT' TOTAL PRORATED - SHARE FOR NEIGH- BORHOOD'PARK+C01 - PROJECT 177 PENDING LAT- ERALL-STORM SERI. PRaTBCP 177 PENDING TRUNK :" STORM SEWER TOTAL ASSESSMENT PRaTECT 351 Am 177 d8,T-,ot City park Lateral #351/ rook 177 Storm Sewer (3C/sa. ft.) (3fi/scr.ft.) - - - - - - 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,39:00 City park - - - - - - • Blk 9,Lot 1 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 2 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 - 1,070.00 Lot 3 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 Lot 4 817.00 50 30 897.00 _ - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 5 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 6 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 7 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 Lot 8 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 gh Lot 9 817.00 50 30 897.00 - 495.00 1,392.00 SECTIO] 3 010-50 - 50 30 80.00 - 495.00 575.00 010-51 - 50 30 80.00 495.00 495.00 1,070.00 020-51 - 50 30 80.00 371.25 371.25 822.50 030-51 - 50 30 80.00 371.25 371.25 822.50 GRAND TO'T'AL $28,595.00$4,100.00 $2,460.00 $35,155.00 6,207.30 $36,625.05 77,987.35 • Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Eight PROJECT 259 E B. Project 259, Final Reassessment Hearing (Vienna Woods Streets) -- As the Council may recall, the City of Eagan entered into an agreement with the Unisource Corporation (Mr. Marvin Bump) to pro- vide for the respreading of the assessments associated with the street construction against the three lots under the ownership of Mrs. Carol Lindo. These assessments were to be respread over all lots in the Vienna Woods subdivision under the ownership of Marvin Bump. Staff has been unsuccessful in getting Mr. Bump to agree to paying these assessments associated with street construction over Mrs. Lindo's three lots to alleviate the necessity to respread these costs. Mrs. Lindo has indicated that these assess- ments have not been paid and she continues to incur interest and penalty charges for non-payment of these assessments. Therefore, the staff presented the proposed reassessment roll to the City Council at the January 5th meeting and scheduled the final reassess- ment hearing to be held on February 2, 1982. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners pertaining to the additional assessment associated with the installation of gravel base, bituminous surfacing and curb and gutter. It should be noted that, while interest and penalty charges were being accrued due to non-payment of the assess- ments associated with Mrs. Lindo's lots, the staff feels that Uni- source Corporation should not be responsible for any penalties assessed. However, the staff feels that interest from the date of the original assessment hearing should be levied and still the responsibility of Mr. Bump, just as if this assessment were respread at the original assessment hearing in accordance with the agreement. It should be noted that Mr. Bump has not yet paid the first install- ments on the street assessments associated with the remaining lots in the Vienna Woods subdivision. Therefore, the inclusion of this past interest would have occurred if it had been assessed in accordance with the original agreement. Enclosed on page 2 2 is a summary sheet indicating the totals associated with this reassessment hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the final reassess- ment hearing and, if no written objection is received, to approve the assessment roll and authorize staff to certify the roll to the Dakota County Auditor. (If written objections are received, it is recommended that the public hearing be continued to allow staff to follow required court procedures.) Z. 1 1 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 259 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Vienna Woods FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING: February 2, 1982 September 24, 1980 (Previous assessment Hearing) IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: WATER RATES pArea ri Laterals pService Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area Laterals SANITARY RATES QArea Laterals Service *, Ej Lat. Benefit/Trunk:. -.. STREETS Gravel Base Surfacing 110.87 per lot Res. Equiv. 1 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 89 Lots NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED:__ $ Years (1983 - 1991) RATE OF INTEREST: 1980 - 2%. 1981 - 8%. 1982 - 8% 198 8° etc TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $9867.43 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 79-5 and 79-15 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 12 1978 -22- • Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Nine PROJECTS 246 & 257 11 C. Projects 246 & 257, Continued Reassessment Hearing (Ahnert & Buckman) -- On January 12, 1982, the City Council held a formal public hearing to discuss proposed assessments associated with the individual properties for which written objection was submitted at the December 1, 1981 public hearing. Two property owners re- quested a continuance at that time due to their inability to attend the January 12 meeting. The following information is presented for each of those two individuals for Council consideration: 1. Mr. & Mrs. John Ahnert, 4470 Oak Chase Way (Lot 4, Block 2, Oak Chase 3rd Addition) -- This parcel contains 46,501 square feet which qualifies it for the large lot storm sewer assessment policy, which resulted in a $460 assessment to which was applied a $24 credit for previous improvements by the developer resulting in a net assessment of $436 in May of 1980. This assessment was revised to include addi- tional costs incurred to $503.82 before the same $24 credit was applied, resulting in a net reassessment figure of $479.82 which was presented at the public hearing on December 13 1981. The City Appraiser has determined a before valua- tion of $85,356 with an after valuation of $92,906 for a determined benefit of $7,550 which exceeds the proposed assessment of $479.82. Because Mr. Ahnert is unable to attend the February 2 Council meeting, he has submitted his objections and information for consideration by the Council in a letter that is enclosed on page 24 for your information. 2. Thomas A. Buckman, 1405 Waldrid Street (Lot 1, Block 4, Evergreen Park) -- This parcel contains 20,000 square feet which qualifies it for the large lot storm sewer assessment policy, which resulted in a $430 assessment to which was applied a $67 credit for previous improvements by the developer resulting in a net assessment of $363 in May of 1980. This assessment was revised to include additional costs incurred to $470.96 before the same $67 credit was applied, resulting in a net reassessment figure of $403.96 which was presented at the public hearing on December 1, 1981. The City Appraiser has determined a before valuation of $72,060 with an after valuation of $76,766 for a deter- mined benefit of $4,760 which exceeds the proposed assessment of $403.96. Mr. Buckman was sent a letter informing him that his item would be considered before the Council at the February 2nd meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing for Lot 4, Block 2, Oak Chase Addition, and Lot 1, Block 4, Ever- green Park Addition. 2 0 Thomas A. Colbert Director of. Public Works 3795 Pilot Knob Road P.O. Box 21199 Eagan, Minnesota 55122 0 4470 Oak Chase Way Eagan, Minnesota 55123 January 24, 1982 RE: Project 257, Thomas Lake and Oak Chase Pond Drainage Basin Storm Outlet. Lot 4 Block 2 Oak Chase 3rd Addition Dear Sir: Because I will be on extended mi'.i.taty duty ccring the: next two meetings of the- city council, I will present my dissent to the above assessment by this letter. 1) My house is 36 feet above the water level of the pond behind my residence. Whether the pond level is raised or lowered.during rainy periods is of little consequence and of no value to my resi— dence and property. 2) For the past three years the quality of the water in the pond has steadily declined. Originally one could see children swimming, as'well As waterfowl and fish utilizing the pond. Now the pond is basically dead with no waterfowl observed, no fish seen, and a heavy, green scum aboudaag.. during the summer. I originally bought my lot because of the quality of water in.the pond. The value of my house and property has declined because of the use of this pond as a storm sewer holding pond. Thank you. Sincerely, Com, /l (2 John 0. Ahnert 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Ten PROJECT 247 E D. Project 247, Alexander Road Reassessment Hearing (Continued) -- On December 15, 1981, the public hearing was convened to consider the reassessment of costs associated with the construction of Alexander Road to the R. L. Johnson Subdivision. At that time, there was indication from the City Attorney's office that there was a potential for a negotiated settlement pertaining to this revised assessment. Subsequently, the public hearing was continued until February 2, 1980. In the interim period, the City Attorney's office has proposed a draft agreement between the City and the owners of the property proposed to be assessed under this project which would provide for the following three main points: 1. The assessments would be spread over a fifteen year period. 2. The assessments would be pro rated based on acreage of the lots involved rather than the front footage adjacent to Alexander Road. 3. If, and when, development of Lots 1 and/or 2, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park, does occur in the future taking road access from Alexander Road, the City will refund to R. L. Johnson any assessments received by the City for these two lots. At the time of the preparation of this agenda information memo, the executed agreement has not been received by City staff. If it is not received by the time of the final assessment hearing on February 2, 1982, it is recommended that the hearing be continued to a future date. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To continue the final reassessment hearing or, if the executed agreement is received, to close the reassessment hearing, approve the assessment roll and authorize certification to the County Auditor for collection in accordance with the terms of the executed agreement. a5 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Eleven ., OLD,`, BUSINESS;, PRELIMINARY_PLAT_FOR_KNOB_HILL A. Ed Dunn of Blackhawk Park Associates for Rezoning from A to PD to Include Limited Business, Townhouse and Condominium Develop- ment & for Preliminary Plat Approval of Knob Hill, Consisting of 40 Acres -- A public hearing was held before the APC at their Novem- ber 24, 1981 meeting and, due to a continuance, was again considered at the December 22, 1981 APC meeting. The APC is recommending approval of the rezoning and preliminary plat subject to a number of conditions outlined in the attached minutes. This item was considered by the City Council at the January 19, 1982 meeting and continued until the February 2, 1982 meeting to allow the City staff to address several additional questions. The City Administra- tor prepared a memorandum outlining five (5) questions to the City Planner. The questions as prepared by the City Administrator and addressed by the City Planner are enclosed in a memorandum found on pages _,J -_ through _:3-1_. Also enclosed on pagesthrough -35-- is a memorandum prepared by the City Planner and a e January IV -,-1982 that addresses some questions that were raised by Mayor Blomquist prior to the City Council meeting. These two memorandums offer additional information on the applications to be considered for the Knob Hill project. Also enclosed is a copy of the APC minutes on pages -'3-(,--through _$.. For additional information, refer to the City_P`I`anner's repo which was copied on pages 103 through 116 of the January 19, 1982 City Council packet. And in addition to the information, a booklet was prepared by the applicant which was also included for review by the City Council with the last agenda packet. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to approve the Knob Hill preliminary plat and rezoning. 2%o Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Eleven OLD BUSINESS;; PRELIMINARY_PLAT_FOR_KNOB.HILL A. Ed Dunn of Blackhawk Park Associates for Rezoning from A to PD to Include Limited Busidess, Townhouse and Condominium Develop- ment & for Preliminary Plat Approval of Knob Hill, Consisting of 40 Acres -- A public hearing was held before the APC at their Novem- ber 24, 1981 meeting and, due to a continuance, was again considered at the December 22, 1981 APC meeting. The APC is recommending approval of the rezoning and preliminary plat subject to a number of conditions outlined in the attached minutes. This item was considered by the City Council at the January 19, 1982 meeting and continued until the February 2, 1982 meeting to allow the City staff to address.several additional questions. The City Administra- tor prepared a memorandum outlining five (5) questions to the City Planner. The questions as prepared by the City Administrator and addressed by the City Planner are enclosed in a memorandum found on pages --a7- hrough Also enclosed on pages�'�. through _35_ is a memorandum prepared by the City Planner and 3aCed January 3T;--1982 that addresses some questions that were raised by Mayor Blomquist prior to the City Council meeting. These two memorandums offer additional information on the applications to be considered for the Knob Hill project. Also enclosed is a copy of the APC minutes on pages -S-f,--through _S$.. For additional information, refer to the City--PT—anner's repo which was copied on pages 103 through 116 of the January 19, 1982 City Council packet. And in addition to the information, a booklet was prepared by the applicant which was also included for review by the City Council with the last agenda packet. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to approve the Knob Hill preliminary plat and rezoning. 2b TO: THOMAS L. R=S, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FPO,,: DALE C. RUN=, CITY PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 28, 1982 RE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR KNOB HILL DEVELOPMENT At the January 19, 1982 City Council meeting, the City Council had five' questions which they requested additional information for. I will try to state each question and provide a response to each. 1. Please review with the MWCC and/or Metropolitan Council how they will treat a change from an R-2 to an R-3 zoning as it relates to sanitary sewer flow. Will this zoning change jeopardize the amount of sewer flow allocated in the future? RESPONSE: In a memo to Tom Hedges dated January 19, 1982, part of this question I think has been answered. In the Comprehensive Guide Plan for Eagan, the Metropolitan Council has reviewed the estimated sewer flaw projections for 1980 and 1990. In the 1980 metered flaw of sewage for Eagan, it was 2.47 million gallons per day. In 1990, it is projected by the Metropolitan Council to be 4.10 million gallons per day for ap- proximately.14 million gallons per day lower than what the City has projected. The Metropolitan Council has approved Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan and sewer flaw projections for 1990 stating that .14 million gallons above the Metropolitan Council's figures are not significant at this point in time. Torn Colbert has received a letter from McCombs - Knutson, the engineers for the Knob Hill development,and has the projeo- tions for sewer flaw for this development. I believe Ton Colbert is ad- dressing the exact amount of increase this development would have with the townhouse and condominium project vs. all townhouse in this area. In regard to part of the question regarding the change from the R-2 to R-3, I have contacted Barbara Senness of the Metropolitan Council's staff and have discussed the increased density for this development pro- posal. 'The response staff has received regarding this development pro- posal is that the Metropolitan Council is looking at the gross number of units and does not want to become involved with net density increases. It had been explained to Ms. Senness that the net density for Knob Hill was 7.8 units per acre. The Comprehensive Guide Plan indicates that this parcel should develop at a density of 3-6 units per acre. The Knob Hill development on a gross basis is approximately 6.5 dwelling units per acre, or approximately .5 dwelling units per acre above what is indicated on the Comprehensive Guide Plan. The response from Ms. Senness was that the City of Eagan does not even have to send an amend- ment to the Metropolitan Council to be processed for this slight increase in density. Therefore, if the City of Eagan approves the development proposal, there will be no approval needed by the Metropolitan Council. Ms. Senness did indicate if the City continues to have projects or pro- posals continually increasing the density allowed on the Comprehensive Guide Plan, they would start to look into it in the future. However, this particular project would not irrpact any of the Metropolitan systems. a7 Knob Hill of Eagan - January 28, 1982 Page two Therefore, it is so minimal that no amendment would be needed for this particular development proposal. 2. Please examine the grading plan for Knob Hill as it compares to James Refrigeration. The concern the City Council has is that aesthetically the intersection will become unbalanced if James Refrigeration is lower than the Knob Hill Development. RESPONSE: I believe Ton Colbert, Public works Director, is examing the grading plans of James Refrigeration and Knob Hill and will be responding to this issue. 3. Please meet with a representative of McCarthy's to review a possible extension to the north of the Knob Hill Development for a road from this project. RESPCNSE: Staff has tried to contact Mr. McCarthy in regard to this re- quest. At the present time, staff has not been able to contact Mr. McCarthy, and hopefully, prior to the February 2nd meeting, staff will have a reponse from the McCarthy's. Staff has been looking into providing a connection to the north. In the existing development proposal, the only possible exten- sion would be where the condominium building is on the north of this site. This would be the only possible extension, and if this road extension was, to be put in, major alterations would have to be done to the condominium site. Staff is looking into this area in detail and will have a response for the Council in the February 1 Administrative agenda packet. 4. Drainage of the entire property should be studied and those concerns addressed for the City Council. RESPONSE: Tom Colbert, Public works Director, is reviewing this question. 5. Explain in further detail the parking place reduction and whether that involves width and/or length and why there should be a parking place reduction for this development, when, in fact, there was no place re- duction for Shannon Glen Apartments. RESPONSE: Again, staff has mentioned part of this question in the January 19, 1982 memorandum to Tom Hedges. In 1981 and 1982, staff received a num- ber of development proposals for condominiuun units. Every proposal the developer has indicated that 2.5 parking spaces are in excess of the park- ing requirements for a condcminumm unit. Staff has started to look into this issue to see if the developer's concerns are, in fact, correct. In reviewing many of the surrounding amities, parking space remairements in most coimnmities require 2 parking spaces for every type of dwelling unit from single family to multiple. Eagan and Apple Valley appear to be the only two communities which have a parking space requirement of 2.5 spaces per townhouse or condominium unit. Since development proposals have been processed in Eagan, the only condominium project which has been approved and constructed is Shannon Glen Condominium. For the past week, staff has worked with the Eagan Police Department to monitor the Shannon Glen parking area. Mr. Jay Berthe has had the patrols reviewing the parking area for Shannon Glen at different times during the day. The report RE Knob Hill of Fagan - January 28, 1982 Page three that Mr. Berthe has commented to the Planning Department is it appears that 2.5 parking spaces are in excess of the parking that is required for Shannon Glen. There appears to be excess parking for the vehicles that were in the parking lots during different times of the day. The Police Department has indicated that it appears reducing the parking spaces from 2.5 to 2 parking spaces, there still would be adequate parking for the Shannon Glen Condominiums. Since the time staff has processed the Knob Hill Development proposal, an application from Mid - Continent has been processed by the Advisory Planning Commission. Mid - Continent Builders has also constructed a condominium project in Appld' Valley. This particular condominium project did a parking study in Apple Valley and the parking for that particular condominium project required 1.75 parking spaces per dwelling unit vs. the 2.5 which Apple Valley was originally requiring. Since the time that the project has been constructed and complete, the parking is in excess what is needed by the condominium development, and it is Eagan's understanding that some of the parking spaces for the condominium project in Apple Valley are presently being rented by an office facility across the street. Therefore, the parking requirements for that particular development were in excess. All in all, the City staff has not done a detailed study. .However, we are aware of the parking concerns by the developers. In reviewing the Shannon Glen Condominiums, it appears 2 parking spaces would be adequate, and instead of putting an excess amount of parking spaces or blacktop, that more green area be preserved for a better develop- ment proposal for the City. Therefore, at this time, the developers of Knob Hill have indicated again that 2.5 parking spaces are in excess. They are proposing 1.75 spaces. However, if the City chooses, they could reduce the parking fron 2.5 to 2 units per acre at 10' wide spaces, and if parking was congested, or additional parking would be needed, then the 10' wide spaces could be reduced to 9' wide spaces which could add additional parking spaces in the parking areas which have already been developed. Hopefully, this will provide some insite on the parking areas for condominium developments. At the present time, the City has not done a formal study. We understand the con- cerns of the developer and also agree that 2.5 parking spaces are in excess for condominium units. DCR/jach 29 TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: JANUARY 28, 1982 RE: PRELIPUNARY PIAT - KNOB HILL OF EAGAN (ED DUNN) In response to your metro to Dale Runkle on January 21, 1982, I will be addressing numbers 2 and 4 of the Council's concerns pertaining to this proposed development. ITEM NO. 2 The proposed grading for the overall development of the James Refrig- eration conditional use permit on the east side of Pilot Knob Road north of County Road 30 provides for lowering the existing topography by approximately 8-10 feet to accommodate the future design center- line elevations of County Road 30 and 31 upon the proposed relocation of the intersections of these two County roads in the future. After elevating the approved grading plan for the James Refrigeration site and the proposed centerline elevations of these County roads, it ap- pears that there will be approximately 2.5 acres in the extreme south- east corner of this proposed development that should have the grades revised from those that were submitted to provide for an elevation to be compatible with the proposed grading plan of James Refrigeration and future elevations of County Road 30 and 31. A quick review in- dicates that maximum cut required in this corner would be approxi- mately 6-8'. The developer should be required to resubmit a grading plan showing these required lower elevations in this quadrant of this proposed development. ITEM NO. 4 As the Council's concerns pertain to drainage of the entire property, I make reference to the staff report prepared by myself on November 19th for the Advisory Planning Commission a copy of which is attached to this mono for further review. In summary, all drainage will be conveyed to the existing ponding area located within this plat in the northwestern corner which presently has a positive gravity storm sewer outlet to handle this drainage through the Blackhawk Lake drain- age basin to the Minnesota River. Therefore, there should be no pro- blems associated with the drainage generated from this proposed devel- opment. If the volume of run-off is increased due to a change in den- sity, it would only impact the flood elevation of the internal pond which would require the developer to reserve additional land for ponding easement. IMI NO. 3 I will be reviewing the possible extensions of public roadways through McCarthy's property with Dale Runkle and our omumnts will be incor- porated in a future nero to your attention. If you would like me to expand further on any aspect of this development, please inform me. TAC/jach 1 30 TO: ADVISORY PLANNING CON1MISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FROM: THO'vAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: NOVEMBER 19, 1981 RE: PRELI!1INARY PLAT - KNOB HILL OF EAC,AN (THE DUNN =ANY) The Public 1,brks Department has the following items to be considered by the Planning Commission for their review of the proposed above -referenced pre- liminary plat: UTILITIES Sanitary sewer and watermain of sufficient size and capacity is available adjacent to this property to provide the required service anticipated by this proposed development. The property generally slopes to the north and west towards the existing drainage basins located in the north central portion of this proposed plat. These drainage basins presently have existing storm sewer outlet available which provides positive storm sewer drainage from this site to the Minnesota River by way of the Blackhawk lake trunk storm sewer which has recently been completed. All drainage generated from this plat will be conveyed by way of an internal storm sewer system into these internal drainage basins prior to discharging into the referenced storm sewer system which is located in the northwest corner of this plat. A detailed grading plan has not been submitted. There appears to be some minor grade differentials created along the westerly boundary and the north- east corner that will require slope easements from the adjacent property ow- ners based on preliminary spot elevations submitted on their preliminary grading plan. Based on these proposed spot elevations, it appears that the maximum grade of any street located within this proposed plat would not ex- ceed 5% which is well within the subdivision ordinance requirements. SITE PLAN The proposed layout of the internal public streets takes into consideration the separation between the convercial and residential uses of this property in addition to the differential in the topography elevations between the southeast corner and the northwest corner of this property. Knob Drive, which provides the internal access for the proposed commercial use of this property, has its northerly entrance opposite Berry Ridge Road at its inter- section with Pilot Knob Road. This is in conformance with the proposed major intersection access north of the future intersection of Pilot Knob Road with Diffley Road. The southerly intersection of Knob Drive with County Road 30 is approximately 480' west of the intersection of the two County roads in the southeast corner. This is adequate for future improvements to County Road 30 in addition to maintaining adequate site distance for this intersection. Engineering Report - Knob Hill of Eagan November 24, 1981 Page two Knob Lane has its proposed intersection lined up with the existing Heine- Strasse Road and provides for a continuation through the property adjacent to and westerly of this proposed plat. Until such time as Knob Lane can be continued to the west, there is adequate room for maintenance vehicles to turn around with the proposed location of the private drives in the north- west corner of this plat. EASFPH US AND RIGHTS -0F -WAY A 55' half right-of-way must be dedicated adjacent to County Road 31 to pro- vide for the future upgrading of Pilot Knob Road. When County Road 30 is upgraded in the future, its present intersection with County Road 31 will be relocated approximately 80' north of this existing location. This will require the dedication of a 155' half right-of-way adjacent to Countv Road 30 to provide for this proposed future relocation of County Road 30 to the north. Internal easements necessary for a utilitydistribution system will have to be determined upon the final detail design of this system. Upon completion of that design, the required easements will be dedicated as a part of the final plat. A ponding easement must be dedicated around the internal ponding areas of sufficient dimension to incorporate the 886.0 high water elevation and/or 5.0 acre feet of storage capacity above the 882.0 controlled water elevation provided by the existing storm sewer outlet for this drainage basin. ASSESSMENTS This property has previously been assessed for trunk area sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer assessments. However, it was assessed at the existing Agricultural zoned use. With the proposed development of this property to its anticipated zoning, the difference in trunk area assessments should be collected as a condition of preliminary plat approval. In addition, lateral benefit from trunk sanitary sewer will have to be assessed based on benefit received of the existing trunk sanitary sewer located adjacent to the west property line. Lateral benefit from trunk water will have to be assessed due to benefit received from the existing trunk watermain located within County Road 30 adjacent to the southerly boundary of this proposed plat. In addition to these referenced assessments, this property will be responsible for all costs associated with providing internal lateral utility distribu- tions to service this plat. In addition, a condition of the development agreement should provide for the acceptance of future assessments associated with the upgrading of County Road 30 and/or County Road_31. I will be available to discuss in further detail any questions associated with this plat at the Planning Commission Meeting of November 24, 1981. Respectfully submitted, Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. 3 Director of Public Pbrks TAC/jack S TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FRCM: DALE C. RUNFLE, CITY PRIER DATE: JANUARY 19, 1982 RE: ADDITIONAL'iLFORlATION FOR BURET REALTY PYLON SIGN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR KNOB HILL OF EAGAN In revieAng the two items which you have requested information, the .. first being a pylon sign for Burnet Realty, your question in regard to signs for the two additional buildings: Ordinance 16.05, the Sign Ordinance, allows building mounted business signs. Ordinance 16.05 states "no more than one business sign for each major street frontage shall be permitted on a building for each business located within such building. Design similarity. All business signs mounted on a build- ing shall be similar in design. Sign Area. .No signs or combination of signs mounted upon a building shall cover in excess of 208 of the gross area of side. SignProjection. No sign mounted upon a builcl- ing is allowed to project more than 18 inches from the vertical sur- face of the building and no sign mounted upon a building is allowed to project above the highest outside wall or parapet wall." Therefore,. Ordinance 16.05 would allow building mounted signs for the other two office buildings which will be constructed in this area. The Park Committee at its December meeting made a recommendation for the preliminary plat which would consist of the following: A cash dedication per dwelling unit. 2. A tot lot be provided with the assurance that the amenities the developer is proposing with the gazebos and open space also be provided. 3. The developer install the trails on Pilot Knob Road and County Road 30 at the developer's expense. The reason for this Park recommendation is that the Park committee noted that the park dedication for this neighborhood would be to the north and east of the subject site. Therefore, no land dedication would be requir- ed with this development proposal. The second item regarding Knob Hill of Eagan was the sewer capacity for the proposed development. The first response to the sewer capacity is presently Eagan's 1980 metered flow of sewage was 2.47 million gallons per day. In 1990, it is projected by the Metropolitan Council to be 4.10 million gallons per day, or approximately .14 million gallons per day lower than what the City of Eagan has projected. Therefore, sewer pro- jections as a whole, or increasing the project by approximately 34 units, would not increase the sewer flaw substantially between the proposed 33 Knob Hill of Fagan January 19, 1982 Page two R-2 and the R-3 designation. Getting to more specifics regarding the site, it is my understanding that sewer pipes are always oversized and that an additional 34 units of flow would not hinder the capacity of the pipes which would be installed. A mire detailed analysis could be explained by Tom Colbert, Public Works Director, in regard to this speci- fic project. In reviewing the land use change, or land use from R-2 to R-3, the land use plan projections were based on a gross acreage. Therefore, in doing the rough calculations for population saturation, staff did not work with net acreage or trying to deduct road right-of-ways which would not be constructed on. The intent was just to guide the area for types of use. Once a detailed development plan is proposed, then staff will deduct the rights-of-wav and do the calculations on a net acreage basis. In review- ing this site plan, the net density of the development would be 7.8 dwell- ing units per acre. In reviewing the gross density, the development is between 6.4 and 6.6 dwelling twits per acre which is just slightly above the 3-6 density range. In reviewing the R-2 land use, the 3-6 dwelling units per acre, this 3-6 dwelling units per acre could incorporate single family units at the lower end of the scale or around 3 dwelling units per acre, up to townhouses which would fit into the 6 dwelling units per acre range. Therefore, the R-2, Mixed Residential, 3-6 dwelling units per acre could incorporate single family through townhouses on the proposed site. If the property is zoned R-3, Townhouse District, the density for town- houses would be 6,000 square feet per dwelling unit, or 7.3 dwelling twits per acre. The development proposal has a net density of 7.8 units per acre, or .5 dwelling units per acre above the R-3 category. The reason- ing the developer has given for this increased density is that to provide a mix between townhouse units and condominium units provides a better mar- keting tool in the type of unit an individual would want to purchase vs. not having a choice and being allowed to purchase only a townhouse unit. The last item which was brought up is in regard to the parking spaces being reduced from 2.5 spaces per unit to 1.75 spaces per unit. During the past several months, staff has been processing development proposals which are either condominium or townhouse projects. The parking require- ment presently is 2.5 spaces per unit. The developers have indicated that 2.5 parking spaces per unit is in excess of what is needed to provide adequate parking for these types of dwelling units. The City of Apple Valley had conducted a study on a condominium project which indicated that 1.75 spaces is adequate for a condominium unit. Most cities in the Metropolitan area presently require 2 parking spaces per any type of dwelling unit. Therefore, it appears 2.5 spaces per unit is in excess of what is really needed to provide adequate parking. Staff, at this time, has not had a chance to do a detailed study of the other commmities to determine what parking standards they should use for townhouse and condo- minium units. However, staff is in agreement that 2.5 parking spaces is in excess of the parking needs. The parking spaces that have been pro- vided are still the 10 x 20 foot parking space. Therefore, the spaces, or sizes of the spaces, have not changed. It is just a reduction of the 34 Knob Hill of Eagan January 19, 1982 Page three number of spaces the applicant is proposing to provide. The other item staff would like to point out is the more parking spaces that are required, the more you disturb the natural amenities, and the more blacktop you pro- vide with each devvlopment proposal. Therefore, if the additional parking spaces are not needed, then the more green area could be provided for each development. 3S 0 0 APC Minutes December 22, 1981 KNOB HILL OF EAGAN - REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT The continued hearing regarding the application of Edmund B. Dunn of Blackhawk Park Associates to rezone approximately 40 acres from A (Agri- cultural) to PD (Planned Development) with 10.5 acres of limited business and 19.7 acres of residential acreage, together with application for preliminary plat with 11 lots with 5 lots for limited business and 6 lots residential, was next convened by Chairman Joe Harrison. Mr. Dunn was present as was Greg Frank of McCombs Knutson Engineers, Jack Boarman, Architect, and Barton Dunn. Mr. Dunn and Mr. Boarman explained the changes in the plan since the last hearing and also distributed a hand out dated December 15, 1981. Mr. Boarman stated that the right of way configuration for Diffley Road will be revised to accomodate the proposed widening of Diffley Road and that the balance of the area for the right of way will consist of outlots. The Developer indicated that he would expect to be credited against park contribution for construction of the trail, but later, stated that because of the policy of the City in and adjacent to commercial areas, that the developer would pay for the cost of the trail without a credit for park purposes. Mr. Boarman further stated that the request for a variance for 5 stories would not be made at the present time and further, that the developer is recommending 1.5 parking spaces per condominium unit, which is less than the 2.5 spaces required by ordinance. The housing density was of prime concern to the planning commission members and it is noted the density has been reduced from 9.4 dwelling units per acre to 7.7 dwelling units per acre. Mr. Boarman also stated that there is interest in acquiring or constructing two office buildings at the southeast corner of the property and the planning commission members were concerned about architec- tural uniformity of the office building. Mr. Dunn and Mr. Boarman stated that the developer would insist on architectural uniformity. Member Wilkins ex- pressed her opinion that the office buildings in the area were not conducive to the residential character of the neighborhood, including Diffley Road and Pilot Knob Road, and also felt that the density was still too high. There was also discussion concerning private recreational areas within the development and the public and private streets shown on the plan. Mr. Runkle stated that 1.5 parking spaces per unit is too low for condominiums and 1.7 to 1.75 units per acre are more appropriate, which later amount was agreed upon by Mr. Dunn. There was also discussion on whether the neighborhood business district zoning had been moved from the Thomas Lake Road area to the northwest quadrant of Pilot Knob Road and Diffley Roads, requiring further study. Mr. Boarman argued that for financial purposes, the density for condominiums is necessary and desirable. Krob moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application to rezone 40 acres from Agricultural to Planned Development, with 10.5 acres of limited business, and 19.7 acres of residential, including 60 condominium units and 93 townhouse units, pursuant to the following condi- tions: 1. A planne� development agreement and development agreement shall be completed prior to the starting of the lst Addition. The planned development agreement shall not exceed an 8 year term. 2. Homeowner's association articles and by-laws where applicable, shall C_ be reviewed by the City for each phase of development. 3 36 APC Minutes December 22, 1981 3. A staging plan shall be required to determine how the area is to be developed. All voted in favor except Wilkins who voted no. Krob then moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application for preliminary plat according to the following conditions: 1. Outlots shall be established on the plat for the additional right of way which is to be acquired by Dakota County for the upgrading of County Road 30, Diffley Road. 2. The plat shall be subject to Dakota County Plat Commission's review and comment because the plat abuts two County roads. 3. A detailed landscape plan shall be provided with each phase and a landscape bond amount approved by the City provided for each final phase of the development. 4. The development shall provide all the parking spaces that have been stated in the planner's report under required parking unless otherwise approved by the City Council, with staff to recommend to Council and Couuncil to approve the parking spaces per unit. 5. The plat shall be subject to the Park Committee's recommendations and comments for park dedication on the proposed development. 6. The developer shall re -design the parking layouts on Lot 7, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 in order to provide for the additional parking spaces required. 7. All other City ordinances shall be applicable to the overall de- velopment plan. 8. All L B buildings shall be architecturally compatible. 9. That up .to 75 foot half right of way shall be dedicated adjacent to County Road 31 and up to 75 foot half right of way shall be dedicated adja- cent to County Road 30, Diffley Road as finally requested by Dakota County with the balance of the proposed Diffley Road right of way in outlots. 10. A ponding and drainage easement shall be dedicated providing for a highwater elevation of 886.0 and/or 5.0 acre feet of storage capacity for the drainage basin referenced as DP -27- 11. A detailed grading and drainage plan shall be submited for formal approval prior to final plat application. 12. All easements required by the installation of an internal utility distribution system shall be dedicated as a condition of final plat approval. 4 37 0 0 APC Minutes December 22, 1981 13. The owners of the property shall accept the additional as:jessments associated with the upgrading of the zoning of this property for trunk area utilities. They shall also agree to acceptance of the future assessments asosciated with the upgrading of County Roads 30 and 31. 14. An 8 foot bituminous trailway shall be constructed within a 10 foot strip inside of the anticipated future dedication of public right of way along County Road 30, Diffley Road, and County Road 31, at the sole cost of the owner at the location finally determined by the City. All voted yes. KATHLEEN SCHVAHZ — CONDITIHAL USE PERMIT FOR BEAUTY PARLOR The hearing regarding the application of Kathleen M. Schwanz, of 4283 Stirrup Street for conditional use permit for beauty parlor in a residential district was then considered by the planning commission. Ms. Schwanz was present as was one objecting property owner who submitted a Petition indica- ting 25 homes with 18 contacts, 7 opposing, 5 approving and 6 with no opinion. / There were concerns about traffic, alleged reduction in house values, possible danger to children with more traffic, etc. The commission members reviewed the ordinance restrictions on home occupation in a residential district. After discussion, Turnham moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application, subject to the following conditions: 1. Hours of opeartion will be from 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. only. 2. The only employee shall be an occupant of the household. 3. Customer parking must be on site and limited to two (2) customer autombiles. 4. There shall be no commercial signs advertising the business. 5. There shall be no over the counter sale of merchandise. 6. The permit shall be granted on an annual basis. 7. All other applicable ordinances must be followed. All voted yes. 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Twelve AMUSEMENT DEVICE_APPLICATION _COACHMAN.OAKS_APARTMENTS B. Amusement Device Application for Coachman Oaks Apartments - An application for an amusement device license for Coachman Oaks Apartments was continued at the January 19, 1982 City Council meeting to allow the City staff to address specific questions that were raised regarding the hours amusement device machines could be operated at the Coachman Oaks Apartments. The Administrative Intern, Dave Osberg, has reviewed the application with the applicant and enclosed on page -,�Q- is a copy of his memorandum that outlines the hours of operation and other considerations if the application is to be granted. Also enclosed on page _� is a copy of a sketch indicating where the amusement devices are to be located at the apartment complex. The location of these amusement device machines, if granted by the City Council, will be difficult for enforcement by the Police Department. It would mean the Police Department would have to enter the apartment complex as well as the recreation room before they can adequately police this operation on a periodic basis. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the amusement device application submitted by Coachman Oaks Apartments. 37 0 0 MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT OSBERG DATE: JANUARY 29, 1982 SUBJECT: COACHMAN OAKS APARTMENTS AMUSEMENT DEVICES At the January 19, 1982 City Council meeting, the application for allowing three amusement devices to be located in the Coachman Oaks Apartments was continued until the February 2, 1982 meeting. Since the January 19 meeting, I have had several conversations with the people at the Coachman Oaks Apartments in an effort to get a better understanding of the amusement device situation. As I understand it, the present application before the City Council is for three amusement devices. The Planning Department has also received an application from the Coachman Oaks Apartments for licensing to allow more than three amusement devices. This applica- tion is temporarily scheduled for the February Advisory Planning Commission meeting. The applicants are proposing to open a recreation room.in the apart- ment complex, and the amusement devices will be located in the recreation room. Initially, there would be three amusement devices in the recreation room with an additional 10 to 12 to be placed in the recreation room if the licensing is approved. The applicants are proposing to have the recreation room open seven days a week between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Ordinance #73, Amuse- ment Devices, states that, "Mechanical amusement devices shall not be operated after 10:00 p.m. except by permission of the City Council." Therefore, the applicant is complying with this section of Ordinance #73. However, there is no mention in Ordinance #73 of the hours in which the machines may begin operating. This is something the City 'Council may wish to discuss if they feel 7:00 a.m. is too early for amusement devices to be in operation. There are several issues in regard to the supervision of the recre- ation room. Ordinance #73 states that, "Adult supervision shall be present where a mechanical amusement device is located at all times the device is in operation." The ordinance also states that, "The use of such device by a person under the age of 18 years and unaccompanied by his parents or guardian shall constitute a conclu- sive presumption that the same is being used with the permission or at the sufference of the licensee and person, firm or corporation upon whose premises it is located." The supervision for the recrea- tion room will be somewhat unique in that there will be a lock on the door of the recreation room with keys to be distributed only to the tenants of Coachman Oaks Apartments. A sign will also be placed in the recreation room stating that children will not be allowed in the room unless they are accompanied by an adult. Attached to this memo is a proposed plan submitted by the applicant outlining the recreation room as it will be with the amusement devices. 5S 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Thirteen PROPOSED_RATE.INCREASE_-_URBAN_PLANNING_&_DESIGN C. Proposed Rate Increase for Urban Planning & Design (Planning Consultants) -- At 'the direction of the City Council at the January 19, 1982 meeting, the City Administrator did address the concerns the City Council had about the amount of the proposed rate increase for the planning consultant. Urban Planning & Design did lower their rate per hour for principal planner, planner II and landscape architect I. The only two positions used by the City on a regular basis are the prin ipal planner and secretary. Enclosed on pages .2 through --�} - is a copy of a letter from Urban Planning & �e`s"ign, the new rate schedule and the original rate schedule. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the revised rate schedule as submitted by Urban Planning & Design, Inc. 4I 0 ,oN PLANNING ` DESIGN, INC. January 25, 1982 2800 East Cliff Road • Suite 140 • Burnsville, Mn. 55337 • (612) 890-2320 Mr. Thomas Hedges, Administrator City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Dear Tom, John S. Voss, President As I indicated to you by telephone today, our proposed rate increase was primarily determined by two factors. First, we have incurred substantial overhead increases during the past two years; particularly for auto expenses (25%) and rent (22%). Secondly, our fees have lagged behind those of our competitors for several years. At the same time, I am sympathetic to the desires of the City Council to keep -ex- penses down as much as possible at this time. Therefore, I am sending herein a revised rate schedule which keeps the overall rate increase at about 10% for 1982. rs ! tr ly, S Joh S. Voss JSV/bav Enclosure: Revised Rate Schedule VAN PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE DESIGN 0 0. -- RATE SCHEDULE -- Effective March 1, 1982 URBAN PLANNING & DESIC-P;, INC. STAFF Principal Planner (1) Planner II (2) Landscape Architect I (3) Landscape Architect II (2) Draftsman Secretary Research Assistant Mileage (per mile) Materials RATE PER HOUR $ 50.00 38.00 33.00 25.00 20.00 10.50 20.00 .24 Cost (1) "Planner -In -Charge" as designated by the State of Minnesota for 701 Planning and minimum five (5) years experience. (2) Masters or undergraduate degree and minimum three (3) years experience. (3) Minnesota Registration by State Board and minimum five (5) years experience. IM 0 0 -- RATE SCHEDULE -- Effective March 1, 1982 URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN, INC. 1°!8Z l48\ STAFF RATE PER HOUR Principal Planner (1) $ 55.00 $45.00 Planner II (2) 40.00 35:00 Landscape Architect I (3) 35.00 30.00 Landscape Architect II (2) 25.00 22.00 Draftsman 20.00 18.00 Secretary 10.50 9.50 Research Assistant 20.00 18.00 Mileage (per mile) .24 •20 Materials Cost Cost (1) "Planner -In -Charge" as designated by the State of Minnesota for 701 Planning and minimum five (5) years experience. (2) Masters or undergraduate degree and minimum three (3) years experience. (3) Minnesota Registration by State Board and minimum dive (5) years experience. Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Fourteen CEDAR_CLIFF_COMMERCIAL_ADDITION D. Steven J. Flanagan for Preliminary Plat Approval, Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition -- The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing at their October 27, 1981 regular meeting to consider an application submitted by the developer, Mr. Steve Flanagan, for a preliminary plat of "Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition" con- sisting of 15.8 acres and containing sixteen commercial lots in the Cedar Cliff Planned Development. The APC recommended approval of the preliminary plat to the City Council. At the November 17, 1981 City Council meeting, the preliminary plat was considered and continued until the City staff could review alternative align- ments to a proposed road through the subdivision. At the December 1, 1981 City Council meeting, proposals by the City staff concerning the road alignment were considered. Please refer to pages [}7_ through4q-- for a copy of the memorandum that pertains oche City stafr s consideration of alternative road alignments. The City Council, after reviewing alternative road alignments, asked the City staff to prepare a letter to the Dakota County Plat Commission, requesting their comments and indication of approval for the road alignment planned for the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addi- tion as favored by the City Council. The City Planner discussed this matter with a representative of the County Plat Commission who responded in a letter dated December 9, 1981 to the land owner of the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition, Mr. Joe Ryan. A copy of this letter in enclosed on page _ -So-- Also enclosed on pages ,�( through _.__,� 3 _ are some a i conal comments from the City Pier regar ind g crarification of the county's view regarding the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition pertaining to the aforementioned letter. At the January 5, 1982 City Council meeting, the City Administrator was asked by the City Council to draft a letter to the Dakota County Plat Commission and to take a firm position on behalf of the City as to which street and road alignment the City Council prefers if the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition is to be further considered A copy of this letter is enclosed on pages _ $� through _ $S_. The City Administrator specifically requested a response by �e February 2, 1982 meeting and, therefore, anticipa- ting a letter from the County placed this item on the February 2, 1982 agenda. To date, there has not been a response from the Dakota County Plat Commission. The City Administrator has contacted the plat commission and, apparently, Mr. Larson was ill when the plat commission met and he is attempting to review the matter with the various commission members, and, hopefully, a letter will be received Monday, February 1, 1982 so this item can be considered at the meeting Tuesday. If a letter is not received on Monday, the City staff will contact the residents adjoining the Cedar Cliff Addition and also the applicant suggesting a continuance until the February 16, 1982 meeting. For additional information on this item refer to the original City Planner's report, a copy of which 46 0 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Fifteen is enclosed on pages _S_6 _ _ through --b-7. For a copy of the APC minutes of October 27,x- refer to page --�5-. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the preliminary plat as recommended by the APC. 40 Agenda Information Memo November 24, 1981 Page Twelve CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT E. Steven J. Flanagan for Preliminary Plat Approval of Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition -- On November 17, 1981, the City Council for- mally reviewed the preliminary plat application for the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition. During the review of this preliminary plat, there was considerable discussion pertaining to the alignment of the proposed road through this subdivision. The Council continued consideration of this item until the December 1 meeting to allow staff time to research the following concerns: Costs associated with relocating Scott Trail to the eastern edge of the proposed plat; 2. Traffic implications of off -setting the proposed inter- section with Erin Drive at Nicols Road on the west edge of this proposed plat. A location map referencing the street patterns north of Cliff Road adjacent to Nicols Road is enclosed on page S 3 A for Council infor- mation. In order to relocate Scott Trail From its present inter- section with Cliff Road to the eastern boundaries of this plat, it would require a considerable amount of fill to be placed in this low area. This fill would be required to be placed whether this road were relocated or•not. However, the developer has in- dicated that he does not intend to develop the eastern edge of this plat until a later date. The total cost to perform the removal of the existing Scott Trail and to construct its relocation adjacent to the eastern boundaries of this proposed plat has been calculated and broken down as follows: Item Const Street $31,100 Fill 75,000 Est. 27% O.H. Total $ 8,400 $39,500 20,250 95,250 4 �' TOTAL $134,750 L. 0 0 C' Agenda Information Memo November 24, 1981 . Page Thirteen Although the total construction cost seems considerably high, it should be noted that approximately 71% of the cost is associated with the necessary fill to construct this roadway to proper align- ment and grade. This fill would be required irregardless kf• the road is constucted in this location or not. The estimated price of this fill was based on the premise that no material was available on site and it would have to be brought on site from another loca- tion. This relocated entrance road could serve as a central access point for the property located to the east of this proposed plat. As such, the Council could consider sharing a portion of this cost on an assessment basis against the adjacent property for its benefit received. Pertaining to the proposed relocation of the westerly intersection of this proposed interior road with Nicols Road, it was originally intended to line up with the existing intersection of Erin Drive and Nicols Road, providing a four way intersection approximately 740 feet north of the center line of Cliff Road. The attached C exhibit shows a proposed relocation of this westerly intersection with Nicols Road which would result in a center line to center line offset north of Nicols Road of approximately 430 feet. This would provide for approximately 310 feet between the center line of this proposed intersection with the existing center line of Erin Drive at Nicols Road. Both off -set dimensions are acceptable from engineering standards. However, in looking at the overall relationship of the roads in the Mari Acres Addition to the Cedar Cliff Addition, it would provide a continuation of off -set intersec- tions that would vary from 300 to 550 feet.. This is not desirable in trying to provide proper traffic control for the anticipated turning movements associated with the future development of the commercial property within the Mari Acres Addition on the west side of Nicols Road. If these intersections were off -set, it would eliminate any feasible alternative for providing signalization at the intersection of existing Erin Drive in the future as traffic may warrant. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the preliminary plat for Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition with the appro- priate conditions as recommended by the Advisory Planning Commission and City Council. M i I4 r..� � CL l�mt t,l' ¢kt it N:,'Af k•: ":AL � � T FC \. I a � • Y.Y I s'w ear ptp alai I P�f* A . 3. �I� =f=v�a ••S Nilw .! 'J b 1 r� ., 4 - !� tp�• ______ :.If nIP _ $41 - ,!. 1P ¢ t' �e 4 a- tea. Q: O 4t •.z+. >�- <. -�Rly/ • t Aad. - o`'q, I t<� '_q`JJ\ by A ,� t -4 _ - _ _ _ ; �..^ _ ''�tt +�. �, � r P Y pN.>�f ¢ �g8\. a%5P r Lec,f , F p � :I�p'� y r+• �J d� a t "i± F m (f ri'Ifej.. +Sry+ 3Y �•' N Jhi,� �'�� k r4.4 `J.✓�. tl :P z��i_,. I ! K t / .b St�i *• 8 hh f pP\ 1• :`� jl?u �`! -I _ !I' L�� i 1• Z•(yY `a •/r Ii r V��IA b h-af•I'4 _ �• �� -Vi.� 11. f{t ° Ir, "1 i r7d�.- �k :'%.f �• d <iT9 t '{'> �;. , I��E el m l • f Lfi A .s A ,lP I I- . -ql m �.1 y t.e e4s ••Y A ��;•Ir �N ix °v - W- :� ( r�> . ��A lna.! oief 9 •'-•-0^ ,° Y ." by -U y • / o ; . ¢ +va• _ N1H9 FL -ili - J- UIO-seau ar - - _•^^.+- •,ll --a .c.-cv- -.. .. . .NiC `"_. -r: iY �Ai1•r,. s9�vr..saca:.a..vAaYy. 'ud L�'a�n�"r�'v�y' MARI Lm MA RI AG RES AN _ ;'a1` u) .,QCT e•fl M1b'w Sloe OUT LOT J Il i ERINi bwNl F�Atrli5 �' v ,(- Imo. .� s • fie+ • . p LOTenl- O`� V Lore I I n��L' v xw.''I�01rj .L_I .y •,p* _—. I Ya Q� t� Y� yl - LOT 1 F- 4 • • 170BER f P. SANDEEN. P.E. CUUNTY ENGINEEN DA ® ®A 0 7%® C'0 11 N TY T[I EFLIG N E: 512.43]-0396 -DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER 1560 HWY. 55 HASTINGS. MINNESOTA 55053 December 9, 1981 Mr. Joe Ryan St. Paul Land Resources Inc. 385 Washington Street St. Paul, MN 55102 Dear Mr. Ryan: In preliminary review of alternate proposals for development of the NE corner of Nicols and Cliff Road we recommend the following: 1. The CSAR 23 access (Scott Trail) already approved by the County Plat f Commission be preserved. 2. Access to Lot 6 and 7 be permitted off of Scott Trail and not Cliff Road. 3. Access from Nicols Road (CSAH 23) could be permitted 355' north or 700 ft. north of Cliff Road would be permitted but we prefer the more northerly access. Sincerely, L rry G. Figgins, P.E. Administrative Design Engineer LGF/ar A SO AN EQUAL OPPORTUN11Y EMPI.OYCR C 0 0 TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DIVE: DECEMBER 23, 1981 RE: CLARIFICATION OF THE MEMO STATING THE At the December 15, 1981 City Council Meeting, staff submitted a metmrandum to the City Council regarding comments of the prelimi- nary review of the Dakota County Plat Commission for Cedar Cliff Comrercial Addition as revised by the City Council. The comments submitted by Dakota County are as follows: 1. The CSAH 23 access, Scott Trail, already approved by the Dakota Plat Commission be preserved. It is staff's understanding of this comnent that the Plat Omission will not accept a plat that will have additional access onto CSAH 23, or Nicols Rd., than what has already been granted. The Plat Commission re- cognizes 'that there is presently a 60' access provided at the north end of Outlot G and that this should provide access from Nicols Road to the comrercial lots, or to this portion of the plata It is staff's understanding that direct access onto Nicols Road would not be permitted at this time. 2. Access to Lots 6 and 7 be permitted off of Scott Trail and not Cliff Road. It is staff's understanding regarding this comment that it is in regard to the additional cul-de-sac provided west of Scott Trail to provide additional access to this commercial area. It is staff's understanding that the cul-de-sac should be provided off of Scott Trail rather than Cliff Road. Staff also understands that no other access other than Scott Trail will be allowed west of Scott Trail to the intersection of Cliff Rd. and Nicols Rd. 3. Access from Nicols Road CSAR 23 could be permitted 355' north or 700' north of Cliff Road, but we prefer the more northerly access. It is staff's understanding that the access onto Nicols Road presently is at the very northerly 60' of Outlot G. The County is indicating that they would prefer this access to be. the access onto Nicols Road. However, if the City would want to realign the access into this Addition, this access could shift southerly but no closer than 355' from the intersection of Cliff Road and Nicols Road. Therefore, if the Council wanted to shift the access southerly to provide more space between the road and the duplexes, this shift would be allowed. However, the County recognizes the fact that the present access does line up with Erin Lane, and there would be a 4 -way intersection at this pre- sent location. S1 Thomas L. Hedges Memo Re: Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition Deoanber 23, 1981 Page two 4. The last ccmnent staff would like to make which was not incorporated into the letter is that the County has also looked at the possibili- ty of vacating the southern portion of Scott Trail and relocating it easterly to the east property line of the plat. The County, at this time, ,has indicated that the present alignment of Scott Trail is fine and that shifting it easterly would not provide adequate spac- ing to the access on the southside of Cliff Road to the Driver's Test Center. Therefore, the County at this time would prefer the existing location of Scott Trail proposed to the relocation of Scott Trail. Hopefully this memorandum will clarify the concerns that the County had when they reviewed the revised Cedar Cliff Conniercial Addition. If the Council would like to re -schedule the hearing for Cedar Cliff Comrercial Addition, staff can then get direction as how to proceed with the Cedar Cliff Commercial preliminary plat. Hopefully, this memorandum provides a clearer explanation of the concerns and ccmTents that Dakota County had in reviewing this plat. DCR/jach ;•!r/6•r J/H eid.i J[V fl.Y K.W )P aN at lirU f -tL lfd y-`vOrn .... •.L�. ^' I- yj I ..- foL It '" ^-rli:�( iir" �1 /-sI`e-I-"ss `f -Ji -e `1--ait-'r-.iil-�; ••• I:JN ••• :I n.v . \ - .. W T L AN D S•' ^ : 1 Li ,e 3 L,y,' i� Ci i� a �> 4 S: �} L AALS rI 4d .,w cq fn /S r tltL O_ : v/ N1 i_aw_1 �_Nw_J L;__„i-.;, 3 �.� �• ` �0 8. a1FFWEW -_urs ��- VVa _'. • ~ �---riiA-�-ldrr.-Jri -'`i ��di9___O •::• i _�} r' sAnY '•. I Br arL r . .• r 8 it r .� 4'. �.� S d",. ... ^rr.. 7 O. h. Qj lbSrrF•''....."'�r Air l` 12. �,'r 13 a�nS;.`� '\:.�. •'Pi•'''' •.nr .+I•nnB. • / � 11 V / 4 J � .rfldlL i += r/^ - ',ii�.r.'._.:':r� N.. sn 'y: _ I�fC9 ♦1 r! .«y'r ."001 •I 7,9 li`S l{ yam;•-. �..3' r �� ^``;- b ` `'� `� �'? .`+ � ,',i : Cr— � G lei .,, ' n � e; N %(�:'t a ��. 9. Z•. • �1 r�•GG. 9Y `� �... rp r�¢v N,t, 2 aP ` 3� .O•I S M1 � �, �` Sj "`I o•SI R 5 Q lets>s"t ^nn,l I,p: 5 A, iy rgirja_ J �� i rsrluv i h 1 I o:: W a z w f .e z n" P � .aarNr✓1 � W r _ I. g rrarul. � �• I .rerrai/ i, ; L ,x ~ I IL ) Lor 1;i •{ � � int I=+,i � . •� i� ra i t •`c� O r X r I � I• L_ lan 4. sow nA ..•44IaC W.� , STATE t•I :AID ;: HIGHWAY N0.23•--�••l'. ____-•-------:..; .3r --- TATE------- -- I •-Z)9/f1-- "Alt) Nlu ins✓A KW Y.V✓JJ0%" WS. m til ywlr, n Ff.4•HY M1i? Z: �...•• I SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS BEA BLOMOUIST MAYOR THOMASEGAN CITY OF EAGAN JAMES A. SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER,y.7795 PILOT KNOB ROAD COUNCIL MEMBERS P.O. BOX 21199 "'EAGAN, MINNESOTA SS197 . PHONE 454.8108 January 12, 1982 v ' DAKOTA COUNTY PLAT COMMITTEE J DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER`, 1560 W HWY 55 HASTINGS MN 55033 0 Re: Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition Preliminary Plat Dear Sirs: THOMAS HEDGES CITY ADMINISTRATOR EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE CITY CLERK In official action that was taken by the Eagan City Council at a regular City Council meeting held on December 1, 1981, approval was given to the staff and applicant to prepare Cedar Cliff Com- mercial Addition with a cul-de-sac adjacent to Cliff Road and two access points for parking and commercial development off Nicols Road. Please make reference to the attached drawing entitled "Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition". The Eagan City Council has spent considerable time reviewing this parcel of property and feels this proposal is the best method for platting the Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition parcel. The residential integrity of Cedar Cliff Third Addition will be least impacted by this drawing. Traffic volumes on Cliff Road and Nicols Road should not affect the three proposed access points to the property (a cul-de-sac on Cliff Road and two entrances from Nicols Road) due to the Cedar Avenue Freeway and I -35E which are both close to this property. Any revisions to the proposed preliminary plat as prepared would be expensive, realising the topography adjacent to Scott Trail. The City of Eagan would like a formal response from the Dakota County Plat Committee regarding the pro- posed Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition before any further work is performed by the developer. The City of Eagan is planning to discuss this item at the February 25 1982 City Council meeting, and, therefore, a response prior to that meeting would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Qvvvx d Thomas L. He geS U City Administrator 15-4 TLH/hnd cc: Dale Runkle, City Planner; JohnVoss, Dakota County Commis - THE LONE OAKSTREEen (�THE SYMBOL OF;ySTRENOTH AND GROWTH IN OURCompanies COMMUNITY. ^- r9e.00 NH9.4o YiE i n s $e 5H9•AO'94"w 1 oyE+g x WATI Mo° }dacoo % BBdr U` II b 171py \\� I I I I J•�—�_ p � �-,. Gee / -xe'r �- ee r 6 �r�t 11I II II II �I r'e•„�I 2 ti;` ^ }'� �i' $ .A •.. �. •.z .�I I II I II , I r I xsq I nm i,_nea _ � xro �vrc :� ;e II II �I 4 {'• .#i S S/ . \ I ia� \ \. ° ”' yee ! I x S "' ♦60P/ i II \ G � •+qV�'Y _ � ),5I - I-�.. IF ri�°i rq_ I r '. t � y�Y ••�l�+�A� \ r r`\n `•J`'� �~�Y .rM Yrc��A. - rt nqr l.c xro �t .�':�rn �7 2\- ,r^p 2 J III a'^ '",mow a J �•=_ rt- rrnvv I B' i.. NI@ w.8: �I 18 @ • t'- I rom _ gg pin ,ex u?:' I x css(�.- ia6 $: [ 15 t s . s e"^ 2 � " 'i !�'�•--�r[re-' e 9 It —Im. ax yam �za• no aaas yuye =/:+R` a rMpaY -Ar _ i4�.j =Mir @ IA 10Rf •, t __ + ... i/lAlf•+6 4FF.H(6Lq; aw• a '.�. e* e B �•D !�y', i .n✓ir/ Iso.0 J eacp z>.m ram m.ae o noa • 'r e« y ti. w y2 ' 12 e 6 6 lk R IIS y B 8 mi 1 I =¢ s •S s °rw _ ..R L II _ rrrarn -saa•a:l: c x n 'g= b4 �` 6 R +. 'aT 6• - ___rr+� -�. s w was sat . sso ao • [ra• AS�. i �� 10 :.e..r @ 4. 1101.i ao e. ex »m »oo nee n�Ixl�arr_••' '/ ; • @12�,3@ : , � w•x » ra raaa irsre xeYf.'xY L = . +�i 5 8 O♦ R°F 11 n4 ]o ori ltlm; 8 ro, 4 � ✓i ° g - s + °troth • rr�f•'. Ifl.P =°g° sa ra n AAtsyrro .+•s a 4d8 4d'...., Tb aW•8 _g 8 l+.[- 1j.yb x' xsP'• IYae �' I �' 1+$ :+'zti •'•i s.'•e il*+i•X naa•xniaB a,e•r '.y ejGC�1.4}2xm`Lri f° y•g�a..[� � eapao- r.• • r r �'q/, ha "'\SCOTT ".+'.'8'� 'r y 3r1�� qr ay'.• paras 6l y++ 10 O,j °' e4 '.,:;!"'�' eour.r.m: �anl e° ao »air r.�+..-:. - w ;[i +. 6, i� b'axz�ga'°.+ W•�r 8 `DAR I a °,: +$r• �8 s T CE�0° r$ x aaa•aa'na g xa�l .e: — n "a°p sto x.v ON'�'N•U��e pBCCa; 3 N a p m ° $ ..� T ° ...wo.,. _.._ ^- r9e.00 NH9.4o YiE i n s $e 5H9•AO'94"w 1 oyE+g x WATI Mo° }dacoo % BBdr U` II b 171py \\� I I I I J•�—�_ p � �-,. Gee / -xe'r �- ee r 6 �r�t 11I II II II �I r'e•„�I 2 ti;` ^ }'� �i' $ .A •.. �. •.z .�I I II I II , I r I xsq I nm i,_nea _ � xro �vrc :� ;e II II �I 4 {'• .#i S S/ . \ I ia� \ \. ° ”' yee ! I x S "' ♦60P/ i II \ G � •+qV�'Y _ � ),5I - I-�.. IF ri�°i rq_ I r '. t � y�Y ••�l�+�A� \ r r`\n `•J`'� �~�Y .rM Yrc��A. - rt nqr l.c xro �t .�':�rn �7 2\- ,r^p 2 J III a'^ '",mow a J �•=_ rt- rrnvv I B' i.. NI@ w.8: �I 18 @ • t'- I rom _ gg pin ,ex u?:' I x css(�.- ia6 $: [ 15 t s . s e"^ 2 � " 'i !�'�•--�r[re-' e 9 It —Im. ax yam �za• no aaas yuye =/:+R` a rMpaY -Ar _ i4�.j =Mir @ IA 10Rf •, t __ + ... i/lAlf•+6 4FF.H(6Lq; aw• a '.�. e* e B �•D !�y', i .n✓ir/ Iso.0 J eacp z>.m ram m.ae o noa • 'r e« y ti. w y2 ' 12 e 6 6 lk R IIS y B 8 mi 1 I =¢ s •S s °rw _ ..R L II _ rrrarn -saa•a:l: c x n 'g= b4 �` 6 R +. 'aT 6• - ___rr+� -�. s w was sat . sso ao • [ra• AS�. i �� 10 :.e..r @ 4. 1101.i ao e. ex »m »oo nee n�Ixl�arr_••' '/ ; • @12�,3@ : , � w•x » ra raaa irsre xeYf.'xY L = . +�i 5 8 O♦ R°F 11 n4 ]o ori ltlm; 8 ro, 4 � ✓i ° g - s + °troth • rr�f•'. Ifl.P =°g° sa ra n AAtsyrro .+•s a 4d8 4d'...., Tb aW•8 _g 8 l+.[- 1j.yb x' xsP'• IYae �' I �' 1+$ :+'zti •'•i s.'•e il*+i•X naa•xniaB a,e•r '.y ejGC�1.4}2xm`Lri f° y•g�a..[� � eapao- r.• • r r �'q/, ha "'\SCOTT ".+'.'8'� 'r y 3r1�� qr ay'.• paras 6l y++ 10 O,j °' e4 '.,:;!"'�' eour.r.m: �anl e° ao »air r.�+..-:. - w ;[i +. 6, i� b'axz�ga'°.+ W•�r 8 `DAR I a °,: +$r• �8 s T CE�0° r$ x aaa•aa'na g xa�l .e: — O I sto Is 4 ....10 �,. II _ $ ..� ,. ...wo.,. _.._ I� fl I R 7 ♦ f'. Ic 1 I Nh& CUFF +. S5� E x} Z O I h IIMMER[IAL � I I� fl I R 7 1. 1 I I I S5� �3s- T S TA DEPARTMEWTT& NSPORTATION RIGHT, �1"1PLAT`N0:19=10:_ee'ars=`:;u�.:'-:r;c.:u;�•.I::-2-a-�'.. -. 00 Vv%ta C Agenda Information Memo C November 13, 1981 Page Twelve WN SBU$0 5 0 PRELIMINARY-PLAT.--CEDAR-CLIFF-COMMERCIAL-ADDITION A. Steven J. Flanagan for Preliminary Plat Approval, Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition -- A public hearing was held by the APC to consider an application submitted by the developer, Mr. Steve Flana- gan for the preliminary plat of "Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition" consisting of 15.8 acres and containing sixteen commercial lots in the Cedar Cliff Planned Development. There was considerable discussion regarding this preliminary plat as well as alternate designs review by the APC. The APC is recommending approval of the preliminary plat to the City Council. For additional informa- tion on this item, please refer to the City Planner's report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages --+t- through For action that was taken by the APC, refer to a copy ofth5 minutes, a copy of which is enclosed on page „ ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve the preliminary plat entitled Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition. r. ,S' 0 CITY OF EAGAN 0 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT --CEDAR CLIFF COvINIERCIAL ADDITION APPLICANT: STEVEN] FIANAGAN LOCATION: OUTLOTS G & H, CEDAR CLIFF PLANNED DEVELOPPfENT EXISTING ZONING: OFFICE M14ERCIAL UNDER A PLANNED DEVELOMENT. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: OCTOBER 27, 1981 DATE OF REPORT REPORTED BY APPLICATION SUBNaTIEED OCTOBER 21, 1981 (UPDATED) An application has been submitted reamsting a preliminary plat, Cedar Cliff Conmiercial Addition, which consists of approximately 15.8 acres and contains 16 commercial lots. ZONING AND LAND USE Presently, the parcel is zoned camercial under the Cedar Cliff Planned Devel- opment. The Planned Development contract specifically states that the entire area shall develop solely as an office complex facility unless otherwise ap- proved by the Eagan City Council. As you recall, the original request made by Mr. Flanagan was to revise the zoning to allow retail commercial and a prelimi- nary plat. The Advisory Planning Commission denied the rectuest for the rezon- ing which was upheld by the Eagan City Council. Therefore, the 15.8 acres can only develop as an office complex. As you may recall, on August 25, 1981, the Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a revision to the Cedar Cliff Planned Development and a preliminary plat, Cedar Cliff Cammercial Addition. The Advisory Planning Commmdssion recommended to deny the rezoning to allow retail use within this area. The preliminary plat was recommended for approval to the City Council. The City Council denied the application to rezone the property to retail commercial ` and requested that the Planning Commission again review the preliminary plat re- garding access and circulation of the cammercial district. Since the time the Eagan Citv Council requested additional review of the prelim- inary plat, staff has been in contact with Dakota County regarding additional access points to this addition. It is staff's understanding_ that when the or- iginal plat for the Cedar Cliff lst Addition was filed with the County, there was a restricted access easement over the entire area west of Scott Trail to Nicols Road. There was also a restrictive access easement from Cliff .Rd up to the norhterly 60' of Outlot G. In reviewing this restricted access easement with the 66 a CITY OF EArAN PRELIMINARY PIAT - CEDAR CLIFF COMMIAL ADDITION OCTOBER 27, 1981 PAGE W10 County, the County has indicated that this easement has alreadv been granted to the County and to have this restricted access removed, the City would have to demonstrate the need for any additional access points. A copy of the letter from the Dakota County Plat Commission has been included for vour review. The Council also indicated that.the plat,as designed, would have all the build- ings backing onto Cliff Road and Nicols Road, and that either a service road or another means of access should be looked at in the overall design. Another factor which was brought out at the public hearing at the Advisory Planning Commission Meeting and City Council Meeting was the concern from the neighbors regarding traffic going through the Cedar Cliff neighborhood shortcutting the stop light at Cliff Road and Nicols Road. Since the time the plat had been reviewed by the Advisory Planning Commission and City Council, new Cedar Ave- nue has opened. Since the opening of new Cedar Avenue, staff has reauested that the police monitor the through -traffic on Scott Trail in regard to the neighborhood concerns. Since the opening, staff has had a report that on two different days after Cedar Avenue had opened, that there is veru little com- muter traffic turning onto Scott Trail going through the Cedar Cliff Addi- tion to Nicols Road vs. going out to the new Cedar Avenue. In reviewing the overall layout and design, staff originally worked with the Cedar Cliff 1st Addition of how access would be provided tc Outlots G and H of the Cedar Cliff Addition. The original plat shows one access off of Cliff Road which is Scott Trail, and the second access being the northerly 60' of Outlot G which abuts Nicols Road. This northerly 60' ties in exactiv to the southerly access of Mari Acres, or Erin Drive directly west. It had always been the original intent that a looped street, or a connecting street, from the northerly access on Nicols Road would tie in to Scott Trail for the over- all circulation plan for the commercial development, which in turn has been related to the preliminary plat which Mr. Flanagan had originally submitted. In reviewing alternatives to the design, staff has looked at the possibility of providing direct access to approximately 4 lots off of Nicols Road and pro- viding a secondary access to Cliff Road. Staff has also looked at the possi- bility of providing a frontage road so no lots would be backing onto Cliff Road or Nicols Road. In reviewing the alternatives, it appears the most feasi- ble way to develop the property is that the original design appears to pro- vide the best access to the individual lots and provides for good access to the overall commercial area from either Niools Road or Cliff Road. In reviewing the overall plan of the Cedar Cliff Addition, you can see has Scott Trail curves through the development in order to not provide direct ac- cess between Cliff Road and Nicols Road. The commercial Addition, as stated earlier, contains approximately 15.8 acres, or approximately 1 acre +/- per lot,which appears to be a reasonable size lot for an office complex. The lot lines between preliminary plat and final plat could shift slightly in order to meet the setbacks for individual buildings prior to submitting the final plat. Once the final plat has been recorded, the applicant will have to replat or go through the waiver process in order to change any of the designated lot lines. ".%. C 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN PRELIMINARY PLAT - CEDAR CLIFF CUTERCIAL ADDITION OCICBER 27, 1981 PACE THREE At the present time, it is staff's understanding that Por. Flanagan does not have any clients lined up to develop any portion of the overall development. Therefore, he is just preparing the lots in approximately 1 -acre sizes which would adequately acccnvcdate buildings and selling the individual 16 lots for strictly office use. Staff has enclosed two exhibits of alternate ways the site could be developed. However, the original application which has been submitted seems to be the most feasible and best designed for an overall development plan. If approved, the plat should be subject to the following conditions: 1. A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by the City for Lots 1-5, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 3, because this area will abut the residents in Cedar Cliff Addition. This landscaping is the main buffering area between the office and the residential lots. An adequate landscape bond shall also he provided and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. 2. A landscape plan shall accommodate all of the other lots as develop- ment occurs. An adequate landscape bond shall also be required for each lot and not released until one year after the landscaping has been camleted. 3. The plat should be subject to Dakota County Plat Commission's review and comments. 4. There shall be no other access allowed other than Scott Trail and the access proposed on Nicols Road. 5. There shall also be a restrictive access on the southerly 80' of Lot 7, Block 2 and Lot 4, Block 3 in order to provide adequate stacking distance onto Cliff Road. There shall also be a restrictive access on Lot 1, Block 2 in order to provide stacking distance onto Nicols Road. 6. All buildings shall require the same architectural and building ma- terial on all sides of the building when proposed in order that the building will not have an unattractive side. 7. All trash receptacles shall be incorporated in the side of the build- ing or attached to the building and maintained with the same archi- tectural characteristics of the building. DCR/jach ST • CITY OF EAGAN CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION AUGUST 25, 1981 PAGE THREE ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS s 1. ALL STORM WATER SURFACE DRAINAGE MUST BE CONTAINED WITHIN THE PERIMETER OF THIS PROPOSED PLAT AND DIRECTED BY WAY OF GRAVITY STORM SEWER TO.THE MARI ACRE POND (AP -9). 2. A 36', 9 -TON STREET WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN ERIN DRIVE. 3. A 5' CONCRETE SIDEWALK SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF ERIN LANE AND,THE WEST SIDE OF SCOTT TRAIL WITHIN THIS PLAT. TAC/JAC sq c a 0 TO: ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FROM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: AUGUST 20, 1981 RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT - CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION (STEPHEN FLANAGAN) THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS TO OFFER FOR CCN - SIDERATION OF THE ABOVE -REFERENCED PLAT: UTILITIES SANITARY SEWER AND WATERMAIN OF SUFFICIENT CAPACITY AND ELEVATION IS AVAILABLE ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF CLIFF ROAD ADJACENT TO THIS PROPOSED PLAT. GRADING AND DRAINAGE BLOCK 1 AND 2 OF THE PROPOSED PLAT WILL DIRECT ALL SURFACE DRAINAGE TO A LOW POINT LOCATED IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS PARCEL. BECAUSE THE EXISTING TRUNK STORM SEWER LOCATED ALONG CLIFF ROAD IS NOT DEEP ENOUGH TO ACCOMMO- DATE THIS PROPOSED LOW POINT ELEVATION, THIS PROPERTY WILL REQUIRE THE INSTALLATION OF APPROXIMATELY 1,400 FEET OF STORM SEWER WHICH WILL PRO- VIDE A DIRECT OUTLET INTO THE MARI ACRE POND (AP -9) LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF NICOLS ROAD NORTH OF ERIN DRIVE. THE PROPOSED DRAINAGE FOR BLOCK 3 DIRECTS ALL SURFACE WATER TO THE EAST LINE OF THIS PROPOSED PLAT INTO THE EXISTING LOW DRAINAGE BASIN. THERE IS PRESENTLY NO FEASIBLE WAY TO PROVIDE POSITIVE GRAVITY STORM SEWER OUTLET FOR THIS LOW DRAINAGE BASIN WITHOUT A SIGNIFICANT EXTENSION OF THE TRUNK STORM SEWER SYSTEM FROM THE EAST. SUBSEQUENTLY, BLOCK 3 WILL HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED DIRECTING ALL SURFACE DRAINAGE ONTO SCOTT TRAIL AND INTO THE REQUIRED STORM SEWER SYS- TEM MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY. THIS WILL NECESSITATE APPROXIMATELY 13-16 FEET OF FILL WITHIN BLOCK 3. STREETS THE PROPOSED CONFIGURATION OF THE INTERNAL STREET TO SERVICE THIS PRO- POSED PLAT FOLLOWS THE ORIGINAL DESIGN CONCEPT WHEN THE CEDAR CLIFF PUD CONCEPT WAS SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL. THE SETBACKS FROM NICOLS ROAD AND CLIFF ROAD ARE ADEQUATE. THIS INTERNAL ROAD SHOULD BE NAMED ERIN DRIVE TO PROVIDE THE CONTINUITY OF THE 4 -WAY INTERSECTION WITH NICOLS ROAD. A CONDITION SHOULD BE PLACED ON LOT 4 OF BLOCK 3 REQUIRING THAT DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO SCOTT TRAIL BE CONFINED TO THE NORTHERLY 35' TO PROVIDE THE PROPER SETBACK FROM THE MAJOR INTERSECTION WITH CLIFF ROAD. ALL OTHER LOTS SHOULD HAVE RESTRICTED ACCESS TO THE NICOLS ROAD AND CLIFF ROAD THEREBY REQUIRING ALL ACCESS TO BE TAKEN FROM SCOTT TRAIL AND/OR ERIN DRIVE. BECAUSE THIS IS AN INTERNAL MINOR COLLECTOR FOR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT A 36' WIDE STREET WITHIN THE 60' RIGHT-OF-WAY BE REQUIRED. I WILL BE AVAILABLE TO DISCUSS IN FURTHER DETAIL ANY ASPECT OF THIS RE- PORT WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THEIR MEETING ON AUGUST 25, 1981. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 60 Proposed.• CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION FOR: JCHN FLANAGAN fOUTLora a W H. clwR CLIMI I .! r/�/4 ni.ii iHr 1.�4 rlF, p fi/ l{njr rl WET L A NO Q VICINITY MAP —SURVEYORS— ' X Sec 30• Twy.27 R 23 :'Na•u'JlS^: ` .. 1 j it llr-rreo�j tiu-"i//�%/tQ i11-arm'`!'%i4 ;/_�KK-�r-Nl-� ... tiW .•. N.y.. .ii 1 1 1. r S _.� ` r94 < 3�ia, Cli I PaG I N I 2 ,iEI tl Z S 1Ifw� , r .I `.2. .1 rYl r`as 4 ', �f. .•O• Cs z L!iK,iJ{@_,:i!0K_.l_NPo_ LOW-�l,t_� j1` �S i.? �/t • �' Y ^r MpA. AIFFVIEW unr /. O V �•' " 1 �F:: yL �? �.. iWi rruuy�R•� ya ._ _ 1 ,rvA--. l f- jrrm _-l� - rTiD -.• •'_C 1 =• +Y I .�/wY,t' I 1 1 w�"'••) •.8 I'H �rrr%� r' Z _ `2 r1'i?yYurl�°�r ``'rx �`;6;fVd{/ r�.,/J;`. rti �4i1•,1 13 iLt�.PB;.. ` `'s 'Ni�'•. , �`o rs�rr,-/ . _ sw..r. L.—LJU it/c q IC TRAIk, I10 12 r,t< ryj/pQ . . ' 11. ."•^ 10 ``.�' ,Jr"'� "l:�/' `'9. dna,. "Y: 4L CD 7 +iy; //\..•'�'}B a:Z'Vy3;.• \ �� i 0�: y r� A1,�n at j ,a 5�ii 9' ?niwav __ICG+ ` 111f11j95 k 0 �8vbm,*rmy� Ia q '� ••• i lobfNl: r 1— Rm � •8 ;a a � ;� p L- i8 h e it x i• z al `I J �. v w ♦y 1__!'or L,i:!_j IL .J2rilY J $ ___1I Q o°~ ti x ,rNwl, ti 1 _..nalNrr/•W I J _l.,m, A a V � web'-� l '� � Srom-=1 LOT 11 1 AT I 1 Y I `� 'a' O 1 .t STATE llw.lw. I AID r ' ll�I.HIGHWAY •, I uM i. ...te�•'HP STATE •-zlrica--,/AID w'rll.,.rlH,K,lx./x.ux wrA.la r,.rrMruFiIGHW;4)' ;:ii l3._....- •' • •.YO ill/ -L••' SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS VIL;Ifql I T MAt� I wna— See.30, Tv* 27, PAY an i rr.0 III'll Ji r, 1z". Ij -wo— r Fiv -, I - � - I ,, r --wo WET 4_4 .4 oo w 4 ND S. M 4 z- :, 4 :1 k IFMi 4,� 3 2 3 ........ ... It Z -�6 4U lti�_ ii oq. -CLIFFVIEW 17 -W z I Wit" 10 pl; ZO 4L Cr— ca -zo 4ki, 411 -5 a 7 4 < Iy z > 4 4 J 2e is A 3 28 2 2 : F 7HM V) i I !A1 LIJ IL Z) z D A 0 (L) r - OI� LOT I LOT 6 L HIGHWAY STATE AID — — — — — —NQ S TATF Z.J. �'-��SHEET 2 OF �2SHEEETS 114IN ONES SINGLE FAM I LY HnMES T TWIN M wirl HC ES OFFICE OFFICE COM E MERCIAL I f a �.... I SCALE-* DATE= .or�. pon�_ Aaacrram =crgra .aea a �.... I 'DAKOTA COUNTY .DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTE13 1560 HWY. 55 -HASTINGS. MINNESOTA550J3 September 22, 1981 City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Attn: Planning Department Dear. Sirs: B E{112 LARSON D A.IOT� COJIiTV SURVEYOR V TELERn OnE; 612.437.020 The Dakota County Plat Commission met on September 22, 1931, to consider the proposed plat of CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION. Said plat is adjacent to County Road 423 and County Road 432 and is therefore subject to the Dakota County Contiguous Plat Ordinance. This plat appears to satisfy the provisions of the ordinance with one exception. Adjacent to the right-of-way lines on both County Road 32 and 23 shall be a restricted access ease- ment dedicated to the County of Dakota on the final plat. Upon satisfaction of this item, the plat commission will recommend approval to the Dakota County Board of Commissioners when submitted for recordation. Sincere yours, Ber and H. Larson Dakota County Surveyor BML/ej c: C. R. Winden & Associates COMMISSIONERS - IST :ISTRICT21,0 DISTRICT JOSEPH A. HARRIS GERALD E_ HOLLENKAMP HASTINGS SOUTH ST. PAUL 6S 3RO DISTRICT 4TH DISTRICT STM DISTRICT JOHN S. VOSS GENE ATKINS RUSSELL STREEFLAND BURNSVILLE INVER GROVE HEIGHTS BURNSVILL� 04 ZLI wp ROALL R-11) )R) E P R R4 R -IV R&D -IV ER� R-1 Y, Ind R-11 p LB R-11 is p R4 cscT L P LB R-1 cJ R -I nRI 1 3,3 R-1 R-11 :ALLEY M .In Ind )AInd RMVLEIZ 4 ... .. Elnd. —NE3---- PF NB AcrR-4 N V � t . �•. Y i r n —4 m i f1 tAl Rr.JEC DAR- RDVf' 4 MARI ya:`t.�.. _; PF R-,4 CSC �` V n Sym _ . QJ. 4•' SGL C S C IY ✓.�� J1 ,-�� ! �.b s�r�.► -LE ZNB RIVER R B l A A A A z' I TE5T ' II ` A. LB �. ��; ENTER R-2 R— I,"- A RB._ RIR( F£LI fN A ADQ�TI(ZJV ff�t LL A 1 Cy `/ � ' yy �` :.ti"`>_ ).�:,�Z�• 3y�J� M14i_�j '�. ani:✓'� �-`.,i SA 6kQ-j _ i "`1 �'ti�..i:`yrs-"i•s: '� ��.•.o,.L� JJ') i;�1 3, iJJ:. --1- '. )_ } ESiA�'EvS i - '.Js : � ' : � ,:>-). s.L ).'}•rte . ,_ :J� l: +.J.•' sir,. .J. - j: +�;,�� ♦]1 v, 1. �%'< .•,) _ i'.. APC Minutes October 27, 1981 • CEDAR CLIFF COMMERCIAL ADDITION The application of Steven Flanagan for preliminary plat approval of Cedar Cliff Commercial Addition was next heard by the Planning Commission. The 15.8 acre parcel would contain 16 commercial lots for office buildings only. Mr. Flanagan was present as were a large number of affected residents from the area. An application had been heard before the Planning Commission on August 25, 1981 to consider revision to the Cedar Cliff Planned Development to pro- vide for some retail -commercial use in a portion of the development. The Council denied the application to rezoning for commercial use. There was discussion concerning access and several alternate schemes for the development were submitted for review by the Planning Commission. The staff recommended the original proposed preliminary plat and also the recommendations made by the Planning Commission concerning the layout of the plat and the development. Steve Darling, a neighboring resident, stated the most important objection is the connecting of the access to Scott Trail from the office area and it was suggested by certain residents that Erin Drive be cul de sated to prevent additional excessive driving through the residential area in the Cedar Cliff Addition. It was noted the maximum cul de sac allowed without variance, is 500 feet under the City ordinance. Estimates were made of the number of persons who would use the professional buildings if the land was used to the ultimate with approximately 10,000 square foot buildings on each lot. There were concerns about the trash containers, that berming should be well designed and that the exterior lighting not affect the neighboring residents. Harrison moved to refer the application to the City Council with no further recommenda- tions from the Advisory Planning Commission. Krob seconded the motion. All voted in favor. LAWRENCE MILLER - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - A h W RESTAURANT The public hearing regarding the application of Lawrence Miller and Gary Lowe for conditional use permit to allow more than three amusement devices in a general business district located at 3998 Sibley Memorial Highway at the A & W restaurant was next convened. Mr. Miller and Mr. Lowe were present and stated that the reason for the application is that the restaurant has lost 40% of its business due to the revision of access in the Cedarvale Shopping area. The proposal is for a familiy restaurant with adult supervision, no smoking in the amusement area and further, that it was intended that there be more than 15 amusement devices. There were questions concerning the curfew time and the applicants indicated they would conform with the City ordinances in that respect except to permit the restaurant to remain open until 12:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday evenings. After discussion, Hall moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application, subject to all applic- able ordinances except that the establishment would be allowed to stay open until 12:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday nights, further, that the Council grant approval for a period of 5 years, subject to annual review with the Council authorized to revoke the license in the event that there Are viola- tions of any applicable ordinances. All voted in favor except Krob who voted no. 3 G% 0 Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Sixteen 0 PRELIMINARY-PLAT---BICENTENNIAL-8TH-ADDITION A. Federal Land Company for Preliminary Plat of Bicentennial 8th Addition, Consisting of Approximately 3 Acres -- The Advisory Plan- ning Commission held a public hearing on December 22, 1981 to con- sider a preliminary plat application for approval of Bicentennial 8th Addition which consists of approximately 34,322 square feet or 3.08 acres and contains two (2) commercial lots. At that APC meeting, the item was continued to allow City staff to address some additional items as well as suggest additional conditions if approval was considered. The APC again reviewed the application at the January 26, 1982 APC meeting and is recommending approval of the preliminary plat subject to the conditions as referenced in the APC minutes. There was considerable discussion regarding the site plan as to how the two lots of Bicentennial 8th Addition would develop. Lot 1 would consist of a 92 unit motel and Lot 2 a 5,000 sq. ft. office building. The Planning Commission was concerned about the 22 foot variance request for the setback at the motel. The APC also discussed the motel being three stories versus the rest of Bicentennial being all two story buildings. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's reports found on pages _ _'-70_ _ through __ A copy of the APC minutes of the January T6 -,-T9-92 meeting concerning this item will be included with the administrative packet on Monday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve the preliminary plat. ME „b, CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - BICENTENNIAL 8TH ADDITION APPLICANT: FEDERAL LAND COMPANY - MARTIN & VERNON COLON LOCATION: OU'II.IJT B, BICENTENNIAL 7TH ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: al ERCIAL UNDER A PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: DECEVBM 22, 1981 DATE OF REPORT: DECEMBER 16, 1981 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting preliminary plat approval of Bicentennial 8th Addition which consists of approximately 134,322 square feet, or 3.08 acres and contains 2 cormercial lots. LAND USE AND ZONING: Presently, the site is zoned coimiercial under a Planned De- velopment District. This is the only area left to be platted in the Bicentennial Planned Development.. The land use on this particular parcel is designated NB' (Neighborhood Business District) for the two lots. The overall planned development which was approved, shows this general location as a motel site for the Bicentennial Planned Development. IXIMIENTS: As stated earlier, the preliminary plat, Bicentennial 8th Addition, is the last Addition to be platted in the Bicentennial Planned Development. The appli- cant proposes to locate a motel on Lot 1 and an office on Lot 2. The preliminary plat is somewhat confined to the boundaries for Lot 1 and Lot 2 due to Washington Drive being constructed to the north and west of the plat, and the right-of-way for 35E abutting the south and east portion of this plat. Therefore, the restraints as to the depth of the parcel have been determined by the factors mentioned above. Therefore, the Colons' are platting the remainder of their par- cel into the two lots. At the present time, Federal Land Ccupany does not have site plans for either of the two lots. Staff, at this time, cannot address parking, setbacks, or lot cover- age because site plans have not been prepared. The applicant will have to meet the requirements of the zoning ordinance in preparing the site plan. If the applicant cannot conform to setbacks or lot requirements, a separate vari- ance will then have to be submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City Council. Due to the uniqueness of the two lots and the confined depth of the lots, the applicant may not be able to meet all of the zoning ordinance criteria. If the applicant cannot meet this criteria, then they will have to sub- mit a separate application for the variances which they cannot meet. _7Q CITY OF EAGAN BICENTENNIAL 8TH ADDITION DECEMBER 22, 1981 PAGE TWO If the preliminary plat is approved, it should be subject to the following condi- tions: 1. The sidewalk should.be constructed along the east side of Washington Drive on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Bicentennial 8th Addition. 2. Access or curb cuts should be coordinated wherever possible to curb cuts which already exist on the west side of Washington Drive. 3. The plat should be reviewed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation because the plat abuts State right-of-way. 4. The landscape plan and landscape bond for the two lots shall be determined at the time the site plans are reviewed for each of the particular Pots. At the present tire, the City does not have a landscape plan to base the landscape bond on. Or, if the City elects, they could establish a $2,000 landscape bond for each of the two lots with the final plat. 5. All easements shall be dedicated as required by City staff. DCR/jach 71 s YAN99 DOODLE ROAD p• � moi: QTTTfTTf�f ...� g., {� III OH+fH+r H+N-�H-O OIH+�N-IN+I+, • .®�' 1llWlll lllllllWllL --- --- -- -- YANKEE SDUAflE: PHri5E:1r.+.: _V-11A5£r��,..`S;r.: •.., �,,;.;< 11 I ouu..0 of x "OTFFMm i 0 D YANKEE SQUARE o........... i ru........ on........ n.x. FEDERAL LAND COMPANY wur.o .mu. nduou . I. MEND07.. ,1 •1 ' GB Ind• Ind.,. — � � � COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT lild P Ro ll Ind ; ,!.. GB c1 R l I a• _I�i Ind RBD R IV In r 'L r— d. LII i .- NB o LB, -' c I RIII y -0, '::. R -III -. - R -III R_� (�� '-C GOLF • .--R.p-- '. .n nd. � RII LB R-111 - .. a �'� R•.i_. 4 /r. I'vl�• '� r, , v �•�' R•II' ',�'I ,•�` RII '-P RIII �. x,}e10 R -I Ind :..r-'� �ilY, j�j ' Q C . v r. ftR•II• 1.w� O-�:� (�J �R-II R -I e i ...'R -IV �.:�E I eiq+{n � I +.l '1r;,u,•k': r I' �1 ��-III/ R' •lJly ,.,"d '� �l,>, ��`' ,HALL RII \\ R -I RII R -II IN P F: I .. R -II HS �. P i IH 11 r� nr�.; R -II - Q ',• � <� ' I _4 .� '... �/n R-111 Q RII LB 7 N R1 Rill R IU RIII• RIII l��'� ,A'�- RI ili CSC/GB/SLB R -t R -III ;!•-: R -I I i -II R -II �.P,... .. .'•w ii�i,.`i ® R -II, P JB CsC R I LB R I,. /�• __� LB c1% ; R -I P ' I� R -I JJ `, lal R -I J R-1 P; nwl� ' R -II i •l /�� R -II �.5,au r .y ..9, `Q• I' :i;, � � RII _�� - R -I P tZ(. - R -II VALLEYT..,lil _-, � li J• •.L I -73 ^—i MSEMOUN�� n ^s _ 1 Y LI �� r INPQi 40' c a aw.: = PFS � EADOR_3 �° LI _',, PF — .. vir JCIflI r tt ICS ft -4 R-4 SI EY T MINA R D u I�I• L I R -I —_ R-!4 j INPUSiRIA PARK A R_ R-4 I LI o r No ry 3 ac3 A RIDGE P'K A A94cia R-4 I R-4 NB NB A 3R[ -4 ?V- GB LR t _ p_ 4 . r � HE1l`irt . pF 75-3 R-4 A v�. A 4 1 f T LB tro -I I_D_G,VIW p+ ,C , TAf K — ? i — BL A(K yp'S \ Q PGRES ] / ADDITION ---- r R-4 JONN /�L ACKli . — - - RC - ACRES �I ; R -I - _ I 1 HI<_LIS T I _ I i Q�. ; T ) R•4 \�. _ R �� I' �� I _.,PF E —%�—J. R—I I yQs, i-; �,• R�dG`icK�1cH�E, 74 / / K :,tib ,•.�.r-i .(1% ` "' :.PAwK.',=..':`,: P Y n Tlx: ADVISORY PLANNING COPMSSICN FROM: DALE C. RUN=, CITY PLANNER DATE: JANUARY 19, 1982 RE: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR BICENTENNIAL 8TH ADDITION As you recall, at the December 22, 1981 Advisory Planning Cammission Meet- ing, the APC tabled the preliminary plat, Bicentennial 8th Addition,. in order to receive a site plan for Lot 1 and Lot 2 to see that the proposed motel and office would fit on the two lots which are being platted. At the present tine, the applicant has submitted a detailed site plan for the proposed office and motel complex. The site plan does not exactly follow the configurations of the plat. However, the overall site plan for the two lots make sense in site planning to design the entire area instead of trying to create two individual parcels. The first thing staff would like to point out is that Lot 1 on the plat contains approximately 89,871 square feet. The site plan for Lot 1 contains approximately 101,600 square feet. Lot 2 contains 44,551 square feet and is shaped like a stove- pipe which provides public access to Washington Drive. The site plan for lot 2 consists of approximately 32,000 square feet. The difference be- tween the square footages of the two lots from the site plans is approx- imately 12,000 square feet. This difference is that the applicant is using part of the northerly 60' of Int 2 to provide parking for the site plan on Lot 1. As stated above, the applicant has submitted a detailed site plan for the two lots. The motel which is located on Lot 1 of the plat is proposed to incorporate all of Lot 1, 89,871 square feet, plus the northerly 60' of Lot 2 which is an additional 12,000 square feet for a total site plan of 101,600 square feet. The proposed motel will consist of a 3 -story build- ing and contain 92 units and have a gross building square footage of 34,000 square feet, or approximately 11,333 square feet per floor. The parking for the facility requires 104 parking spaces. According to the proposed plat, the lot coverage would be 128, but the applicant would be short ap- proximately 11 parking spaces. The site plan which incorporates the nor- therly 60' of Lot 2 provides the additional parking spaces plus provides access to the north end of the parking lot. Therefore, a better circula- tion has been provided for the parking area for the motel complex. The only requirement the applicant cannot meet on the proposed site plan is the 50' setback requirement from the east lot line which abuts I -35E right-of-way. At the present time, the applicant is proposing a 30' set- back, or would require a 20' variance from the setback abutting I -35E. In looking at the elevation for the motel, it appears that the motel will sit approximately 10' higher than the off ramp of I -35E. Therefore, berm- ing or a good landscaping plan could provide the buffer area needed in- stead of the 20' additional setback which is required. Lot 2 on the plat contains approximately 44,400 square feet. The site plan shows approximately 32,700 square feet, or a reduction of approxi- mately 12,000 square feet. The proposed site would consist of a 1 -story office building which would contain 5,000 square feet of gross floor area. -75 CITY OF EAGAN PRELIMINARY PLAT - BICFSI MIAL 8TH ADDITION JANUARY 19, 1982 PAGE 'IUD The lot coverage on the site plan would be approximately 15% and increasing the site plan to conform to the platting of Lot 2, the lot coverage would be reduced to 11%. Both site plan and plat of the proposed building would be under the 20% lot coverage requirement. The proposed parking for the office building would be 29 parking spaces. The site plan indicates 29 parking spaces for the office building even with the reduction of the 12,000 square feet. The applicant meets all ordinance requirements for the proposed office building on Lot 2 with the exception of the 60' of frontage on a public street. Therefore, the applicant has platted the stovepipe lot, or the 60' strip, to Washington Drive to provide proper access to the office building. The last item staff would like to bring to the Advisory Planning Commission's attention is the proposed hotel that is a 3 -story building. In review- ing Ordinance 52, if this planned development is considered a Neighbor- hood Business, than the maximum height requirement in a Neighborhood Busi- ness is 2 stories, or 201. In Ordinance 52, any other commercial category, Limited Business, General Business, Roadside Business, Commmunity Shopping Center, all have a 30' height limitation, or would allow a 3 -story build- ing. Therefore, staff would like to clarify the applicant has submitted a proposal for a 3 -story building and a determination should be made that either a 3 -story building is allowed, or is not allowed, within this plan- ned development district. If approved, the site plan should be subject to the following conditions: 1. All driveway access to Lot 1, Block 2 should be a minimum of 241. 2. A 20' setback variance would be required for the motel from the east property line. However, berming or landscaping could be done in this area to offset this setback requirement. 3. A determination should be made if a variance would have to be granted for the 3 -story motel, or as a part of the planned devel- cpment, the 3 -story building would be an allowable use. 4. A cross easement shall be required in order to provide parking spaces for the motel on Lot 2 or the office building lot. The cross easement should be on the westerly 180' and northerly 60' of Lot 2. 5. The parking areas should contain an asphalt surface and concrete curbing around the perimeter of the parking areas. 6. A detailed landscaping plan shall be approved for each lot and a landscape bond shall be submitted and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. DCR/jach -7(o 1 N S . ITE PLAN S rte FROP"'41 bFFICE e� LOT 2 /SITE DATA LOT 1 BLDG. TYPE HOTEL 3 STORY 83 UNITS I R/}V INE _ 61TE AREA 3.33 ACRES ITA NWT. 101.600 SOFT APPOX. I BITE GREEN AREA 39S BLOG. SITE COVERAGE 111 GROSS BLDG. AREA 54.000 60 FT REQUIRED PARKING 104 SPACES PROVIDED LOT 2 BLDG. TYPE OFFICE - 1 STORY SITE AREA .76 ACRES 32,700 80 FT APPROX. SITE GREEN AREA 16% BLDG. SITE COVERAGE 13.3 % GROSS 81.00. AREA 6000 SO FT NET BLDG. AREA 4360 SO FT REOUIRED PARKING 22 SPACES PROVIDED rrruu r�rrr�� O ;i;•�'IFL=_:Nsi� ?.Hi?•d Aiil'T•G'! PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 1 BICENTENNIAL EIGHTH ADDITION otnlw.:V lru. G4:f,YT�pi., i.i.=✓:: ?tr;Y I •r I I \-ei�., NYrerH .•'NRf'IDOf£'. I flY4I7/r-J...r— '.ueyl- .r,,. I 'nul' II I' AM-ROW •../ •�' �. r.....n,..nr,...iic.<rir4�'- -}''dr w III h I. r- c.l 1, \\ //�•�'.` '>�- LOT d—1i'I IIIA It I' c � I I I � I —+ .`;_;•'r ��•� ! � �,<'.1, � BL�K � �!•, Ie .- � � •;: III .= r ` IN Iti .,. .. __ _ISL 1 ��:�� ,,,��r•�'>!u.,� ,, r ��II:,I� F�'=" .,_. ____L_____ I I I : I_ I ., n �-- I n•,••.$' �/ l� ••`� �• � +`'% , I d! //, %' " •n.� `'1'i i '..� t- [�' 1 Itll � I ao-. e..-t[G[� ��w_.. L_.—__ - - � IIL��"'7�r� /•f/tee � % 1;,�/X % //,/I`� i��.r, I IIS I c.o..+. .� wo-.... IF _ .._. _ —L._.A `"•,�-� -a i � � III ' . / .' � \ ._.I' j d,rwln'e •-1 '' ' I I �:r w.a:.. ma. e.,r...:....�. Y ': 1. i.�1 s.wr �r6�y.I.M ,..J'•' I \I`. I� I I�.' / / ' / I Y' __ r� I. - _. _ .. , - /•I r.,,ii lll� `= __� �� .i..//� II ,� / Tj I- ,:.•. aZ=___L'.r.Tll—_—.i%_---__—_ —�— L.,. il. L' rte Np till i 1 LNN J Ai S."z Fri/ B r.Ls 0 _ y . N CAw Agenda Information Memo January 29, 1982 Page Seventeen VARIANCE_FOR_JOHN_HENRY_FOSTER_BUILDING B. John Henry Foster Company to Allow an 8' Variance from the 40' Setback Requirement from a Public Street in a Light Industrial District -- The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing at the January 26, 1982 meeting to consider an application submitted by the John Henry Foster Company for an 8' variance from the 40' setback requirement from a public street for a light industrial building. The APC is recommending approval of the variance to the City Council. For additional information on the item, refer to the Planning Intern's report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages _ _ _ through _-' — _ A copy of the minutes on this item will be included in the administrative packet on Monday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the requested variance for John Henry Foster Company. slThomas_Li $ed es ty ministrator 71 0 0 TO: THE ADVISORY PLANNING CCMISSION, C/O DALE RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FRCM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: JANUARY 21, 1982 RE: JOHN HENRY FOSTr'2i BUILDING - VARIANCE REQUEST (IAT 3, BLOCK 4, EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK #3) The Engineering Department has some background that may be beneficial in consideration of this variance request. At the time of platting of Eagandale Center Industrial Park #3, there had not been determined a need for the future Mike Collins Drive at that time. Subsequently, the location of Mike Collins Drive through this 3rd Addition had not been dete=ned. When the Eagandale Center Industrial Park #4 was platted, utilities were installed within this public right-of-way and an easement was acquired from Lot 2, Block 4, 3rd Addition. Subsequently, when Mike Collins Drive was physically constructed through a City contract, it did not follow the alignment of the easement that had been previously acquired for the utilities. The actual alignment of the curb and gutter in relationship to the east property line of Lot 3 (John Henry Foster Building) is located within the shaded portion of the attached site plan. Subsequently, when Jim Donicht of Bales Building Systems acquired a build- ing permit for the construction of this facility, they constructed the footings in accordance with the required 40' setback from the existing east property line without knowledge that an additional street easement would have to be acquired to incorporate the existing alignment of Alike Collins Drive. After reviewing the existing alignment of Mike Collins Drive and determi- ning that an absolute minimum of 7.5 feet of boulevard is necessary to allow for sufficient snow storage and private utilities (telephone, gas, electric, etc.), it requires the dedication of a minimum 9.26 foot public street and utility easement over the easterly line of Lot 3, Block 4, Eagandale Center 3rd Addition. Before this determination had been made, the footings and foundation for the proposed facility had already been constructed. This additional easement requirement eliminated the previous 40' setback and reduced it to a 32 +/- foot setback as referenced on the attached site plan. Subsequently, the builder was informed of his require- ment to proceed with a variance request to the required 40' setback. The builder has agreed to dedicate the necessary street and utility ease- ment to incorporate the existing alignment of P ke Collins Drive. These documents are presently being prepared and processed for the property ow- ner's execution and ultimate recordation at Dakota County. Therefore, the Engineering Department would recommend consideration of approval of this variance request in consideration of receiving the necessary street and utility easements as previously discussed, and also due to the fact that this variance request was through no fault of the developer based on the information that he had available at the time of the construction of his footings and foundations. TAC/jack $ 0 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT LOCATION EXISTING ZONING DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: DATE OF REPORT: REPORTED BY APPLICATION SUBMITTED: 0 JOHN HENRY FOSTER BUILDING - JIM DONICHT PART OF THE NEI -4 OF THE NE; OF SECTION 11 L -I (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) JANUARY 26, 1982 JANUARY 18, 1982 DAVE OSBERG, PLANNING ASSISTANT The .application submitted is for an 8' variance from the 40' setback requirement from a public street for a Light Industrial building. Staff has worked with the applicant in the past on the location of the building. Prior to submittal of the variance application, the applicant thought he was complying with all zoning ordinance requirements. However, it was brought to the applicant's attention that the building was only 32' from Mike Collins Drive, or 8' closer than the zoning ordinance allows. Due to the unique location of the road, staff mistakenly allawed the building to be constructed too close to the road. The applicant is seeking the variance to cmpensate for the error by staff. DMO/jack a M,:i Y I n) 'ST SEWER NI.::. b,.,. '79.80 i– .)M: :Ices C. .. I.lve n•q b4 —NORTH _ NORTHEAST CORp;F LOT L LINE OF ,� im-©u,o. OF LOT 3 '� Iryy e3934 _ M31c r Oi 2� u Q t r 2 -- \ °61 TTG �• 332 x563 (b 6 co 1 IrNll'` POSED' .,BUILDING c)'- ism" .sm" e, - L �. � J I •� f I .6633 462.56 ` •6653 I 0L17,11 7 0<0 929 / 1 s �•• L ihl �A• eS- C ! —9613 t1 1c aE41, �• E - Ix662 r-.. I �. 9>Gi H B64 \ s _ �.. bG19 x ri . PROPOSEDI \ .860.4 y;1.5PARKING LOT .962�9s :1 C\ \' •�1 �1 9�{ x6S9A ` .eF2< 2T � 9531�• 959=--. �_ M, CURB SED e 35;`w36 \ BS7n ` FYI .i \ Fdl fi \ .S56G Z PROPOSED / � ,9c•� 1 \ 15"R.C.P STORM \0o S SEWER w Os yY �10.0 1a3 '\,\ •B'w I - \ SOUTHLINE $e", Y' fJ 4\ \ af•:f sourllE; E%2 OF LOT 45Yti EXISTING SIORM SEWERCC IL •eoo ^ ,wx �__' row m>.tL�.f` ( 1• b * j b� i, ,I, , .. � � I '•x,90 � , ( 7 �, 1 MM .•� T. �ry, 11 r�' Y: •1 n�5� � DIY e]'�� f nee 'rnn _—' AA »Jeu' ♦ \ rD '_b_]C.\' �»nROAD .. - _ ., w .•i: �, � . •� �. _ �' i _ syr - � .r.. We•� I � :. zip y • � D ♦ ne L _ I � � 1 y _ ',e�)i ieOlO .. ) HTS � C .]']e ! _�_..'�� '• .. i POND ,'S%�s ze' ` - - '�kY , 4 3.i a t]- ts• Ji'--_\� y i' fie' .yr .— .. s 1 t t I Jlk 24 22 % QpVN 01 CIS j •' ]• J , '/ A-_ •J 20 4D 111Ae.) - rte.. - — -- I. j• .[� R-111 B VALLEY :"D A -AR U N GB RB Ind. Z= COMMERCIAL :Zjrl . ........ P, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Ind a.r R lot:: R11 Ind.. R-11 G 8 RE Ind. R&D-: R-111 RA Ind.. 1 nR LBj r 01 —R-111 E4 RF -19 - '-find. R-11 R -'I'l -czz: GOLF —R 11 p �U R -I R-11 RE' Rill R I I Ind r7"". —ZN. P R-1 jo HALL INC N`7 R 11 R-11 R RIj_ R-111 n is 1 P R-11 '-sit "R LB h, !11 p FR .. 7 R -1b NB 7. 69 R-111 ,X/IRB� 7 R-111 R-1 CSC./GB/LB R-111 RL R -I C -E' ...... P 2 _..777R-1111 R-11 P csC o • 74-0 7 11 �\ gra •, LEX 1 fi0 I D RSC C F ;. LII R-4 GB LI LONE OAK ROAD A }: A iFilhA rr\ Ll AUDITOR'sA -- GB Rsue - ` - ;.. �19iPC'd� G B a Rnio 3 1 R-1 .� F c R L I PLnRIAL PA, .a I s--"j tr.�L 74- - � L I M I R- R-2 Gbp. R-3 P LB NiI�iL ScoT�-4 LI' HILL > / LI L1 WE960TT / P D CARRIAGE / HILLS 76-1 GOLF - C PIE�' FSE GARDEN L TS \ LPA . 1v�..a-+- w%r+ti•.�x- ww..a Y _ _ a_ .. .. % :. i•'_ _r....---, .a�..a.•_ Ss. _....e+.aG(a' .. ._..y..a+P .. `, .jSy •+P ^C 'Ff^ µ .r:. MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JANUARY 29, 1982 SUBJECT: INFORMATIONAL Fire Department At the direction of the City Council when meeting with the Relief Association during the fall of 1981, a draft procedural manual has been prepared that outlines the constitution, bylaws and procedures and policies taken from minutes for operation of the Eagan Volunteer Fire Department. A copy is enclosed for your review. The City Administrator has asked the Fire Chief to review the policies and procedures as drafted and provide any changes so a final draft can be prepared, adopted and used as a guideline of operations by the Fire Department. The City Administrator met with Gus Welter, secretary of the Minnesota Volunteer Firemen's Association, Roger Katzenmaier, the City's auditor, Fire Chief Childers and John Flood and Darrell Haines of the Relief Associa- tion Pension Committee on Thursday, January 28, 1982. The purpose of the meeting was to continue discussions on tax consequences of various pension funds and, more importantly, to explore pension options available to the City and Fire Department to provide a pension fund for the volunteer firemen. The City Administrator feels the meeting was successful in that both Mr. Welter and Mr. Katzenmaier were directed to prepare a memorandum that outlines tax consequences and the various plans in detail and to further prepare for a work session between the City Council and Relief Association within the next two to three weeks. Such a work session would not be regarded as negotiations or as a time to make decisions on a pension program for the Fire Department. This first work session would be a fact finding session at which time Mr. Welter and Mr. Katzenmaier would be present to share in the information and answer questions from the City Council and volunteer fire fighters. Information will be sent out in advance of the meeting so questions can be drafted by everyone concerned. After the work session is held, a decision could then be made at a later date by the City Council. Again, I felt this meeting was beneficial and brought the City and fire fighters closer to an understanding of all the facts per- taining to further discussion on the pension matter. Planning Commission Officers Chuck Hall was elected chairman; Lloyd Krob, vice chairman; and Doris Wilkins, secretary as officers of the Advisory Planning Commission for 1982. The height subcommittee appointments were Chuck Hall and Doris Wilkins. The Cable Television Subcommittee representative was Lloyd Krob and the Assessment Committee representative was David Bohne. 0 0 Informative Memo January 29, 1982 Page Two History Committee The City Administrator, at the request of the City Council, did notice Mr. Frank Dembroski that the City Council would like an update on the history and, more importantly, assurance that the history will be completed and published prior to the opening of the library facility which may occur late this fall. Mr. Dembroski did respond to a letter from the City Administra- tor and the City Administrator, after reviewing the amount of data that has been prepared by Mr. Dembroski, is quite confident that the history will be completed and published in accordance with the City Council's desires. The history committee is meeting on Tuesday, January 2, 1982, in the City Administrator's office and will be making a report to the full City Council at the first meeting in March, March 2, 1982. Paratransit Enclosed on pages Tcf through `l0 is a copy of the letter the City Administrator sent to the project manager of the paratransit study with the Metropolitan Council. Betty Schaumberg delivered the letter prior to her meeting with Mr. Diaz and the rest of the paratransit committee. Mrs. Schaumberg also indicated that a film on paratransit is available for review by the City Council. The film would take approximately ten to fifteen minutes. If members of the City Council would like to see the film, the City Administrator will arrange for its viewing in conjunction with a special meeting sometime during the month of February. Virginia Harrington A letter was sent to the Mayor and City Councilmembers from Virginia Har- rington who resides at 1420 Skyline Road that reads as follows: "I wish to compliment the snow removal crew of Eagan for the fine job done on Wednesday, January 20th. The record breaking snowfall was handled better than any other time I can remember in the 30 years I've lived in Eagan. It was a pleasing surprise to find Skyline Road plowed by 4:00 when 1 returned from work. Please extend my satis- faction and praise to the persons on that department. Sincerely, Virginia Harrington" People's Natural Gas Company Enclosed on page 71 is a letter that serves as notification of a rate increase for natural gas service to the general domestic and commercial customers. I believe that most of you have received your gas bills and you will find that this rate is in effect on the current billing. Apparently, and according to Mr. Lee of People's Natural Gas, the customers living in Eagan will receive credit sometime in the near future for the first rate increase that was placed into effect. Apparently, the entire amount was not approved by the Public Service Commission. HE Informative Memo January 29, 1982 Page Three Engineering Information - Teleprompter The City will have its consulting attorney draft a letter to Teleprompter authorizing that cable company to gather information for the purpose of conducting an engineering study of the City of Eagan at no cost or obliga- tion to the City of Eagan. Work Program Memo The City Administrator is drafting a work program memo that includes a time table for the City Hall, addresses modifications to the 1982 budget and several other issues that will need to be addressed by the City Council in the near future. This memorandum will be available in eight to ten days. ityvAdministrator a • O BEA BLOMOUIST MAYOR 7MOMp5 HEDGES •'1 CITY ADMIRISTRATOR THOMAS EGAN CITY OF EAGAN EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE CITY CLERK JAMES A. SMITH JERRYTHOMASACHT THEODORE WACHTER ""_x:57195 PILOT KNOB ROAD ' K COUNCIL MEMBERS-P.O; BOX ]1199 - EAGAN, MINNESOTA January 19, 1982 _+r PHONE 454-8100 y NATALIO DIAZ PROJECT MANAGER METROPOLITAN COUNCIL .. 300 METRO SQUARE BUILDING 7TH & ROBERT STS ST PAUL MN 55101 ." Dear Mr. Diaz: I am writing this letter on behalf of the Eagan City Council to request specific information regarding the goals, objectives and status of the pro- posed paratransit system. According to our records, a preliminary applica- tion that was made by the Metropolitan Council on behalf of the Cities of Apple Valley, Burnsville and Eagan in early 1978 read as follows, "to demonstrate a paratransit system that would serve the communities of Apple Valley, Burnsville and Eagan which would provide local circulation needs and provide a collection and distribution system for regular route transit, in a manner consistent with the paratransit development guide plan." This study was later expanded to include the Cities of Lakeville, Rosemount and Savage. The objectives of the study further indicate that the para - transit project was to: Improve accessibility to regular route transit; 2. Determine what regular route transit is unable to provide that could be provided through paratransit; 3. Determine if the paratransit system would be utilized by drivers and passengers and at what price the service would be used. The original project description suggested van service for shopping and major employment centers throughout the six cities. In addition, the para - transit proposal was intended to compliment the existing MTC regular route system. It is the City of Eagan's understanding that the paratransit study will be completed by the consulting firm of Cambridge Systematics, hired by the Metropolitan Council. The City of Eagan is concerned that many of the objectives and the project description as originally proposed for a para - transit study have been changed during the past two years. Apparently, a bus service is now under consideration that would act as an alternative to the MTC bus service. The City of Eagan realizes legislation exists that allows this alternative; however, a full fledged bus service was never con- sidered as an alternative. sq THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. 4 ! . • I City of Eagan/Paratransit January 19, 19882 Page Two The City of Eagan has several concerns it would like to have addressed before the paratransit study proceeds too much further: 1. What exactly are the goals and objectives of the paratransit study? 2. What are the various alternatives for financing the paratransit system? 3. How will ,transportation be provided to those individuals who need to get to and from the Minneapolis and St. Paul areas? 4. What happens if one of the six cities wants to opt out of the para - transit system? 5. Does the paratransit sutdy/system have any priorities? If so, what are they? The City of Eagan is very concerned that the paratransit study has expanded into more than originally planned without adequate communication between the Metropolitan Council and the six communities. By addressing the concerns I noted previously, I feel the Eagan City Council would have a better understanding of what is happening with paratransit. Sincerely, (�Vjt"�C4 " Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator TLH/hnd cc: Betty Schaumberg Ed Brunkhorst d Peoples Natural Gas Company January 22, 1982 To The Honorable Mayor and City Council Eagan 55122 Attention: City Clerk This letter will serve as notification of a rate increase for natural gas service to the general domestic and commercial customers in your community effective with bills rendered on and after January 19, 1982. This rate increase reflects the increased gas costs from our wholesale supplier, Northern Natural Gas Company, based on its annual purchase gas adjustment filing which was effective December 27, 1981. Pursuant to the Cost of Gas Adjustment Provision (Original Sheet No. 74) of our Tariff on file with the Minnesota Public Service Commission, Peoples will place into effect the rate increase of $.06951 per hundred cubic feet of gas to reflect the change in wholesale cost. All general service customers will be individually notified of this rate increase by a billing insert that will be included with customer bills rendered at the increased rate. If any portion of the above filed increase is changed by Federal Power Commission Order, we will notify you of corresponding adjustments in our rate for your community. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact our local office or the undersigned. Sincerely, PEOPLES NATURAL GAS COMPANY District Manager C? I