05/18/1982 - City Council Regular,..AGENDA
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
REGULAR MEETING
CITY HALL
MAY 18, 1982
6:30 P.M.
SPECIAL NOTE: Due to a school board election in Independent School District
#196 on May 18, 1982, no formal business can be transacted until
after 8:00 p.m. Therefore, the City Council will use the period
of 6:30-8:00 p.m. as a workshop session. The public hearing
section of the agenda will begin at 8:00 p.m. with all other
formal items to follow.
I. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES -
III. DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS
Q. A. Fire Department e' C. Park Department
B. Police Department D. Public Works Department
QQ'
IV. CONSENT ITEMS (One motion approves all items)
A. 911 Emergency Telephone Grant Agreement
C,11 B. Temporary 3.2 Beer License — Dale Goergen
1\ C. Temporary 3.2 Beer License — Arnold Doering
Q 11 D. Contract 82.2, Change Order #1 (Briar Hill 4th Addition)
e.l2 E. Project 356, Present Feasibility Report/ Order Public Hearing
(Comserv)
P%I -F. Excavation Permit — Oakwood Hts. Condominiums (Countryside
Builders, Inc.
P,►1 G. Contract 80-21, Change Order #1, Blackhawk Lake Trunk Storm
Sewer Outlet
V. 8:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS
Q•13 A. Project #264A, Reassessment Hearing, Twin View Manor Utilities
e,lg B. Project #274, Reassessment Hearing, Silver Bell Raod Area Streets
& Utilities
C. Project #264B, Assessment Hearing, Twin View Manor Streets
e
VD. Project #284B, Assessment Hearing, Windtree Addition Streets
e 23 E. Project #293B, Assessment Hearing, Windcrest Addition Streets
Q ZSF. Project #308B, Assessment Hearing, Duckweed Trail Streets
e 13G. Diamond Lake, Inc., for Industrial Revenue Bond Financing in the
Q Amount of $750,000
VI. OLD BUSINESS
VI1. NEW BUSINESS
�ltt, A. Gerald & Shirley Smith for a 10' Variance from a Front Yard
Setback Located at 4367 Onyx Dr., Lot 22, Block 3 Cedar Grove 4
p 40� B. McDonald's Corporation for a Variance to Exceed the Allowable
` Height for a Pylon Sign Located on Lot 1, Block 1, Mari Acres
(�O C. Roger Kreidberg of Scheutt Investment Co. for Preliminary Plat
B Approval, Berry Ridge Addition, Consisting of Approximately 3.65
Acres, Located on Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop Estates
Q%S D. Pilot Knob Shopping Center, IRB Financing/Request for Extension
'f? E. Lone Oak Heights for Temporary Sales Office
Q
0
Eagan City Council Agenda
May 18, 1982
Page Two
6
VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS
Q1 A. Contract 82-4 (Twin View Manor 2nd Addition, et al, Streets)
Receive Bids/Award Contract
Q 0 B. 1982 Health Insurance Bids
C. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commission Update
IX. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda)
X. ADJOURNMENT
i 0
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COLNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 14, 1982
SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION
After approval of the April 20 and May 4 regular City Council
minutes and the May 18, 1982 City Council agenda, the following
items are in order for consideration: (Special Note: The page
or pa'g'es to be corrected by the City Attorney regarding the April
20, 1982 regular City Council minutes are enclosed on page
FIRE DEPARTMENT
A. Fire Department -- There are no items
the Fire Department at this time.
POLICE DEPARTMENT
to be considered for
B. Police Department -- There are no items to be considered for
the Police Department at this time.
PARK DEPARTMENT
C. Park Department -- There are no items to be considered at this
time for the Park Department.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
D. Public Works Department -- Item #1: Request of Ann Pietsch
Mrs. Pietsch's request to the City Council was a sc e u ed agencTa
item under Public Works Department at the May 4, 1982 regular City
Council meeting. In the absence of Mr. or Mrs. Pietsch, this item
was continued until the May 18 meeting. Mrs. Pietsch has informed
me that they are planning to be present. For your information,
Mr. and Mrs. Pietsch were granted a deferment by the City Council
for certain assessments against their property located on Dodd
Road. The property is recorded in the names of both Mr. and Mrs.
Pietsch and therefore the agreement of record between the City
of Eagan requires both Mr. and Mrs. Pietsch's signatures. Mrs.
Pietsch has requested special consideration by the City to waive
the signature of her husband which would allow her to proceed with
the assessment deferment. If the assessment deferment agreement
is not exercised, the assessments will be levied with the property
taxes this year. The City staff, including both the City Adminis-
trator and City Attorney, has explained to Mrs. Pietsch that the
City staff cannot waive this right of signature. Due to the Pietsch
situation, there are too many uncertainties providing risk to the
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Two
City. Mrs. Pietsch was advised that she consult legal counsel
in an effort to work out this problem on a personal level. Mrs.
Pietsch has asked to appear before the City Council and therefore
was scheduled as a part of department head business. Her letter
was difficult to reproduce and therefore a copy has been typed
and is enclosed on page __!$ for your reference.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny waiving
Mr. Pietsch's signature on the deferment agreement between the
City of Eagan and Mr. and Mrs. Pietsch.
Council Minutes •
May 4, 1982 • PHH
LEXINGTON PLACE PRELIMINARY PLAT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 209 1982
After the motion made by Smith and seconded by Wachter to approve the
application with 4 conditions, on page 6 of the Minutes of the April 20, 1982
meeting, the Minutes should be worded as follows: "Mayor Blomquist recom-
mended a limit of 12 studio units and submitted a proposed Resolution in the
form of an amendment for consideration by the Council regarding approval of
the application which was rejected. Those in favor of the motion were Wachter
and Smith; those against were Blomquist, Thomas and Egan. The motion failed.
There was considerable discussion concerning the number of studio units that
should be allowed. Mayor Blomquist then submitted the following Resolution:
WHEREAS, U. S. Homes, Inc., has applied for preliminary plat approval for
a 672 -unit condominium complex consisting of 28 buildings with 168 studio
units, and
WHEREAS, the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan provides for goals
and objectives in housing; and,
WHEREAS, Table 12 p. VIII -27 provides for a goal of 50 modest cost
dwelling units within Section 14 of the City where this development is pro-
posed; and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City to distribute modest cost housing
in a reasonable manner about the City; and
WHEREAS, a reasonable upgrading of Table 13 P. VIII -30 for inflation
since 1978 would result in the studio units being classified as modest cost
housing;
NOW THEREFORE, upon motion by Blomquist, seconded Eagan, it was Resolved
as follows:
1. That the preliminary plat application of U. S. Homes be approved
subject to the following conditions:
a. That no more than 50 studio units 'as described in the applica-
tion be allowed so that additional modest cost housing may be
allowed in Section 14 within the goals of the Eagan Compre-
hensive Guide.
b. etc.
12 3
_ G-�; � , `J`� �f�•.F<Cver� r � �L�.. �e��c-aG . JF'/'L'>..;' .c_ s��:.sr�-.<
.—. -� �z%c- G[ct-or�ia�s,clu _�-i' /r.� y.,�.rc:�. G�� xe.� °• .�,� -
\,
... .�UZC.cC. �/C 1�2 .!%/L(-e'..=L� /T%FLrL iCLn.•c. �;C/C/ Z1r
.+�.0 zz 2--
4 /
_.. ---- - ��Z � G,.h�..�•c%� kip ��„ �` �Crnc.� /�,� / 7�� A .-- li.�.���
-_._---_-��.. -.� �, �.lo,� Gee �� 0�4�.•� �� .6�,�._----
"To the Honorable Mayor,�`�
"My name is Ann Pietsch. I live at 4275 Dodd Road, Eagan. My hus-
band and I are separated. I've got.a deferment for the acessments
but my husband will not sign. I make the payments. Therefore
just for this year until I know more what will happen with this
house, I would very much like for you to consider just one signature
on deferment papers. I can not afford $100.00 per month to be
attached to this payment. Also with the past record of payment
on this mortgage the mortgage company will not go along with late
payments. I have struggled all my life and I don't need a for -
closure of this house because of acessments which we did not want
here. We had to be one of the mis-fortunate people who have to
pay interest yet on this money due for acessments which we can
not come up with -- which is over $9,000.00. Is a lot of money.
I contacted city attorney for help they said I should write the
Council. I want to appear before the Council if necessary. I
am very concerned about this matter. I need a home to live in.
I can not afford to loose it because of acessments due.
Mrs. Ann Pietsch
4275 Dodd Road
Eagan, Minn."
• 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Three
Item #2: Project 257, Public Works Committee Meetin (Pat McCarth
aim or ama es -- a Pu is or s ommittee met on Tuesday,
ay at :30 p.m. on forty acres of land owned by Mr.
McCarthy located at the southwest corner of Deerwood Drive and
Pilot Knob Road to review his claim for damages resulting from the
restoration performed for the above referenced project which pro-
vided for the installation of a trunk storm sewer outlet from Thomas
Lake to Blackhawk Lake. Copies of the background information per-
taining to this Public Works Committee Agenda was forwarded to
all City Council members previously. Committee chairman Ted Wachter,
committee member Jerry Thomas, and Public Works Director Tom Colbert
met with Mr. McCarthy to walk the specific property in question.
While the soil sample analysis performed by Twin City Testing,
Inc., indicated no significant difference the soil located in the
construction zone as compared to the undisturbed soil elsewhere
on his property, the visual inspection by the Public Works Committee
did notice that there were areas where erosion had occurred, washing
away what minimal topsoil there was and exposing rocks and boulders
in certain areas. The field inspection verified Mr. McCarthy's
contention of his attempt to till this field for planting. However,
he contended that due to the type of soil provided in the restora-
tion it was not condusive to proper tillage nor an ability to sup-
port crop growth. While the contractor made every attempt to sal-
vage and replace whatever exising topsoil there was along this
alignment, it should be noted that this is the second time that
a major utility construction took place along this alignment.
The original construction was to install the trunk sanitary sewer
line that was installed in 1972. Consequently, after two con-
struction projects, what limited topsoil originally existed could
have slowly diminished and been lost in construction. It was noted
that the quality of the soil was not highly rated to begin with
or in the adjacent undisturbed areas. However, Mr. McCarthy still
contends that he is unable to make use of this field. Subsequently,
he is demanding that the City replace a foot of topsoil over the
3.72 acres of disturbed land to enable him to continue his farm
operations. To replace this amount of topsoil over the disturbed
area would take approximately 6,000 c.y. at an estimated cost of
$22,500.
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Four
Public Works Committee Recommendations
Because of the excessive costs associated with replacing new topsoil
over the disturbed area which would result in a quality of land
better than what originally existed, .it was the committee's recom-
mendation that the City consider "renting" this construction area
from Mr. McCarthy for the negotiated $100 per acre figure as agreed
to by Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy indicates his intention to con-
tinue farming this field for fifteen years which would result in
a cost to the City of $6,000 over the fifteen year period. However,
it was the committee's recommendation that the rate of $100 per
acre be approved resulting in an annual payment of approximately
$372 to be paid to Mr. McCarthy on an annual basis for each year
he is unable to make use of this property for farming purposes.
Mr. McCarthy's request for Council consideration is for the replace-
ment of topsoil. However, he has given an indication of his wil-
lingness to accept the "rental" alternative as suggested by the
committee. The Public Works Committee will be available to discuss
this item in further detail with the full Council on May 18 to
obtain a final resolution to this question.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny Mr.
McCarthy's claim for damages and establish an acceptable alternative
if City liability is determined.
R
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Five
i CONSENTI 'ITEMS!
There are a total of seven (7) items on the agenda referred to
as consent items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council.
If the City Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further
detail, those items should be removed from the consent agenda and
placed under additional items unless the discussion required is
brief.
911 EMERGENCY TELEPHONE GRANT
A. 911 Emergency Telephone Grant Agreement -- The City has received
a revised agreement from Dakota County regarding the 911 emergency
telephone service agreement. In a letter from Joseph Schur,
Director of Planning & Human Services for Dakota County, he stated
that apparently the grant agreement amount as prepared by the Mcto-
politan Council staff was in error. The correct amount of the
grant to the City is $20,799 and not $22,367 as originally indi-
cated. The original amount in the April 12, 1982 letter from Dakota
County included some network installation costs. These network
installation costs will still be paid by the County, but the direct
grant to the City must be changed to reflect the installation cost
of 911. Therefore, enclosed on pages $ through _/6- is a
copy of the letter from Dakota County Including a copy of tTie re-
vised grant agreement.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To terminate the previous
grant agreement as executed at the May 4, 1982 City Council meeting
and approve the revised grant agreement as stated.
�I'Xax'.41 ' v,LT1yf7
.IEFFRFY I. CONNELI.
UrQctor O1 Plannma PLANNING SERVICES
Phv31e31 Develom"Oril DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER
1560 HWv 55 - HASTINGS. MINNESOTA 55033
16121 43).0225
May 4, 1982
Thomas L. Hedges, Administrator
City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Rd.
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Tom:
JOSEPH P iCHUR
Director a! Plannmy
Hkiman Services
In reviewing the 911 Emergency Telephone Service Grant Agreement amounts with
Metro Council staff, an error was discovered. The letter dated April 12, 1982,
and the contract attached to that letter, included a grant amount of $22,367 for
the installation of 911 in your City. In talking to Metro Council staff, it was
determined that the correct amount for your City is $20,799. The original amount
in the April 12, 1982 letter included some network installation costs. These
network installation costs will still be paid by the County, but the direct grant
to the City must be changed to reflect the installation cost of 911 at your PSAP
only.
Please find attached, a revised grant agreement which reflects the change described
above. I regret any inconvenience this error may have caused. If you require .
further explanation or have any other questions, please do not hesitate to call upon
me.
JPS:vk
Enclosure
r—
r6
COMMISSIONERS—
Sincerely,
Joseph P. Schur
Director of Planning,
Human Services
IST DISTRICT 2Ho DISTRICT 3RD DISTRICT 4TH DISTRICT STH DISTRICT
JOSEPH A. HARRIS GERALD E. HOLLENKAMP JOHN S. VOSS GENE ATKINS RUSSELL STREEFLAND
HASTINGS SOUTH ST. PAUL BURNSVILLE INVER GROVE HEIGHTS BURNSVILLE
0
GRANT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the Dakota County Board of Commissioners,
•
hereinafter the Board, and the City of Eagan ,
hereinafter the City, are desirous of establishing 911 Emergency
Telephone Service within the municipality, and
WHEREAS, the Board by Resolution 81-718, adopted
December 22, 1981, has authorized the grant of $ 20,799 to
the City to reimburse the City for the expense of establishing a
Public Safety Answering Point, hereinafter PSAP, within the 911
system, and
WHEREAS, the City is willing to establish, maintain,
and operate the PSAP within the City.
..
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board and the City do mutually
agree as follows:
1. The Board will reimburse the City $ 20,799
for the expense of establishing the PSAP to be operated within
the City, such reimbursement to be made in January, 1983.
- -
2. The City will establish, maintain and operate the
.-
PSAP for the City within the countywide 911 system.
'.. -.
3. The city will assume the expense of purchasing the
power supply unit for the operation of its PSAP and will so pur-
chase the unit.
-
4. The Board shall be entitled to receipt of the 208
71
reimbursement from the U.S. Department of Transportation for
installation of the 911 system.
5. The City will hold harmless and defend the Board
3;z?.r;<;"s.:,;;:..i<s�,;-;:y;;:.:_•:;i
and Dakota County from any claims arising through the
establishment, installation, operation, or maintenance of the
PSAP - 911 system within the City.
6. The City agrees to comply with all laws and
regulations, g lations, both federal and state, relating to the expenditure
" -
of these funds, including but not limited to those laws
prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, religion,
national origin, sex, or handicap.
Q Page 1 of 2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
Agreement to be duly executed.
Approved as to form:
Assistant County P
torney/Date
Approved as to execution:
Assistant County Attorney/Date
Approved by Dakota County Board
Resolution No. 81-718.
This instrument drafted by: DMF
Dakota County Attorney's Office
Dakota County Government Center
Hastings, Minnesota 55033
Telephone: (612) 437-0438
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
By
Gene Atkins, Chairman
Hoard of Commissioners
Date of Signature
Attest
Carl D. Onischuk, Auditor
Date of Signature
CITY OF
By
Title
Date of Signature
Attest
Title
Date of S gnature
C-82-14 Page 2 of 2
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Six
TEMP. 3.2 BEER PERMIT - DALE GOERGEN
B. Temporary 3.2 Beer Permit for Dale Goergen -- An application
for a non -intoxicating malt liquor license was applied for by Mr.
Dale Goergen residing in Apple Valley, Mn. The purpose of the
special temporary 3.2 beer license is for use at a softball tourna-
ment scheduled on July 24 and 25 at the Univac fields. The applica-
tion has been reviewed by the Eagan Police Department and has been
found acceptable for consideration. Therefore, the license appli-
cation is in order for City Council review and consideration.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve the 3.2 beer
license submitted by Mr. Dale Goergen.
TEMP. 3.2 BEER PERMIT - ARNOLD DOERING
C. Temporary 3.2 Beer Permit for Arnold Doering -- An application
for a non -intoxicating malt liquor license was applied for by Mr.
Arnold Doering residing in Eagan, Mn. The purpose of the special
temporary 3.2 beer license is for use at a softball tournament
scheduled on June 19 and 20 at the Univac fields. The application
has been reviewed by the Eagan Police Department and has been found
acceptable for consideration. Therefore, the license application
is in order for City Council review and consideration.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve the 3.2 beer
license submitted by Mr. Arnold Doering.
CONTRACT 82-2
D. Contract 82-2, Change Order #1 (Briar Hill 4th Addition) --
Upon the initiation of the contract to install utilities in the
Briar Hill 4th Addition, it was discovered that the developer did
not complete his grading to the required elevations in accordance
with his approved grading plan. Subsequently, the City's contractor
has to incur additional cost to perform this work. The City has
received a written letter of concurrence from the developer agreeing
to the acceptance of this additional cost as his responsibility
and waiving the right to objections associated with this increased
cost. The estimated cost for this additional grading is $2,080.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve Change Order
#1 for Contract 82-2 for an additional $2,080.
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Seven
PROJECT.356
E. Project 356, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing
(Comsery No. 1 Streets & Utilities) -- On March 16, the City Council
received a petition from the developer and ordered the preparation
of a feasibility report. The report has now been completed and
is being presented to the Council for their information.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To receive the feasibility
report for Project 356 (Comsery No. 1) and order the public hearing
to be held June 15, 1982.
EXCAVATING PERMIT - OAKWOOD HTS.
F. Excavation Permit, Oakwood Heights Condominiums (Countryside
Builders, Inc.) -- The City has received an application for a
grading/excavating permit for the Oakwood Heights Condominium pro-
ject, located on the north side of Wilderness Run Road east of
the Wedgewood Addition. The preliminary plat for this proposed
development was approved by the City Council on May 4, 1982. The
grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been reviewed and
approved by the staff. The insurance certificate and performance
bond are anticipated to be in order by the May 18 Council meeting.
All fees associated with this application have been paid.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve the excavation
permit for Oakwood Heights Condominiums to Countryside Builders,
Inc.
CONTRACT 80-21
G. Contract 80-21, Change Order #1, Blackhawk Lake Trunk Storm
Sewer Outlet -- During the predesign final investigation in the
vicinity of the overdepth tunneling construction, soil samples
indicated a general sandy type soil in this vicinity. However,
during the construction of the tunneling operations, the mechanical
advancement of the storm sewer was halted by large rock and boulder
obstructions. Subsequently, the contractor had to switch the means
of his operation from mechanical advancement to hand tunneling.
After several meetings and review of this force account work, it
was determined that the contractor was entitled to an additional
$11,533.41 for this unanticipated costly work. The staff recom-
mends acceptance of this change order providing for this additional
payment.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve Change Order
#1 to Contract 80-21 in the amount of an additional $11,533.41.
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Eight
PUBLIC HEAR'ING'S
PROJECT #264A
A. Project #264A, Reassessment Hearing, Twin View Manor 1st Addi-
tion (Utilities) -- On March 16, 1982, in compliance with a court
ordered directive resulting from an assessment appeal for these
utilities, the City Council vacated the assessments as established
at the public hearing on September 15, 1981 and ordered a reassess-
ment hearing to be scheduled for May 18, 1982. This was necessi-
tated by the fact that the City did not follow proper assessment
procedures in determining benefit to the property before levying
the assessments. Subsequently, this reassessment hearing will
allow the City to follow the proper procedure. In order to perform
this market analysis in determining benefit, it will be necessary
for the City Council to continue the final reassessment hearing
for any objecting property owner and order a property appraisal
to be performed. Therefore, in anticipation of the additional
costs expected with this market analysis requirement, the per lot
assessment for the twelve (12) appellants had to be increased by
$500 to cover this future financial obligation by the City which
is a cost directly related to this improvement. Subsequently,
the new per lot assessment is $6,514.85 as compared to the September
15, 1981 final assessment of $6,014.85.
The basis for the appellants' objections and subsequent appeals
is based on the amount of interest that was levied at the final
assessment hearing. The appellants felt that they were guaranteed
an 8% rate of interest at the time of the public hearing which
was held on March 18, 1980. Because the assessment rate is depen-
dent upon the rate of interest associated with bonds sold to finance
the particular project which occurs after the public hearing, the
City does not have the knowledge or the ability to guarantee an
assessment rate. Subsequently, the amount of interest levied for
this particular project was 11.0%. For the Council's information,
the following history of bond sales and their related percentages
for the past three years is presented to show how the economy has
had a significant impact on interest rates: ASSESSMENT
DATE AMOUNT BOND INTEREST INTEREST
11-1-78
$1,915,000
5.64%
8.0%
6-1-79
6,385,000
5.61%
8.0%
12-1-79
1,825,000
6.75%
8.0%
7-1-80
3,060,000
6.28%
8.0%
12-1-80
3,650,000
9.27%
11.0%
8-1-81
4,530,000
10.70%
12.5%
12-1-81
2,875,000
10.61%
12.5%
13
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Nine
This particular project was included under the bond sale dated
12-1-80 due to the bids for this project being received in September
of 1980.
As the Council may be aware, with this controversial project, there
were several irrate residents in this subdivision who have had
and continue to have complaints pertaining to this project. The
staff has continued to work with these property owners to try to
resolve their concerns,. However, it is expected that several of
these complaints will still be brought forth at this reassessment
hearing. The City Attorney and Public Works Director will be able
to discuss with the Council questions pertaining to this project
and its subsequent reassessment.
Enclosed on page 16 is a copy of the letter that was forwarded
to the twelve (127 appellants explaining to them the City's proce-
dure in this matter. The following :table is a listing of the
appellant property owners and some 'information pertaining to their
interest in this project.
Proiect 264A Reassessment Heari
1+
Petition
Connected to
Appellant
For�gainst
Sewer or Water
Wesley Berg
X
Yes
Arthur Coestner
X
No
A. Nelson
X
Yes
Tony & Elinor Villelli
X
No
Norm & Judith Mundahl
X
No
Terry & Virginia Lambert
X
No
Jim & Helen McDevitt
X
Yes
Gordon & Loraine Byers
X
Yes
Jim & Harriet Morris
X
Yes
Ben & Marlys Ruzicka
X
Yes
Larry & Linda Wittwer
X
Yes
Dennis & Claudia Mueffleman
X
Yes
1+
40
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Ten
For the Council's information, enclosed on page is a petition
that was submitted at the time of the public hearing ordering in
the installation of utilities signed by several residents objecting
to this project. It is interesting to note Item F., wherein the
people indicate their awareness of the uncertainty of the assessment
rate.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: If written objections
are received by May 18, continue the public hearing for those
specific individuals. Close the public hearing for those indivi-
duals who do not object to their reassessment or agree to drop
their original assessment appeal and authorize the staff to certify
to the County Auditor for collection.
1S
Ll
EEA EEOMOYIET
... .. .. ..
.MIA TNOI:M5 NEOGES
' OILNY:bPIY1O1
TNO, SEGA" EOOENE VAN OVEOEESE
CITY OF EAGAN
IAM., A.0..,
COY EARN
!E"VY IN0M.I
1NEOOOnE WnCNlE9 I'�ywilf PILOT NNGO ROAD "
LWNOI YfuMM
0. ADA 11,N
:""-EAGAN, MINNESOTA "0
Inn
,:Y
ENONe isaeloo '-
April 23, 1982
D.
Re:- Project 264A, Contract 80-19 (1Win View Manor Utilities)
Dear Property Owner:
As you are aware, an appeal has been filed with District Court pertaining to
.
- -- __-
the City's levying of special aacea„ONts associated with the installation of
.
the utilities Under the above -referenced project. Cne of the points of objec-
-
tion noted in this appeal referenced the City's Procedural omission of per
.
.
forming market analysis necess�; to determine benefit received through
_
the
referenced Project. While the City was aware of this requirement, it elected
not to perform this analysis due to the additional costs that would be incur-
ncurred.
red-The City has tried tam ways Provide the necessary improvements at the
...... -
most economical cost in response to the petitioned request of affected proper-
.-- . ".. .. .
ty owners.
-. �-
However, with this project being appealed through the judicial system, the
City will be required to perform this referenced market analysis before we
".
can be allowed to certify these assessments for collection. 'therefore, on
.
,.:::'•.:....
April 6, 1982, the City Council officially vacated and set aside the special
assessments levied against those property owners who officially appealed those
assessments to the District Court. The City Council then scheduled a "reassess-
mart" hearing to be held on May 18, 1982. inclosed with this let, trs you will
.
fired a form that incorporates the final assessment figure associated with the
-
property Under your owmership. Please cote that the City has had m include
..
a "estimated" figure of $500.00 to cover the costs associated with performing
the required market analysis and Property appraisal that would be incurred if
any Property owner requires this technical procedure to be followed in order
--
to Prove benefit to the affected property,
.
If this market analysis and property appraisal is required of the City by the
-
i
Property owners, the City will be required to perform that work. Alf costs
.
associated with this analysis then become a related and direct cost associated
With the installation of these utilities. SubSetpently, the City has to add
these costs together with all other costs to determine the total amount to be
assessed against the benefited properties. Subsequently, the enclosed amount
-
.
references your fair share of these additional costs associated with this pro-
.
jest.
.
the City is obligated only to assess those costs that are incurred in relation
to a particular Prefect. 'therefore, if a market analysis andapprai-
sal is not Yom!
required,mese mots can be related to reflect only those mats
associated project for the installation of utilities.
-
In summaxy, this letter is r cant to inform you the reasons why the special
....
assessments to be discussed on May 18, 1982 for the installation of utili-
ties have increased over those costs that were levied at the original final
-
assessment hearing hold on September 15, 1981.
:'-
.
If you have any questions pertaining to this procedure, please feel free to
... _
contact either the City Attorney, Mr. Paul Hauge at 454-4224 or me.
.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Colbert, P.E.
Director of Public Works
..
TAC/jachis 1
/
-
x -Ann Goers, Special Asseee„=„t Cleric
-
r..7i a M .
Paul Hauge, City Attorney
.-
i
Ic
C
C
I
• •.
March 24, 1980
T0: City of Eagan City Administrator
ATTN: Mr. Tom Hedges
SUBJECT: Improvement Project #264
The undersigned residents of Twin View Manor, after very 'serious considera-
tion, request the City Council of Eagan to rescind the approval of utilities
and street improvements for Twin View Manor approved at the council meeting
of March 18, 1980.
It seems appropriate that the following reasons should be considered by the
Council for this request:
A. Cost figures presented were not inclusive, residents were
not aware of total cost of project with information provided.
B. Petition for street improvements was misleading as it was
specified on a per lot basis rather than a cost per front
foot.
C. Petition for street improvements was (12) negative and (4)
for. This is precedent setting for the whole city.
D. Show of hands vote by audience included citizens not involved
in this project.
E. Present economic condition in our country today; unnecessary
expenditure is inflationary.
F. Not sure of interest rate projected @ 8%.
G. Most homes included in project have present utilities split;
one in front and other in rear.
In order that the maximum number of residents are available for this important
meeting, we request that this action be taken at the April 15, 1980 meeting.
NAME
ADDRESS
S"3
C _
GL....,
<177-(-�,
y,
11
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Eleven
PROJECT #274
0
B. Project #274, Reassessment Hearing, Silver Bell Road Streets
On September 15, 1981, the final assessment hearing was held
for the above referenced project which provided for the installation
of Silver Bell Road from Nicols Road to T. H. 13. Subsequent to
this, Mr. Lester Spenser, located on the northeast corner of Silver
Bell Road and Nicols Road, has appealed his assessment in addition
to filing a claim for damages against the City of Eagan on a non -
related storm sewer item. Again, this appeal points out the City's
deficiency in obtaining a market analysis to prove benefit equal
to or greater than the amount of the assessment levied. Mr. Spencer
was assessed $1,683 under this project. Therefore, the City Attor-
ney has recommended the City Council vacate the original assessment
and establish a new reassessment hearing which would allow the
City to proceed with the necessary property appraisal analysis
required by assessment law. Because this street was constructed
to a collector status greater than the normal residential street,
a residential equivalent assessment was used rather than the entire
cost of this project. However, the estimated $500 associated with
performing the required property appraisals and market analysis
should be the direct responsibility of this property. Therefore,
the original assessment in the amount of $1,683 should be increased
to $2,183 for the final reassessment hearing to be held on May
18 to cover the anticipated additional costs associated with per-
forming this market analysis as required by Mr. Spencer through
his assessment appeal action. If a written notice of objection
is received prior to the hearing on May 18, the public hearing
should be continued to allow the staff to perform this additional
work. If Mr. Spencer decides to drop his original assessment appeal
and/or does not object to this reassessment, the original assessment
amount should then be reaffirmed and reapproved by Council for
collection.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close/continue the
public hearing and approve, if appropriate, the final reassessment
for Project 274 to Mr. Lester Spencer.
11
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twelve
PROJECT 264B
C. Project 2648, Final Assessment Hearing (Twin View Manor 1st
Addition - Streets) -- Enclosed on page 'LO is a summary tabula-
tion of the final assessments associated—with the installation
of streets in the above referenced subdivision. All required
notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to
the affected property owners informing them of their final assess-
ment amount. The final cost per lot is approximately 5.67% higher
than the feasibility report estimate presented at the public hearing
on November 5, 1980. This is a result of performing some of the
boulevard restoration originally proposed under the utility project
as a part of this street construction. Subsequently, the utility
assessment was 6.9% under the feasibility report. When adding
both improvement projects together, the net result shows a. 2.8%
underrun of those costs estimated in the feasibility report to
install both streets and utilities.
Contract 81-2 was awarded in May of 1981. Subsequently, this pro-
ject was included in the 8-1-81 bond sale, resulting in an assess-
ment interest rate of 12.57. If there are any written objections
submitted by the public hearing on May 18, the public hearing for
final assessments should be continued for those objecting property
owners to allow the City to perform additional input as may be
required.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: If appropriate, close
the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project
264B and authorize staff to certify to the County Auditor for col-
lection.
/9
0 0
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT NO: 264B
SUBDIVISION/AREA: TWIN VIEW MANOR ADDITION
FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: May 18, 1982
IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED:
F. R. = Feasibility Report
FINAL F.R.
WATER RATES RATES
DArea
0 Laterals
nService
F1 Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STORM
Area
Laterals
SANITARY
Area
Laterals
Service
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STREETS
Gravel Base
QSurfacing
Res. Equiv.
NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 22 Sing Le Family Lots
NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 Years
RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5%
TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $81,130.94
CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-2
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 51 1980
we
FINAL F. R.
RATES RATES
$3,687.77/lot $3,490.00/lot
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Thirteen
PROJECT 284B
0
D. Project 284B, Final Assessment Hearing (Windtree First Addition
— Streets) -- On April 20, 1982, the City Council received the
final assessment roll for the above referenced project and
authorized the final assessment hearing to be held on May 18., 1982.
Enclosed on page ZZ. is a summary sheet indicating facts and
figures associated watt- is project. Although the final assessment
exceeded the feasibility report by approximately 29%, this is a
direct result of a written request by the developer to include
the upgrading of Elrene Road adjacent to the subdivision as a part
of this project. The developer has been informed through proper
notification of this final assessment figure and its comparison
to the feasibility report. All required notices have been published
in the legal newspaper. Staff has not received any objections
or comments pertaining to this final assessment.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing
and approve the final assessment roll for Project 284B, Windtree
First Addition Streets, and authorize the staff to certify the
assessment roll to the County Auditor for collection.
21
0 0
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT NO: 284B
SUBDIVISION/AREA: Windtree Addition
FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: May 18, 1982
IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED:
F. R. = Feasibility Report
FINAL P.R.
WATER RATES RATES
0 Area
O Laterals
E] Service
E] Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STORM
F1 Area
0 Laterals
FINAL F. R.
SANITARY RATES RATES
Area
0 Laterals
Service
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STREETS
Gravel Base
❑x Surfacing
E] Res. Equiv.
NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 14 Lots (Single Family)
NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 Years
RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5%
TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $42,425.88
CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-2
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 7, 1979
:2.z
$3,030.42/lot $2,350.00/lot
0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Fourteen
PROJECT 293B
0
E. Project 293B, Final Assessment Hearing (Windcrest First Addition
-- Streets) -- On April 20, 1982, the City Council received the
final assessment roll for the above referenced project and ordered
the final assessment hearing to be held on May 18, 1982. Enclosed
on page a -q is a summary sheet with the facts and figures asso-
ciated wit�iis project. As can be seen, the final assessment
rates are under those quoted in the feasibility report discussed
at the public hearing held on January 15, 1980. Notifications
of these final assessment figures were sent to the developer and
published in the legal newspapers for this hearing. To date, the
staff has not received any objections pertaining to these assess-
ments.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To
and approve the final assessment roll for
First Addition Streets, and authorize th
roll to the County Auditor for collection.
a.3
close the public hearing
Project 293B, Windcrest
e staff to certify the
0
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT NO: 293E
SUBDIVISION/AREA: Windcrest Addition
FINAL ASSESSMEENT NEARING: May 18, 1982
IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED:
F. R. = Feasibility Report
FINAL F.R.
WATER RATES RATES
QArea
QLaterals
RService
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STORM
0 Area
nLaterals
0
FINAL
SANITARY RATES
Area
Laterals
Service
71 Lat. Benefit/Trunk
(STREETS
0 Gravel Base
xO Surfacing
Res. Equiv.
NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 30 R-2 Lots, 20 R-3 Lots
NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 Years
RATE OF INTEREST:
F. R.
RATES
R-2 $1,889.1 lot $2—,1-17.-27—
R-3
2,11 ,2R-3 $ 944.59/lot $1,059.65.
TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $75,567.20
CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-2 & 80-25
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: January 15, 1980
a4
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Fifteen
Project 308B
F. Project 308B, Final Assessment Hearing (Duckwood Trail -Streets)
-- On April 20, 1982, the City Council received the final assessment
roll for the above referenced project and authorized the final
assessment hearing to be held on May 18, 1982. Enclosed on page
24 is a summary sheet with facts and figures as they pertain
to this particular project. As can be seen, the final assessment
rate is less than the rate quoted in the feasibility report pre-
sented at the public hearing on June 17, 1980. Proper notification
has been sent to the developer pertaining to these final costs
and the required notifications published in the legal newspaper.
To date, staff has not received any objections pertaining to this
final assessment.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing
and approve the final assessment roll for Project 308B, Duckwood
Trail Streets, and authorize the staff to certify the roll to the
County Auditor for collection.
a 5'
0 0
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT NO: 308B
SUBDIVISION/AREA: Duckwood Trails
FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: May 18, 1982
IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED:
F. R. = Feasibility Report
FINAL F.R.
WATER RATES RATES
EjArea
E) Laterals
Service
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STORM
U Area
nLaterals
FINAL
SANITARY RATES
Area
Laterals
Service
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
ISTREETS
IIID Gravel Base
® Surfacing
Res. Equiv.
NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 2 Lots & 4 Outlots
NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 Years
RATE OF INTEREST:
TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $60,923.69
CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81_2
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 17_, 1980
26
F. R.
RATES
$19.81/LF $20.00/FF
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Sixteen
IR FINANCING - DIAMOND LAKE, INC
G. Diamond Lake, Inc., for Industrial Revenue Bond Financing in
the Amount of $750,000 -- An application to consider industrial
revenue bond financing for Diamond Lake, Inc., was received and
is in order for consideration. A public hearing was set at the
April 20, 1982 and proper advertisement has been published in two
(2) local newspapers as prescribed by statute. The application
for industrial revenue financing as proposed by Diamond Lake, Inc.,
is for the purpose of acquiring equipment and fixtures to be used
in conjunction with a retail supermarket which is under considera-
tion as a part of the Pilot Knob Shopping Center. It is estimated
that the supermarket will contain approximately 25,000 square feet,
will provide approximately 90 new jobs at an estimated payroll
of $1,040,000. The estimated annual sales in the supermarket is
$14,000,000. The Pilot Knob Shopping Center issue in the amount
of $5,500,000, approved at the March 17, 1981 City Council meeting
is providing for 114 new jobs which did not take into consideration
employment proposed for one of the major anchors, a supermarket.
The bond, if approved, will be in the form of a single note with
a seven year term which will be personally guaranteed by John Sulli-
van, Sr., John Sullivan, Jr., and James Sullivan. This proposed
transaction is not a limited partnership. The proposed construction
of the supermarket as a phase of the shopping center complex is
to begin July 1, 1982 and be completed March 15, 1983. Since a
new financial statement has not been published for Diamond Lake
Inc., the review provided by Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.,
dated November 30, 1981, is valid for this application. Enclosed
on page D,8 is a copy of a letter from Ernie Clark, Miller &
Schroderu� nicipals, Inc., providing a review of Diamond Lake,
Inc. Also enclosed without page number is a copy of the application
for industrial revenue financing, financial statements and all
other pertinent information required as a part of the City's appli-
cation procedure. The City Council requested a list of the equip-
ment with the application that was considered in December of 1981
and, therefore, that list is again made available with the packet,
found on pages through9 This application was denied
o
when presented e re the City ouncil- at the December 1, 1981
meeting, the motion reading as follows: "Egan then moved, based
upon the reasons above described and the fact that a precedent
would be set by the Council in authorizing financing of the equip-
ment only, to deny the request for industrial revenue financing.
Parranto seconded the motion and all voted in favor." City Council -
member Wachter was absent at that meeting. For a copy of the dis-
cussion and action taken by the City Council at that meeting, refer
to page _+0 .
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
industrial revenue financing for Diamond Lake, Inc., in the amount
of $750,000.
';L '7
Tall Free Minnesota (800) 8626002 • •
Toll Free Other States (800) 328-6122
Ae
Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.
170 Northwestern Financial Center, 7900 Xerxes Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 • (612) 831-1500
November 30, 1981
Mr. Thomas Hedges, City Administrator
City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Re: Diamond Lake, Inc. Request for
Industrial Bond Financing
Dear Tom:
We have reviewed the request for the above and have talked with
Richfield Bank and Trust regarding their conditions for purchasing
the Industrial Note.
The Richfield Banks feel comfortable with the proposed "loan
agreement", the financial statements of Diamond Lake, Inc., and
the Sullivan's as Guarantors for Diamond Lake, Inc. Extension of
time has been given by the Bank to coincide with Council action.
Land for the facility will be leased by Diamond Lake, Inc.
Inasmuch as the project will provide additional employment, add to
the tax base of the City and adequate provisions have been made to
Richfield Bank and Trust to assure payment, we feel the City is
adequately protected if they decide to approve this request.
ELC:ps
as
Very truly yours,
MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC.
Ernest L. Clark
Vice President
Headquarters: Min neapolis,Minnesota • Branch Offices: Solana Beach, California • North brook. Illinois • St. Paul. Minnesota • Naples, Florid.
Member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation
STORE NLME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
i \
/�✓
6
RETAILER
CITY
DIV.
PAGE NO.
.Ew
RE-
AVD.,,-. O.E. OAT[
Me D.
QTY.
TY.
DATE
DATE
euc
Ra
ADCNED
IRYolc ED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
,
,
I
I
_ _
-GENER
I
, ,
I
I
�
I
I
I
I
,
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
simpping ear b.
,
I
I
17,000
I
at=d pails
I
300 130
I
I
,
I
I
, ,
I
,
I
-47
Flom Scrubbing e'G •
I
/
Web Bry u
I I ,
I
nresst2re elcancr
I
I
I
I
28fr
_1,3-0-
, ,
I
I
1
,
I
i�
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
, 5-d",
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
I
I
,
I
I
I
AIM i nanqinnc,
I
I
Arn 1) r
62-412
STONE FI:G111iOJ COFY
S
U
P
E
R
V
L
U
S
T
0
R
E
,S
N
C
STORE NAME
STREET
/_-\
PROPOSED BY
DATE
6
RETAILER
CITY
DIV.
PAGE NO.
NEw
AE•APPS,_..
MOO.
OPEN DATE
aTY
G.
OTE
A.
DATE
AD.Eo
DATE
INVOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
T r 1T
I
�
i
I
I
Typewriter
I
I
�8g+v
I
I
i
I
�
�
I
I
I
I
I
�
�
I
I
i
�
�
I
I
I
061 oo
i
La
O
I
I
I
1
I
I
�
i
I
r-micinguitI hers
ao
as pi
Fire
;
i
i
Exhaust Pans (eampresser reem)
i
I
E i
9$}fi6
i
aB I Q
LIS
)11
sbnlvl ng
1
i
I
I
i
�
001 69
I
i
, aa� e e
I
20"Q
Refrigerat on
I
i
I
c 4D-1 9 9
_@31;4tiA
I
I
62-412
Sl'O❑E EH GIN F. E I1 COPY
STORE NAME
STREET
'
PROPOSED BY
DATE
6
RETAILER
CITY
DIY.
PAGE NO.
rlEw
B[•
M 00.
Aev... 0>1B o•iE
OTY.
ED
QTY.DATE
Ro.
ADTAED
DATE
III VOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
�
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
/ ITV G
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
I
TOTAL spaw-,RA13 eii As .91 FIT e -ATT ON
I
I
1
I
/ I
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
W
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
62-412
STORE EtlGIN EEI? JJPY
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
6
RETAILER
CITY
DIV.
PAGE NO.
x[w
x[-
Moo.
Aeo: .. ae[x ori[
O TY.
TY.
DAT[
DTc
suc
IID.
coa[o
..v.ICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
T+n >• c
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
TV
n
I
1
,
1
9-7
I
I
I
1
I
^II ^
tl�tl-Q
I
1
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 1
I
7
I
Gr-eee�ry
I
I
storage shelving pallet
1
I
-
I
I
I
I 09
I
,
250
N
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
, ,
,
I
Pallet ftacks
r
I
go
I
-1 --or stanas
,) •\
I
I
1
I
1
,
I
I
I V u
,
1
1
I
ryg1Lq
1
I
I
VVI Vl
1
I
I
Forl'•
I
I
!uu
I
I
uu1
I
^;1
'
I
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
;
1
62-412
sroliE EIJGIPIE [f: ccP'r
Q
m
V
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
i r
`-
i---- 6
•an. _S. on[x DATE
RETAILER
CITY c
DIV.
PAGE NO.
fw I.E.
Moo.
C
OTT.
TY.P.xc
T.
auc
xo.
Ro[x[O
Ix voICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
I
I
I
I
I
�
a24,0001
On
- 1 261, completGoa
I
I
I
I
I
O VV
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
i
Pae Seales
�
2, 5 I
1
I
I
I
I
�
I
i
�i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J tation
goI
i
I
t
I
i
�anana DisplayI
'
i
I
I
I
�
, -86
I— —be m–aehine
I
1
I
�
7
I
I
w7lbin
I
�
'
Misuel
�
I
I
I
I
I
3[ "G;–"
I
nAT, PrOMMr,I
V 0-/-gn--gc- Q G
I
I
62-412
STGLE Cf.'P'i
U
P
E
R
V
0
L
u
[a]
is
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
47,
RETAILER
CITY
DIV.
PAGE NO.
x[w
B[-
Ael •. Ox[. obi[
MOO.
aTY.
TY.
DATE
DATE
aDD
RM
RDMED
INVOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
1
I
�.ked ffleat case
I
00
I
'
se
I
I
—/
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Heat: Rail and hooks
I
I
2001 00
I
I
ShU3:ViL11J :Lli
I
1
I
1,2001 00
I
I
I
W
u
1
00
I
I
1
I
I
Pan racks
8001 u OF
Chickendollies
i
I
.. J l Uv
•
p�'I p4
I
I
-Meat pems
I
I
I
V
I
I
I
Mcat Ings
I
I
I
I
1
V I U
Meat lay car 1
I
I
1
I
I
0-0
I
I
2 Wheal hand truck
I
I Z) I uv
sheivingu
I
I
Moat Block
I
I
81 VU
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
4H6J-0 '
I
I
I
s1xe�x Meat YimEtableCcPf 1/600 00
STORE NAME -
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
RETAILER
CITY .
DIV.
PAGE NO.
NEw
MF•
-
•iV.: _.. OVEN DAT[
Moo.
7
CITY.
TT.
CATs
0AT[
eu.
D.
ADENED
INVOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
�TFi' TrT.ApqTrTrATTrvkT r*r)m 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
,
I
I
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
1
,
,
,
-
�
I
I
I
'
'
I
1
I
,
I
I
00N
I
I
i �
Meat
I
I
I
I
1
I
n An
gria4er
on!
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
-:--phille Ur Lfti= grilldCr,
1
I
I
_ [ Pe
1
I
1
1
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
�vuI
I
I
1 _
,
I
I
I
I
1
J
51—V
I
I
oil stone
I
I
1
°ac
T4-at Pept. Desk
I
I
r'
I
I
I
I
L
"T' 2 "Tf�ATT ON
1
1
I
,
62-412
STOI[E Eli Glf: F.FN CCf•'(
U
P
E
R
V
o
U
S
T
0
R
E
,5
N
C
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
�v 6
RETAILER
DIII TY "'
DIV.
PAGE NO.
xt:w
R[-
OD.
APP..... OPEN DAT[
QTT.q".
SU 11
RD.
DAT[
RODRco
DATE
INVOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
1AC,zen Food J
1
I
/vvul
I
I
Food J
I
I
/ ee
I
1
r r
I
I
,
,
91
ril
I I A r r.i
I
I
1
I
I
nr
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
�
,
IN
i
I
i
I
•
I
,
I
I
I
nn. n.
, ,
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
,
I
,
1
I
,
I
1
,
,
I
,
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
,
1
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
,
I
1
I
I
1
1
,
1
62-412
STGfiE FNGIFI F.F II CDf'!
U
I"
L
U
S
T
0
R
E
N
C
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
RETAILER
CITYi:. '•�
DIV.
PAGE NO.
9
NEW
T.cu.
-E•
APP..-A. OPEN DATE
vTr.
auc
Tr.
xD.
DATE
nvucD
DATe
Ix r-IEED
VENDOR
MANE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
Mi a
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
I
1nairly_
1
,
9
1
Cooler, 141 x 321 corn elte
1
,
13 000100
1
-Dairy
Dairy receiving desk
1
75!0
4 Wheel stock tructs
250' 00
2
I
I
,
,
pliscellannoug
I
1
I
1
1
I
m r
I
I
I
I
I
A I
—T
I
p
,
�
V�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
1
,
I
1
I
�
,
I
I
I
I
�
I
I
1
1
,
I _-
I
1
I
1
1
,
I
I -
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
I
I
I
I
J
, -
1
I
,
1
1
I
I
—
I
,
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
63-AIY
5TGf1E ENGN E!1 CCI"'I
U
P
E
R
v
�
I
L
U
5
T
0
R
E
is
r�
c
STORE NAMESTREET
i--�
4�—
PROPOSED BY
DATE
- 6
RETAILER
CITY ;•-�
DIV.
PAGE NO.
xLw
x[-
MOO.
APv... •. ov[x oAi[
0TT.0TY.
SUD
xa
DATE
Eo a [o
DATE
Ix vo1E[o
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
1
1
1
I
A J
I
I
I
I
I
1
[ �
1
I
1
I
1
-4-,-500: 00
,
/ I
I
i
J V
I
I
I
/
1
1
catse
1
I
1
I
1
I
Come
I
I
/
1
j
"m
I
I
5,
1
j
Custualex number •
I
I1
1
Dell Desk
I
I
W
;
I
•
n 7
1
1
I
,
r
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I -
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
62-412
SiDIIE ENGINEER fUPY
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
RETAILER_
CITV
OIV.
PAGE NO.
[w
x[•
7P.—A. OPEN DATE
MOO.
O TT.
TT.
DATE
OAT[
aoo
.o.
Rocco
Ix vo 1110
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
--------------
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
j
�
1
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
SALES
I
TAN (93cittijimmit)
I
I
I
I
ENGI• . H FFF, 26,216.25
I
I
I
I
_n ON
am
1
I
,
,
�
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
1
�
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
,
!
I
,
1
,
I
I
1
1
I
1
I
1
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
,
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
1
62.412
6TGISE ENGINEER COPY
Q
V
w
U
T
L
,S
N
C
Council Minutes
December 1, 1981
• 0 0c:
DIAMOND LAKE, INC. - I. R. FINANCING
The public hearing concerning the application of Diamond Lake, Inc, for
Industrial Revenue financing in the amount of $750,000.00 for the acquisition
of equipment and fixtures to be used in conjunction with the retail super-
market in the proposed Pilot Knob Shopping Center was convened by Mayor
Blomquist. Robert Levy, attorney for Diamond Lake, Inc. and Mr. John
Sullivan, Jr, were present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Levy stated that
Richfield Bank and Trust Company has, committed itself to finance the
$750,000.00 and that the loan will be paid off prior to the expected useful
life of the equipment. There were many questions from City Council members
and members of the audience as to whether the Council should finance equipment
and fixtures at all or in part. It was noted that this was the first example
where a request for I. R. Financing has been submitted exclusively for fix-
tures and equipment. There was questions as to whether this type financing is
an inducement to new business and whether the approximately 90 new jobs which
consist of only 30 full-time jobs, is a sufficient inducement for the issuance
of the financing. It was noted there would be no increase in taxes and
Industrial Revenue Financing had already been authorized for the shopping
center building itself. Councilman Smith suggested that the City Council
ought to consider issuing financing for fixtures but not for equipment that
has a short anticipated useful life. It was noted the total estimated cost of
the fixtures is $871,000.00, including sales tax, engineering fees, etc. The
attorney for the Pilot Knob Shopping Center was present and indicated the
supermarket is critical for the financing for the entire center. After
lengthy discussion, Smith moved to authorize up to $555,000.00 industrial
revenue financing for heavy duty equipment, including fixtures, which include
a life expectancy of at least ten years. There was no second and the motion
died. Egan then moved, based upon the reasons above described and the fact
that a precedent would be set by the Council in authorizing financing of the
equipment only, to deny the request for industrial revenue financing.
Parranto seconded the motion and all voted in favor.
4a
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Seventeen
GERALD & SHIRLEY SMITH - FRONT YARD VARIANCE
A. Gerald & Shirley Smith for 10' Variance from a Front Yard Set-
back, Located at 4367 Onyx Drive -- A public hearing was held before
the Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting
held on April 27, 1982 to consider an application submitted for
a 10' front yard setback for the construction of a 10' x 20' addi-
tion to the Smith house at 4367 Onyx Drive. The Advisory Planning
Commission is recommending approval of the variance. For additional
information on this item, please refer to the City Planning
Assitant's (Intern) report found on pages ¢1, through 4-7
For a copy of the APC minutes, refer to page ".
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to approve a
10' variance for Gerald and Shirley Smith as stated.
4�
E
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE OF REPORT:
REPORTED BY:
APPLICATION SUBMITTED:
0
CITY OF EAGAN
VARIANCE - FRONT YARD SETBACK
GERALD & SHIRLEY SMITH
4367 ONYX DRIVE
R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT)
APRIL 27, 1982
APRIL 22, 1982
DAVID M. OSBERG, PLANNING ASSISTANT
An applicaticn,has been submitted for a 10' front yard setback for the construc-
tion of a 10 x 20 foot addition to the Smith house at 4367 Onyx Drive.
The applicants are proposing to construct a 10 x 20 foot addition to their house.
The addition to the house would be 10' closer to the lot line than allowed in the
ordinance. A diagram of the house and the proposed addition have been submitted
by the applicant for review. The present house and the addition would cover 14%
of the lot, so it would not exceed the lot coverage requirement.
There appears to be no hardship related to the topographic conditions or land-
scape in order to allow the 10 foot front vard setback variance for the addition
to the house. If approved, the variance should be subject to the following con-
ditions:
1) All applicable ordinances must be followed.
DMO/jach
4z
0 0
7^I
.�3
• ' 12.67 ' ,
1 120 I IN
v N J J ...11 -�
1 J
/i�a�Iil � Nerrh I I /ilei//+ �
i
1 125 39 120 120
r ;o 30
N ? e
O N
— O d
Sol,
.44.9..• e•rovs'44' -
A,c9 �s o
. •._I � o
04
N 12 .10 120 , 1 120 30 • 3° :49.26 A•48.s4112*43ai
'�' •� ; � ••• 155.00••• 300••• :_ 79.26° I
4 ' wo N..ib Nsilb „ 1
N O
'1
�izo
Izo
75 S4.267 -A—, ( 4-5
11
II
J
120 �I.
120
I
'I
I
I
120 i
i . 120,
_
O O
W
h
J
I A
I
� =o
II
11 �
• ' 12.67 ' ,
1 120 I IN
v N J J ...11 -�
1 J
/i�a�Iil � Nerrh I I /ilei//+ �
i
1 125 39 120 120
r ;o 30
N ? e
O N
— O d
Sol,
.44.9..• e•rovs'44' -
A,c9 �s o
. •._I � o
04
N 12 .10 120 , 1 120 30 • 3° :49.26 A•48.s4112*43ai
'�' •� ; � ••• 155.00••• 300••• :_ 79.26° I
4 ' wo N..ib Nsilb „ 1
N O
'1
I 124.90 -
75
75 S4.267 -A—, ( 4-5
o�
..1 v
vl V1
�� 1e,23'al
I
�
I
I
I.
I lila.{h
_
O O
W
I
I 124.62
i
I
� =o
o
O
11 �
.O N
1
_-.. 124.33
�1
I.:. Iz3.13
_
.n �o
w w
75; 1L
_90---
-
--75-
-
90
75
75
75 S4.267 -A—, ( 4-5
o�
..1 v
vl V1
�� 1e,23'al
I
�
I
I
I
_
O O
N O
W O
Y Oti `q
i
N
N
J •D
N Nr w
11 �
1
�1
I.:. Iz3.13
75
75; 1L
_90---
-
--75-
-
ro.
oN. .
tiN
90
15
.- 43 A-7-2141*
•i•
e_16•�Z ta• � .
.1..4.03 .
30 3O F
^ >O
w W
o�
..1 v
vl V1
I
�
I
I
IZ3.43
o
I
i
N
N
J •D
N Nr w
1
I.:. Iz3.13
^ >O
LB
AR ROW
�0 L I
. i
kA6R
IC - FI uW"
,� ti A 'z
NIF
Aft GB GBPF
P
JUNI61 'N B �—
r
PF o NB '
HIGH co
Y
SCHOOL_� W I
P�
Al `may
C R F
t,Lw .i i .� "gin •.r'�i�
;PKSPK , fF
MART. SL[:t:r+�c` ��
;�:�� W .;. _ _.w,.. R-4
CSC, ' LL� .t.i�� i4t � -•` i���i.;"':` j
R -IC R-2
o
z? O __AtLj
2 Y
a
J = NS RIVER R B
l( TEST t.
U) A;LB I. � ll ENTER
zcu pq ---r � �•yI 1.
N
4'7uA
— R-1
:;.SL� ,� ., ,• . i ....'� Z i� isr"� - -
• i •
APC Minutes
April 27, 1982
GEMM & SHIRLEY S m - VARIANCE
The public hearing regarding the application of Gerald and Shirley Smith
for a variance of 10 feet from the front yard setback for construction of a 10
foot by 20 foot addition to their house at 4367 Onyx Drive was next convened
by the Chairman. Gerald Smith appeared pointing out that due to an expansion
in his family and the location of a large tree in the back of his house, the
only available expansion was to the front. He also indicated that no one in
his neighborhood objected after contacting them. Dale Runkle pointed out that
the lot was on a curve which made the placement of the addition in relation to
other setbacks in the addition, not as aesthetically displeasing as in a
normal situation. It was motioned by Wilkins, seconded by McCrea to recommend
approval of the variance. All voted in favor.
p.m.
Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned as 8:50
Secretary
M
90
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Eighteen
MCDONALD'S CORPORATION - VARIANCE
B. McDonald's Corporation for a Variance to Exceed the Allowable
Height for a Pylon Sign -- A public hearing was held before the
Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting on April
27, 1982 to consider an application submitted for a variance to
exceed the allowable height of 27' for a pylon sign located at
4565 Erin Lane, for a McDonald's Restaurant. The Advisory Planning
Commision is recommending denial of this application to the City
Council. For additional information on this item, refer to the
City Planning Assistant's report found on pages sOr through
�$ For action that was taken by the Planning Commisssion, refer
to page S19.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
Advisory Planning Commission's recommendation to deny a variance
application submitted by Signcrafters for McDonald's Corporation.
arm
0 0
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: VARIANCE
APPLICANT: CHARLES PEUGi, SIGNCRAFTERS FOR MCDONALD'S CORPORATION
LOCATION: 4565 ERIN LANE - MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT
EXISTING ZONING: CSC (CC1nwry SHOPPING CENTER)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 27, 1982
DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 19, 1982
REPORTED BY: DAVE OSBERG, pjAMING ASSISTANT
APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application.has been submitted for a variance to ex-
ceed the allowable height of 27 feet for a pylon sign located at 4565 Erin Lane;
McDonald's Restaurant.
On December 23, 1980, the Advisory Planning Commission approved the conditional
use permit application for a pylon sign for the McDonald's Restaurant on Erin
Lane. The City Council granted the conditional use permit at their January 6,
1981 meeting. There were concerns expressed by the City Councilmembers as to
the location of the sign and its impact on the Cedar Avenue freeway. The City
Council approved the pylon sign with the conditions that the sign would be no
more than 125 square feet in area and no more than 27 feet in height.
The McDonald's Corporation is requesting a variance to raise the existing 24 -
foot high pylon sign to 50 feet. The McDonald's Corporation would also like to
relocate the sign closer to the Cedar Avenue freeway. At the present time, the
sign is located on the southeast corner of the McDonald's Corporation, with the
proposed location being in the southeast corner. Included in this report is a
letter staff received from the McDonald's Corporation explaining their reasons
for seeking a variance to allow a 50' pylon sign.. The existing sign has an area
of approximately 100 square feet and the height is 24'. The proposed sign would
remain 100 square feet in area with the only changes being the increased height
to 50' and the location of the sign. Attached to this report is a layout of the
McDonald's Corporation property indicating the existing and proposed locations
of the sign with a picture of the existing sign.
Staff has received a letter from the developers of
opment, stating that the relocation of the sign to
McDonald's Corporation property would not interfere
of Mari Acres. A copy of the letter and sign plan
for review.
.SD
Mari Acres, Hillcrest Devel-
the southwest corner of the
with the overall sign plan
of Mari Acres is enclosed
CITY OF EAGAN
C[[ARLES PEUGFI, SIGNCRAFTER.S FOR MCDUAIAS CORPORATION
APRIL 27, 1982
PAGE TWO
Staff would like to point out that the McDonald's Corporation pylon sign is not
oonsidered a freeway identification sign since the McDonald's Corporation p%
perty is not located directly adjacent to a freeway. Haaever, the McDonald's
Corporation is only proposing to have one advertising sign on the property thus
complying with the pylon sign regulations in the Sign Ordinance.
If approved, the variance should be approved with the following conditions:
1) The sign shall contain no more than 125 square feet of signage.
2) No other advertising signs will be placed on the McDonald's Corporation
property -
3) All other applicable ordinances will be followed.
DMO/jack
S1
70-100 ROAD SIGN 0
Overall Height
(Variable)
0
No. 3
0
z
No. 6
SIGN: 70-100
AREA: Approximately 100 sq.
It.
STRUCTURE: Designed for 30
psf wind load
ELECTRICAL: Inspected and
approved by U.L.
NOTE: Order replacement
panels by number as shown
above
14' 2"
z
0
rr
N
N
70-100 ROAD SIGN
ILLUMINATION
4 ea. F -84 -T12 -CW -HO Fluorescent Tubes
16 ea. F -60 -T12 -CW -HO Fluorescent Tubes
4 ea. F -24 -T12 -CW -HO Fluorescent Tubes
BALLASTS
6 ea. France 458D (or equal) 4 -Lamp Ballasts
ELECTRICAL
-2 ea. 15 Amp. Circuits 120V.
Load 15.0 Amps
PLASTIC FACES
Pigmented Acrylic
Colors: Red #2157
White #7328
Yellow #2037
Acrylic Panels: 6 ea. per side
Grade Clearance
Jfgwrafters Outdoor Display, Inc.
_ m•u. er�tu .. uwin,...rwua u Oren
(Variable) S o2
3
mcDonald's
March 22, 1982
City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
RE: McDonald's Restaurant
4565 Erin Lane
Eagan, Minnesota
To Whom It May Concern:
McDonald's Gsrpurwion
x000 Nirollet Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55420
612i264.4755
McDonald's Corporation is requesting a variance to raise our
main identification sign from the existing allowable height
to 50 feet.
This variance request comes as a result of the hardship caused
us by the new interstate coming through, which adversely
affects our sites visibility. Our sign now sits below the
grade of the interstate.
Due to the fact that visibility of our restaurant is now all
but eliminated, this stores sales volume is far below what
we projected it to be with appropriate visibility. We feel
the solution to this problem lies in raising our sign to a
height of 50 feet. The store must operate at a profit in
order to benefit both McDonald's and the local community.
By increasing our sign height, we would be able to better
draw from the traffic using the interstate.
Please take our request under consideration and grant us this
variance.
Yours truly,
MCDON`ALD' S CORPORATION
�Inn
A� 2
Al Inde
Construction Engineer
Minneapolis Region
AI/vk
S3
i
PROP(X,-D'
Ao4,9T/ON OF °� E
":i4y-i_RSY§:-v'�c�.�.%:n:.:i:ir.::;�:-; u.::•4r.�. T^,'rmr.�ti r-.
I Ir 7i
(l r
R
7 EXISTING
- ea 24'NI0-
5
;.I
Memoes Roan (j
ILLCRES�
VELOPMET
April 15, 1982
City of. Eagan
P.O. Box 21-199
Eagan, MN 55121
ATTN: Dave Osbers Asst. Planner
Gentlemen:
EXECUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
METRO SQUARE
7TH AND ROBERT
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Phone: 224-5811 Area 612
RE: Mari Acres Signage
�},'h"';; Thiswill verify hone conversation today at which time
Y our p Y
„METRO PARKING LOTS, f,¢t1,`4i you requested my input as to the effect on our property if
.%Dowmown St.,Paul �� s�"' McDonald's were allowed to move their pylon sign to the
;xJa �:(' IY �M ir.11 ,I;? I til i✓�3Cf 1�1 Alt jl
;`,;HILLCREST'SHOPPING,CENTER ,y'i" southwest property corner.
it St Paul Minnesota
�,yYd;ts titt, ,v.yNJ) , „ �' ,7�,•y� ¢ l;y, I am enclosing the signage proposal that we presented during
;VIKINGVILLAGEAPARTMENTS {'+f{ our plat approval. We have two lots left abutting Cliff Road
,"�NorthcSt, Paul Minnesota at the intersection of Cliff and Nichols. These lots pre-
, !f •Ivk J�li 'f, e, rr,.
HGNEYWELL.PLANTv sumably may be used for fast food outlets.
-Columbia Heights Minnesota cy
It would be my interpretation that we would still be in
GOODWILLI NDusTRIES BUILDING' `.;; compliance for the approval of a pylon sign because we
'S,LauderdalerMinnesota would be 300 feet from the proposed new location of McDonald's
HENNEPIN SGUARE ' ,�''�3, l7 ` 3 pylon sign. We, therefore, see no conflict if you would see
'
d,Mlnneepolia P
Minnesota q
fit to approve McDonald's request.
j,HARDING BUILDING
_Minneapohe, Minnesota Thank you for keeping us informed on the matter.
Sincerely,
CARLSON MARKETING BLDG. r,,.i,;%
.i,;
Minneapolis, Minnesota N'; , �:
HILLCREST DEVELOPMENT
NEIDHOEFER BUILDING NO 1
r
Minneapolis, Minnesota .114.:,a;rd r;, ••„
���
CLECON BUILDING r
�VErnestF. Christiansen
,;
Minneapolis, Minnesota
P. Construction
.
MURPHY -ELM INDUSTRIAL PARK
EFC: kh
Minneapolis. Minnesota i
CLEVELAND FABRICATING BLDG.
Enclosure
. Minneapolis, Minnesota
;;HILLCREST LAND INVESTMENTS
:•:For the Development of Commercial • . '.'
�;hhtdusbiel • Residential • Apartmen0
ONtea Projects in Minneapolis,
�St. Paul, and Suburbs.
CITY OF EAGAN
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 16 - SIGN ORDINANCE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA,
DOES HEREBY AMEND ITS ORDINANCE NO. 16 AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 16.06 -- FREE STANDING BUSINESS SIGNS, STANDARD:
Subdivision 4 -- FREEWAY LOCATIONS. An on -premise pylon
sign for identification purposes is allowed for a business sign
located directly adjacent to a freeway within the City of Eagan.
Any business that acquires a permit to erect a pylon sign for
freeway identification may be allowed an additional free-standing
ground sign to be located on the side of the property opposite.
of the freeway. All signs must comply in all other respects with
the provisions of this Ordinance. A freeway shall be defined as
a principal arterial highway as defined in the Comprehensive Plan.
ATTEST:
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF EAGAN
BY 4L)C�C�I.L By:
E.V% vanuver eke, City Cle'rk quist, MAyor
Original Ordinance Adopted: May 19, 1964
Amended Ordinance Adopted: -July 7, 1961
Published in the Dakota County Tribune: July 23, 1981
.5 77
�R ROVE'
h
m L31�
C .. A -
T
AR i EEN R
GB GB
PFNB^f:
e PF O Ng
HIGH m
a
B-2 ,aa
SCHOOL 0 ;
PFF-
R-3C
1 ' Fit •� +
PK :�'� PK (
w�y
MART
E :'r •"S
b /� i *yt" %, r... SLA.
C5 1.� ti:L. ,: a •�` �,��}S.j, l�/1Vr a
RZ Y '4 ^V4 -Y ti: F-
.1
csc
Al
6P LI l
10
2
J NB' )RIVER R B
TEST
Z , U-0 A: LB I rr �l ENTER
N
OC A A R B!
SuB.TEG7
Do iPRo�RTY
vi 7 Fv}r[+rtfk�� ,1
0 0
The application of McDonald's Corporation for a variance to exceed the
allowable height of 27 feet for a pylon sign located at 4565 Erin Lane,
McDonald's Restaurant, was convened by the Chairman. Mr. Jack Lawrence of
Signcrafters Outdoor Display, Inc. appeared for McDonald's Corporation. At
the request of member Wilkins, staff advised that there would be no problem
with the 300 foot limitation and that neither Burnett Realty nor Hardee's have
been allowed signs in excess of 27 feet. It was noted by member Krob and
Chairman Hall that the applicant would have had full knowledge of the freeway
prior to construction of the new McDonald's restaurant. It was noted that
according to ordinance, a freeway sign must be on property directly abutting
the freeway. The McDonald's land does not so abutt and in fact, has adjacent
to it, two other other locations for potential fast food restaurants. Wilkins
moved, Krob seconded the motion to recommend denial of the variance. Those
in favor of the motion were Wilkins, Krob and Hall. Those against were Wold
and McCrea.
S9
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Nineteen
PRELIMINARY PLAT - BERRY RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS
C. Roger Kreidberg of Scheutt Investment Co. for Preliminary Plat
Approval, Berry Ridge Addition, Consisting of Approximately 3.65
Acres, located on Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop Estates -- A public
hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at their
last regular meeting held on April 27, 1982. The Advisory Planning
Commission is recommending approval of the preliminary plat. For
additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's
report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages ( f through
'7/ for your reference. For action that was taken�y`tFe Advisory
Planning Commission, refer to a copy of the minutes, found on pages
through -7 3. Park recommendations are enclosed on page "7+
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to approve the
preliminary plat for Berry Ridge Addition.
�
0 0
CITY OF EAGAN
APPLICANT: ROHM KREIDBERG - SMUTP INVESTN4SIT CO.
LOCATION: LOT 11, BLOCK 3, HILLTOP ESTATES, SW; OF SECTION 22
EXISTING ZONING: R-3 (RESIDENTIAL TOWNH(XJSE DISTRICT)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 27, 1982
DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 22, 1982
REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER
APPLICATION SUBMITTED
An application has been submitted requesting a preliminary plat, Berry Ridge Condo-
miniums, consisting of approximately 3.65 acres and containing 26 dwelling units
located on Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop Estates.
ZCNING AND LAND USE
Presently the parcel is zoned �3 (Residential Townhouse District) and would only
allow a townhouse development proposal. The proposed land use plan designates this
parcel as R-1 (Single Family Development). Since the parcel is zoned R-3 (Residen-
tial Townhouse),the zoning takes precedence over the proposed land use plan.
The parcel is the last parcel in Hilltop Estates to have a development proposal
submitted. As stated above, the parcel is zoned R-3 (Residential Townhouse District)
and would allow a townhouse development proposal.
The parcel is 3.65 net acres. There are no ponding areas, streets rights-of-way or
any other dedications to be subtracted from this plat than what has already been de-
ducted in the platting of Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop Estates. The applicant is pro-
posing to provide a looped private drive to provide access to the development pro-
posal. There will be two accesses onto Berry Ridge Road which will provide adequate
circulation for this development proposal.
The applicant was originally proposing 30 dwelling units for the subject parcel.
According to the zoning ordinance, the maximum density for this 3.65 acre parcel is
26.49 dwelling units. The applicant has reduced the 30 -unit townhouse project to
26 dwelling units, which is just under the maximum density allowed in an R-3 zoning
district. The building coverage for this site is 7.42% which is substantially low-
er than the 20% maximum allowed for the subject parcel. The reason for this low
building coverage is that the developer is proposing to have 2 -story units which
each story would be owner -occupied or individual units. The reason for this lou
lot coverage is that the applicant is also proposing underground parking for this
development plan.
61
0 0
CrrY OF EAGAN
BERRY RIDGE CONDMINIUMS
APRIL 27, 1982
PAM TWO
The applicant has taken the existing topography and vegetation into this site de-
sign. The buildings are designed in accordance with the contours of the property
and they are leaving as many of the natural amenities to the site as possible.
The applicant is also proposing to leave as many of the existing pine trees which
are located on the north side of Berry Ridge Road. The only place these pines
would be disturbed is where the access points would be into the development pro-
posal. The applicant has also minimized the site disturbance with this particular
development proposal.
The applicant is proposing to construct 15 one -bedroom units and 15 two-bedroom
units for a total of 26 dwelling units. The one-bedroan units would contain ap-
proximately 750 square feet and the two-bedroom units would contain approximately
1,200 square feet. It is staff's understanding that the project will be designed
with energy conservation in mind and that the proposed project will exceed all
energy code requirements. The proposed project will contain one garage space or
underground parking space and one parking space per dwelling unit. The building
meets all setback requirements as required in Ordinance 52. In reviewing the
parking layout, the westerly parking lot, or the parking area abutting Pilot Knob
Road, should be shifted easterly to provide a 20' green area for the parking area
along Pilot Knob Road.
In reviewing the site plan, the proposed site plan shows 30 dwelling units. The
easterly two buildings will be removed so that only 26 units will be allowed.
With the reduction of the two easterly dwelling units, staff is suggesting that
the applicant may consider parking on the easterly side of the building. Also,
the parking should be extended, or a driveway should be extended, on each side of
the building in order to get fire protection around the entire building. Staff
has suggested that the developer may consider a trail or sidewalk running on the
northerly side of the development proposal in order to allow direct access to the
north side of the building for pedestrian as well as fire and rescue. The pro-
posed building will have individual entrances to each of the dwelling units.
Therefore, the project is more of a townhouse development than a condominium unit.
Staff would like to mention that the applicant has made an attempt to hold a neigh-
borhood meeting to discuss the developent proposal with the neighborhood prior
to the Advisory Planning Commission holding the public hearing. Staff was in at-
tendance at the neighborhood meeting and only three residents from Hilltop came
to this neighborhood meeting. Staff would like to acknowledge that the applicant
has made every effort to inform the neighborhood as to their development proposal.
If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following conditions:
1) A development agreement shall be completed prior to the construction of any
of the dwelling units.
2) A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by City staff and an adequate
landscape bond shall be submitted with the final plat and not released un-
til one year after the landscaping has been completed.
3) The developer shall provide the City with a copy of the homeowner's asso-
ciation by-laws for review.
6a
0 0
CITY OF EAGAN
BERRY RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS
APRIL 27, 1982
PAGE THREE
4) The plat should be subject to the Park Committee's recommendations and
comments.
5) The development plan should be shifted to the east in order to provide a
20' green area between the westerly property line and the parking area.
6) The developer should consider putting parking areas on each side of the
building and extending a drive or path around the north side of the build-
ing to provide adequate fire protection.
7) No more than 26 dwelling units shall be allowed for this development pro-
posal.
8) All other City ordinances shall be applicable for the overall development
proposal.
DCR/jach
9) A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan must be reviewed and
approved prior to final plat approval.
10) Adequate utility easements must be provided to allow a connection to the
existing trunk sanitary sewer along the north property line and the requir-
ed internal water main looping and fire hydrant location.
11) A storm sewer detention ponding system must be constructed in the north-
east corner of this proposed plat to minimize the increased runoff from__:.
this development.
12) An 8' wide bituminous pathway must be constructed along the northern side
of these units a minimum of 15' from any structure for potential future
fire access. other trailway installations along Berry Ridge Road should
be in conformance with the requirements of the Park and Recreation Committee.
13) This development shall provide for a residential street eauivalent assess-
ment escrow for the 283' of frontage adjacent to Pilot Knob Road to cover
this plat's financial responsibilities for the future upgrading of Pilot
Knob Road. This escrow shall be determined on the residential street
equivalent rate for multiple dwelling zoning at the time of final plat ap-
proval.
TAC/jack
63
P
0
TO: THE PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER
FROM: ROBERT W. ROSENE, CONSULTING ENGINEER
DATE: APRIL 21, 1982
RE: BERRY RIDGE ADDITION
The Public Works Department has the following information and concerns rela-
tive to approval of the above referenced plat:
UTILITIES
Water service is available from an existing 8" diameter water lateral in Berry
Ridge Road. Hydrants are located on this line near the southeast and the
southwest corners of this property. It will be necessary to add not less than
two additional hydrants, one near the east end and one near the west end of
the proposed condominium building to provide adequate fire protection.
Sanitary sewer service is available from the existing sanitary sewer trunk
which lies 10 feet north of the north line of this property. Due to the heavy
slope of this property away from Berry Ridge Road, it is not possible to pro-
vide gravity sanitary sewer service to the existing lateral sanitary sewer in
Berry Ridge Road.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
The existing topography of this site shows a relatively heavy slope from Berry
Ridge Road to the north edge of the property. The proposed grading plan util-
izes this slope in the location of the buildings and to provide a walkout on
the northerly side of each of the lower units.
Drainage from approximately the westerly one-third of the property will be to
the northwest to the ditch on Pilot Knob Road. The major parking lot is loca-
ted adjacent to Pilot Knob Road and is shown with surface drainage to the
north. It is recommended that a catch basin in the parking lot and a short
section of lateral storm sewer be required to carry the parking lot drainage
to the existing ditch. In the future, when Pilot Knob Road is updated, this
storm sewer will be connected to lateral storm sewer that will be required for
the Pilot Knob Road upgrading.
The easterly two-thirds of the site drains generally to the northeast. The
preliminary site plan shows catch basins in the parking lot and driveway dis-
charging on the surface approximately 100 feet north of Berry Ridge Road. To
minimize erosion and adverse effects on the adjacent property, it is recom-
mended that this storm sewer be extended to a point near the northeast corner
where a small ponding area should be excavated. This small pond will minimize
any adverse effect which the drainage from this area would have on adjacent
property. With the pond, an overflow across the natural vegetation can be al
Page 1
9313a
64
0 0
lowed which will create no greater problems than the present drainage causes.
The Master Plan for Storm Sewer shows that drainage from this parcel flowing
to Pilot Knob Road will continue north to Pond JP -36 which is just south of
the St. John Neumann Church. Drainage from the easterly portion will flow in-
to Pond JP -48 which ultimately overflows into Pond JP -7. At the present time,
there is no overflow outlet from Pond JP -7. However, it is relatively large
and, with the proposed pond to be added in the Berry Ridge Addition, we do not
believe that the drainage from this Addition will cause any significant prob-
lems with the water level of this pond. As more development occurs in the
area and particularly when Pilot Knob Road is upgraded, an outlet to Pond JP -7
should be considered in accordance with the Master Plan.
Due to the steep slopes involved on this property, an extensive erosion con-
trol plan will be required to minimize problems with erosion during construc-
tion,and to prevent the washing of soil onto the adjacent property north of
this site.
STREETS
Berry Ridge Road will provide street access for this property. Internally, a
private drive and parking lot will be provided. Underground parking beneath
the units is to be provided for one space per unit. The balance of the park-
ing will be in a parking lot to the west of the units and on the widened por-
tion of the access drive in front of the units. Street grades of the access
driveways must provide a relatively flat spot immediately north of Berry Ridge
Road to allow cars to stop on a level area before proceeding into Berry Ridge
Road. Also, drainage from Berry Ridge Road should be preventedfrom flowing
down either driveway by raising the elevation of the entrance driveway above
the center of Berry Ridge Road at the property line.
It appears that the above ground parking is concentrated on the south and
westerly side of the condominium units. Consideration should be given to sur-
face parking near the east end of the units. Such location would provide more
convenience for the owners of the easterly units and would provide the poten-
tial for more adequate fire truck access to serve the north side of the east-
erly portion of the development.
EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY
The existing plat of Hilltops Estates provides the necessary right-of-way on
Berry Ridge Road and the future widening of Pilot Knob Road. An easement will
need to be acquired between this property and the trunk sanitary sewer line to
the north to allow a connection to this trunk'sewer line. All other standard
easements will be required at the time of final plat approval.
SITE PLAN
The engineering department has no other concerns pertaining to the proposed
layout of the site plan. However, the sharply sloping topography of this site
may require minor modifications during the preparation of the detailed site
grading and development plan. The presently shown access points to Berry
Ridge Road are satisfactory from a setback consideration from Pilot Knob Road
for traffic purposes.
9313a Page 2.
4s
0 0
TRAILS/SIDEWALKS
An existing trail on Berry Ridge Road leads from the east to a point near the
southeast corner of this proposed plat. The trail then turns to the south
along the proposed future street to County Road 30. It is understood that the
Park Committee will be considering the desirability of providing a sidewalk or
trail connection from the entrance of this development to that trail.
Consideration should also be given to the installation of an 8' wide bitumin-
ous surfaced walkway from the parking lot on the west end of the building
around the northerly side of the development. Such a trail would provide con-
venient access for the residents from the parking lot to their lower level en-
trances and could be used as an emergency driveway by the fire department for
fire protection purposes.
ASSESSMENTS
Trunk sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water area assessments have been levied
under the Hilltop Estates Development. Also, all lateral sanitary sewer,
water and street assessments along Berry Ridge Road have been levied to this
property. The only other assessment required is for the future upgrading of
Pilot Knob Road. Current policy would require a residential equivalent as-
sessment for the 283.0 ft. of frontage on Pilot Knob Road. A current esti-
mated residential equivalent is $35.00/front foot, resulting in an assessment
of $9,905.00. This amount would be put in escrow and utilized for the Pilot
Knob project when it is carried out in conjunction with the Dakota County
Highway Department.
I will be available to discuss in further detail any aspect relating to this
report at the Planning Commission meeting of April 27, 1982.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Rosene
Consulting City Engineer
RWR:1i
9313a Page 3.
!y
_1 67 ,
_. •i' j ,.0 nu I C A .I r�
/BC�2P7-/02n5\ �(�/�-_ '/'". ; /-.o-4��✓I :! '\ 1 I \�l��. I
C�B4sUO�
J
:1 1 DP -98200 I .1 #_E- 7
V„7ESC07_r-I
WooM.1 864.062i�0.0 13-\GPREN
O�--TLfs
PJ-BB20
_P-61. "" f DP -IB - e�
s)71.0• 00efoei
820 _
'•.r--V`/�-I 79s0 BP3i c "Jl:MJ1Yis L'Jt1. Jp-4 PJ -46 JP-'
1')8060 Q8300 , r °8660 UP 45 � V 832
����••••"�ll-�yy,�yy,,, 8890 3 892.2
7, I I l Jf 872.0 B9zolk.V 40 JP -41/ 896
839.2 • I h ,,(P-47,i-�. \, / L"[ BB70
BP-301^� 1 \ / �, •/ 884/0 x 847.p JP -42 LD1,/ L5: 15i
��ppQ�gg C1 '..J -I ^'BS/t)• /
'_�£Y , ar�K - FiS9"�I vt �y -.C.st -� C BaeO Z. �I�•Jgp_640- 5
U� MILL$ �� arr-/ e4 4 I Jr -32
'!,AH JPi5 L^ 8860/
�g�, I /," P 4� - r8390 '\. JP -II ---� 8900 I i
I�BLA(,`��/ \�. 83'. 4�, B4a0 6! 8157 JP -44 / 13J 1-31 ^b
_7 / BP 26'1 i._ B830'a � 9.7
7913 x9940
°aV J+l
J -m- 2i
�� I `4 -
BLAAKXAN% 1I �T4_K ",n0�� I moi} J70.2 ,_ 1\
PARK i ` Jp- �� j 87.0
:SBP -2 1 Bze.o9 / m} _a
JP -30 8740 �.
/ 794. B2B, JP -10 } 872.7
f �79a.0 %' 820.8 t 882.0
E, 8278
7iNip 6
C�
q \
r,�y teFgp7-J„_gb_I I t�l_�13JP_B
_
zBP \1Y 881-28 LS -12 sV189.0 866,0
// 18-b Oy j o
22 -
J wA ' j i L✓ 9706 IIP=35 BPRO ;. �.
L -r 873:2 1869.4 ; J -d8 JP_ -34 /
/ BB�P-3 / 42 I �d/ 872.9 .z• i�. -iZ. 8840 J-4 _A -e,
881.3 B•cr� BSOO yJ r
ALE BB- (-4 12/JJP-48 tee` �� /dR i� PATRICK ~
=1 f / 4ti isI BB 0 LI 872} 59. _ r.464N II
1;':
BP -25
924.0 1i eN o - e200 JP -29
B-4 9J0.0 DSII 8800 ' P-63 a 9233 ei
i 111 I 856.0 1 -\ ``1 940.0 i
JI '• _36 GB I,N e�, 12' ld B 0 }'I
-gP-24_• m 1 T,. J+4a Nil J -t
y I 918.011
929,0 % P-� - •«I
I I " 74.0-- 1 R-44 _ LP -43
11 � 1 d � - mmrrs'��: •..�T r, }��j7 �� es3.o ! 1 X11
SBP-23�JP,/
• 9]6028
531 3 BP�
-IB �� Q886.0 :�rr..••,, ��,
S O�Q'BB'�-9-0. 4u1 Fx�: ���� -� LOCRN 11
03 /
�! r 9030 , /e 9a1o6
8-91, LS..31Udi ra 902.Or v' (iii I� _ e - 1 \ LP -40 C _LP -61 -
_ .�_ L _41' B9B.0--_�'H-SO
I2 --BP- 5 abNU * 884.0 /,f+�' -903Q gggg20 --- 8884.4
BA44 -� N �]
Iia _�_ j�.i;m,>r L 1 eee.o �:
I.,
fS � r \ �. � - BP• \ syl
LP -q 70,0 J BB0 - 1 -N LIP '
x{1881-19 '�. -'� n '1 BP II 879.
915hT 6.6 92
�9/901Vrtt168 /V'°� ��1..h�E� I'1 -'r�st,�9ovo_I�__•.>_ t.LiC s-' .::>4ee: std 100 -t---�,¢g6G'n� tiC!
u -P 0, V. 'ak LS-Zb
.`i m I// / /e•L��•I f r P ./ \'"�` i'.1 \III�__- I.i I�.`•� I11�YR.M�d FOP /
GO_ULNTY
!` -
62 .0
888630
867069ggB0
,
C?p LP -389110 u 1661.3 LP
8730\/90 t LS -2 7 LP -6 Zc
09TA 9025
B
-74.35
([A��A.`
L -.S---20_ _ f :9 1
4 2Y.0
/ 9/30
9010
-LP-20CP10L
0 '
_5 LP -24
8,0
�
683.2
h/ 92LO � � \ 9 cxCEPr10N J'�� 8860
LP_ 56
19 I Li -19 ! 9640 LP
9700 912
•^_ ILeB7.0 �L?� ) SI`%�. STOM SEWM PIM
891..0 KOTA 9 LP -7 r .,
1\\ 9 Fj '918 6 'S LS- �'• -` J`DISF,}L- _.
1 - r 'v 9380 E• i \•,_ / 1
LP -12 / �/ LP -IT
DAKOA COUh.Y 92d21K 67 LP -15 Sze,
1 LP -60 __t /--•7 14(�0))�'lxtr� __.716
n I 9600 II-
0
4
B" wage Rom y .:
i
t�
Site flan
lie,rryy Ridge
CorxJoniigm
/mnu
omi
.St.0 FlfF4 ,aC111[Cl5 ryC
II
1
l
.1 4
Preliminary Plat, iP-�
6lYW SII
iCSo�
I
R-3
Fi wOp c
R-1 l
• / � fit r (-�
R-1
cirr R -I
I I H4L L'
..I PF A X� R-1 R' 1
,.:
Es Ort
K
7-7
AD
2
' PF �` C
O-
1 •�ttt•�� �y4 L~� -
a Y A.
• <, , y •:.
.f •�. � t 4�£\. i1 u yjy i.
,..� .t �•� L. !. !ti i i�i¢�T]}'!V^'i A III
CL R-3
P1 •} �, � Y•'it •r r tiJt_..1� 4iL'ti 1 •,\.�1
R -I ,
J t �. ' R,z I
PF s
t f.
Lp T
J U • r' • r -t • 1 � I
oi6' PF
- j' T ice::.,, �'�-•�' I
I \ e
TS
Ic
RB aGB.
�� _./ ..., �'- i t'.....i:•. <^^.:. Ind„„, - COMMERCIAL
.'�•-{ PL.ANNEDDEVELOPMENT
:. .... R-f
I�.,,� ,Ind
•°R Er/nnI.�IlI1 I.1-B M '• R-II
RIII
I /R A
Ind rw.m.r�r^'i � \• r '” '':�
_ F781�-/ •R-IV R-III i1�S
'b .I:� �j oa �.�nix i,� i � sn ' � /: RI-1 p •-1 �� O C3
NB
v � I II
/'y i-�� P 1 l,I : - R•19/�iA' - R-III R-III �n\�
1n �LBf R-II LLJJ if;CSC- din%i;r-= .a'I/nd
�tT r' R-11 R4 �P J� .GOLF — R-[r-L U6
•
P ^tet FR•�I n� C x
�'I.i Int 1 till i�+% ' �� - R-0 ..P • Ind. <' w
RII n.• �. a .. R-I-. �{ I „` � ^� E �� I.- :_jlj ..R II ->�iCr - \ O R-� -
. •fi-IV, .', e`."``7 I ..,?. i. 6 moi`_' ... •� ',\ W
_R-III HALL R-11 'Ell
- _ R ILs' R..�N
%Y gym., R-il� r F-�--• .-,..;HS...[ I- I
,1iC”. m �f-,.R-11 ��� s.T I•�, ReR 11 i
Rt
R NB
RB �J, R•III S ?se; rho-i5`.•'." e - ... 'r
-R-111 R It R-II!' R'1t..6� ,t,° i �r�IN��� `\ R-III CSC/GBIIB R-II` � - R-il
p j `.r? C`^� zr E [ II�.Y ..t• L.,i; PQ
R-11 / ;,,q• R II R-II P -� nr � s rim � -'< 1 ® '� R-II eri r
�^ �•�'. �_ ay. a/i.i 1, lbltr 1-, ° �i' lyJ f
SIC
R_I IrN7-
R-I
i PIT '11'd1 SIA - P
GbLI �..,. l ;: p
R-II v.xe
3
p R-11
_. AI P e. ',.i• n' p an J,r .�ryaM �l ` �':� q. ) I ��.�—__
ILI
\r
VALLEY:---eROSENOUNT�. q I n
APC Minutes
April 27, 1982
JOAN A. TMM - JMTM, INC.
The application of Roger Erickson and Ed Leier, dba Jatco, Inc_., for a
conditional use permit to allow,a Mexican fast food restaurant in a Neighbor-
hood Business District located at 1973 Silver Bell Center was convened by the
Chairman. It was noted that there appeared to be adequate parking for this
type of restaurant, which was to expect 508 sit-down and 508 take-out busi-
ness. This was assuming that this Shopping Center continued to be a low-
volume center and that the once proposed, hamburger and beer establishment was
not being developed. The members also expressed concern that the applicant be
responsible for any necessary receptacles for customers that would choose to
eat their food outside of the building and dispose of the waste. Member Krob
moved to recommend approval of the conditional use, subject to compliance with
applicable ordinance provisions It was seconded by McCrea. All voted in
favor.
The public hearing for the application of Schuett Investment Co. for
preliminary plat approval of Berry Ridge Condominiums was convened by the
Chairman. This application would include 26 condominium units in 13 townhouse
type structures, each containing an underground garage, first floor one -
bedroom unit and a two-bedroom unit on the second and third floors. The plat
consists of approximately 3.65 acres, located on Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop
Estates, which is zoned R-3 allowing for this amount of density. ,Roger
Kreidberg appeared for Schuett Investment Co. along with a representative of
an architectural firm.
It was pointed out that these were condominiums as opposed to townhouses,
due to the fact that one unit would be under/over another unit. Member McCrea
expressed concern about the method of figuring the density of the plat. It
was requested that several points of concern be addressed by the developer and
staff prior to final plat. It was noted that the 20 foot green area along the
westerly property line in condition 5 could be obtained either by shifting the
entire project to the east, or by shifting all or part of the parking area to
the east side of the property. The members also requested consideration for
minimizing the drive or path around the north side of the building for fire
protection. The consulting engineer was requested to consider whether the
storm sewer retention pond proposed for the northeast corner of the proposed
plat could be deleted. It was also noted that the developer may change the
entrance to the garages bo the east end of the property and that fire hydrants
would probably be installed at each end of the structures to allow adequate
fire protection to the back side. There were no objections to the applica-
tion. Krob moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the
application, subject to the following conditions:
1. A development agreement shall be completed prior to the construction
of any of the dwelling units.
Z
APC Minutes
April 27, 1982
2. A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by City staff and an
adequate landscape bond shall be submitted with the final plat and not re-
leased until one year after the landscaping has been completed.
3. The developer shall provide the City with a copy of the Declaration
of Condominium, Articles and By -Laws for review.
4. The plat shall be subject to the Park Committee's recommendations
and comments.
5. The development plan should be shifted to the east in order to
provide a 20 foot green area between the westerly property line and the
parking area.
6. The developer should consider installing parking areas on each side
of the building and extending a drive or path around the north side of the
building to provide adequate fire protection.
7. No more than 26 dwelling units shall be allowed for this development
proposal.
8. All other City ordinances shall be applicable for the overall de-
velopment proposal.
9. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan must be re-
viewed and approved prior to final plat approval.
10. Adequate utility easements must be provided to allow a connection to
the existing trunk sanitary sewer along the north property line and the re-
quired internal water main and two fire hydrants.
11. A storm sewer detention holding pond must be constructed in the
northeast corner of this proposed plat to minimize the increased runoff from
this development.
12. Trailway installations along Berry Ridge Road should be in confor-
mance with the requirements of the Park and Recreation Committee.
13. This development shall provide for a residential street equivalent
assessment escrow for the 283 feet of frontage adjacent to Pilot Knob Road to
cover this plat's financial responsibilities for the future upgrading of Pilot
Knob Road. This escrow shall be determined of the residential. street equiva-
lent rate for multiple dwelling zoning at the time of final plat approval.
All voted in favor.
3 -13
0
May 11, 1982
JMEMO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION -
BERRY RIDGE PRELIMINARY PLAT
On Thursday, May 6, 1982 the Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee
reviewed the preliminary plat for Berry Ridge.
The parks dedication has previously been satisfied for this parcel.
The committee did review the plat for possible trail construction. After
review the committee's motion was not to include any trails or additional
parks requirements within the plat.
cc: Dale Runkle, City Planner
Paul Hauge, City Attorney
Judy Chaffee, Planning Secretary
Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works
-74
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty
IRB FINANCING REQUEST - TIME EXTENSION
D. Pilot Knob Shopping Center, IRB Financing/Request for Time
Extension -- Mr. Ronald Krank, representing the architect interior
design firm of Korsunsky Krank Erickson Architects, Inc., is
requesting on behalf of Kraus Anderson a time extension on the
pending preliminary approval for industrial revenue bond financing
for the Pilot Knob Shopping Center. The resolution was adopted
at the March 17, 1981 City Council meeting, approving industrial
revenue bond financing in the amount $5,500,000 for construction
of the Pilot Knob Shopping Center. According to the guidelines
set forth by the City, each industrial revenue financing approval
is for a period of fifteen months. Therefore, the industrial finan-
cing will expire on June 17, 1982 for this issue unless a time
extension is granted. The City has provided a time extension during
the past two years for other industrial bond applications. For
a copy of the letter requesting a time extension, refer to page
76 . If the City Council desires a time extension, one (1) year
is the period of time that has been granted for previous time
extension requests. The reason for the request is due to the in-
ability to obtain satisfactory financing as a result of high in-
terest rates and the depressed construction economy.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
time extension for considering industrial revenue bond financing
for the Pilot Knob Shopping Center Project.
75
11
KORSUNSKY KRANK ERICKSON ARCHITECTS. INC.
February 12, 1982
Mr. Tom Hedges
City Administrator
City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Re: Pilot Knob Shopping Center
Comm. No. 80-124
Dear Tom:
ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS • INTERIOR DESIGN
According to our records, it appears that the industrial revenue bond
resolution which we received approval of on March 17, 1982 will expire
on June 17, 1982.
As you are aware from our prior conversations, we have had difficulty
in obtaining satisfactory financing. We are still very optimistic about
our ability to resolve the financing and still proceed this year.
However, this is taking longer than expected and it is, therefore,
extremely important for us to obtain an extension of the preliminary
resolution.
Would you please advise us as to how we should proceed to process the
approval application from the City Council.
Yours very truly,
KORSUNSKY KRANK ERICKSON ARCHITECTS, INC.
Ronal ,Krank, A I. .
RK:kt
570 GALAXY BUILDING 330 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55401 (612)339-4200
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty -One
LONE OAK HEIGHTS/TEMPORARY SALES OFFICE
E. Lone Oak Heights for Temporary Sales Office -- Midwestern Asso-
ciates was given authorization to proceed with the Lone Oak Heights
condominium and town house project by the City Council at its April
20, 1982 meeting. It was the intention of the applicant to request
at the time of preliminary platting a temporary sales office that
would be occupied for display and sales office only. This type
of request is normally addressed as a condition of the preliminary
plat approval and therefore should be processed as a revision to
the preliminary plat. The sales office would be temporary until
all condominiums and townhouse units are complete. The trailer
would be approximately 10' x 26' in size and it would be located
next to the existing construction trailer.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
temporary sales office for Lone Oak Heights preliminary plat as
requested.
"77
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty -Two
CONTRACT 82-4
E
A. Contract 82-4, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Twin View Manor
2nd Addition et al, Streets) -- On Tuesday, May 11, 1982, formal
bids were received at City Hall for the above referenced contract.
The results of the bid opening and the low bid's comparison to
the feasibility report are presented on page -77 for the Council's
information. Please note that the bids received for Project 335B
under this contract exceeded the feasibility report estimate by
10.24%. In accordance with the new City policy, the developer
has been informed that the bids received have exceeded the feasi-
bility report estimate by more than 10%. The developer has been
requested to sign a letter stating his knowledge of this overrun
and his acceptance of the bids as submitted. If the staff has
not received this letter of concurrence by the May 18 Council
meeting, it is recommended that this project be deleted from the
contract award consideration, resulting in the contract being
awarded to the low bidder, Bituminous Roadways, deleting Project
335B (Twin View Manor 2nd Addition). Upon checking the extensions
and additions of the bids submitted, an error was discovered in
the low bid resulting in a corrected amount of $180,600.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER:
Contract 82-4 and award the contract to
Roadways, Inc., in the amount of $180,600.
No
To receive the bids for
the low bidder, Bituminous
6
Our File No
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
CITY CONTRAC'r N0. 82-4
PROJECTS 335B, 340B,341B, s 346B�
LAGAN, MINNESOTA
CONTRACTORS
1. Bituminous Roadways
2. McNamara Vivant Contracting Co.
3. Alexander Construction Co.
4. Hardrives Inc.
5. Pine Bend Paving Co.
6. Northwest Asphalt Inc.
BID TIME: 10:30 A.H., C.D.S.T.
BID DATE: TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1982
TOTAL BASE BID
$180,420.00
187,686.40
196,568.10
197,375.20
199,044.50
203,035.85
(F. R. ) Over (+)
Project Location Feasibility Report Eng.Est. Low Bid % UnderF.R.
335B Twin View Manor 2nd
340B Windcrest 2nd
341B Windtree 2nd
346B Cinnamon Ridge 1st
TOTALS:
$16,680.00
$17,400.
$18,387.70
10.24 (+)
43,400.00
33,800
30,836.20
28.95 (-)
81,855.00
67,740
62,491.30
23.66 (-)
88,540.00
75,240
68,704.80
22.40 (-)
$230,475.00
$194,180
$180,420.00
21.72 (-)
-79
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty -Three
1982 HEALTH INSURANCE BIDS
B. 1982 Health Insurance Bids -- At the April 6, 1982 City Council
meeting, the City Administrator reported that the City had received
a proposed health insurance increase of approximately 28% and fur-
ther that any amount exceeding a 20% increase requires by statute
that the City bid the health insurance coverage for all City em-
ployees. Authorization was given at that City Council meeting
to proceed with the preparation of plans and specification for
health insurance, advertise for bids•, with a bid opening scheduled
for May 14, 1982 at 3:00 p.m. The bids will be opened at that
time, reviewed by the City Clerk and City Administrator on Monday,
May 17, 1982, with a brief memorandum, bid tabulation and analysis
provided with the administrative packet for each member of the
City Council on that same date. As a reminder, the present family
coverage for health, life and disability insurance averages from
$92 to $100 per month and the proposed package will be approximately
$120 to $128 per month per family. The City budgeted $120 for
each employee during 1982. Since three months are at the old rate
and 9 months will be at the new rate and some employees are on
single coverage which is considerably less, the new costs proposed
by Mutual Services Insurance or some bidder that may have a lower
amount will be within the budget for this year. The reason there
is a range in the family coverage is due to the different rates
for disability insurance per employee. The City Administrator
and City Clerk are recommending that health, disability and life
insurance be bid on a calendar year basis to stay more consistent
with union negotiations, and, therefore, in order to make a conver-
sion from the fiscal year, April 1 through March 31, this insurance
package will be in effect until December 31, 1982. The City is
presently paying the new premium to Mutual Service Insurance for
the months of April and May, and if they are the successful bidder,
the City will continue on with the payment schedule as presented.
If a new insurance company is contracted by the City, the effective
date of agreement between the City of Eagan and that insurance
company would be June 1, 1982 for the remainder of the year. Tradi-
tionally, the City has negotiated union contracts and employee
agreements during the fall of each calendar year with no idea as
to what may occur with insurance premiums which are normally pre-
sented to the City in February or early March for an April 1 re-
newal. By changing from a fiscal to a calendar year, the City
should receive any proposed adjustments to the health insurance
premium in October or November which is more consistent with con-
tract negotiations.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
successful health insurance bid.
h e
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty -Four
BECC UPDATE
C. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commission Update -- The joint
commission met on May 13, 1982 to discuss the following agenda
items: proposed bylaws, local ownership structures, demographic
discussions, and a policy decision overview. Commission vice chair-
man Jim Smith was acting chairman in the absence of Paul Wood and
will provide an update to the City Council at the meeting on Tues-
day. There is no action required by the City Council.
01
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 14, 1982
SUBJECT: INFORMATIVE
Lone Oak Heights Development
The City has received a letter from Mr. John Gustin, President
of Timberline Civic Association, a copy of which is enclosed on
pages SAC through 0.5 for your reference.
Protective Inspection Report
The monthly report for April 1982 and year to date totals for the
Protective Inspection Department are enclosed on page S& . The
City Council will notice in this monthly reporting t ah t a brief
labor distribution is shown for actual inspection and office hours
for the inspection department. Our new payroll system, LOGIS,
has allowed all departments to accurately record labor distribution.
In the future, the City Administrator will attempt to provide more
labor distribution information to the City Council for all depart-
ments.
Mobile Manufactured Housi
The City received an action alert from the League of Minnesota
Cities stating that Minnesota Laws, 1982, Chapter 490, amending
MS 462.357, Subdivision 1, changes the Municipal Planning Act to
prohibit the exclusion of mobile/manufactured homes from cities.
These provisions are not effective until August 1, 1982. In order
to provide some control so that mobile/manufacured homes are not
placed ramdomly throughout the City of Eagan in single family zoning
districts, it is recommended that certain zoning ordinance amend-
ments be given consideration. Please refer to the attached informa-
tion from the League of Minnesota Cities found on pages 137 through
$9 for further information. If the City Council so desires,
further staff input and an amendment to the zoning ordinance can
be drafted and placed on a future City Council agenda for considera-
tion.
AMM Annual Meeting
The AMM Annual Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 26, at the
Sheraton Inn Northwest in Brooklyn Park. Enclosed on pages
1 through --mber is a copy of the notice and nominating committee
report. Any meof the City Council. who wishes to attend should
notify the City Administrator at the meeting on Tuesday so reserva-
tions can be made for you. Please note that spouses are welcome
to attend the annual meeting as was the case last year.
.52
0 0
Informative Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Two
Tax Exempt Mortgage Financing
Enclosed on pages 73 through 9 S is the most recent information
pertaining to the tax exempt mortgage financing program. As stated
on the information, 99% of the loans are pre -committed and only
approximately $33,000 remains for the program. There have been
296 loans including both low income and basic income provided under
the program.
Conciliation Court
The City of Eagan appeared in conciliation court as the defendent
in a case involving Stacy Marie Malcolm who resides at 1919 Silver
Bell Road, the plaintiff, over a charge that due to the discolora-
tion of the water, her laundry was ruined and she requested payment
for her laundry by the City of Eagan. The City Clerk appeared
before Judge Mitchell on May 3, 1982, and upon listening to the
case stated by Stacy Malcolm and the City's position on the matter,
the judge has ruled that the City does not owe Ms. Malcolm any
amount of money as a judgment for her claim. The City of Eagan
had taken the position in conciliation court that discoloration
of the water does not ruin the clothes, it merely changes the color,
and in fact, the City had given Ms. Malcolm a solution called Rover
to restore the natural color of the laundry and there was no valid
claim or judgment against the City of Eagan.
MTC "Opt Out" Program
Mayor Blomquist received information from MnDOT Commissioner Richard
Braun that outlines the program referred to as the "Opt Out" program
providing for local communities in certain circumstances to qualify
for transit funds equivalent to 90% of the property tax levied
by the Metropolitan Transit Commission in the community. Enclosed
on pages through /� is a copy of the letter and the Metro-
politan Transit Demonstration Program.
[!'
r�
May 4, 1982
Eagan City Council
Eagan City Hall
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Re: Lone Oak Heights Development
Gentlemen:
In the opinion of the Timberline Civic Association, the City Council's
recent decision to approve the plat of Midwestern Associates and thereby
allow the construction of another apartment/townhouse development in
Section 9 borders on the irresponsible. The City's own Comprehensive
Plan recognized, as early as 1978, the overcrowding which is taking place
in this area. We would remind you that you were presented with a
petition signed by approximately 300 homeowners in the neighborhood
surrounding the Lone Oak Heights Development requesting that steps be
taken to rezone that property to a lower density classification. You, as a
City Council, completely ignored that petition. At least, no public
hearings were held on it and no City Council vote was taken.
With hindsight, it would not appear that the Council would have had the
resolve to down -zone anyway. One reading the Eagan Chronicle's account
of the hearing where the Lone Oak Heights plat was approved would get
the definite impression that all one has to do to push through a plat
approval is to threaten the City Council with a lawsuit.
Your own City Attorney, Mr. Hauge, provided you with an opinion which
would have supported the ability of the City Council to rezone that
property without the need for "buying back" the zoning. Just why that
opinion was ignored in the face of a threat from Mr. LeVander is most
puzzling.
Commissioners Smith, Wachtler and Egan apparently felt that the
dedication of four acres of land back in 1975 for park purposes entitled
Mr. Shields, the landowner, to perpetually have his land zoned RAII and
RAV, irrespective of how the remainder of the area developed from 1975
through 1982. In their concern for the deal struck with Mr. Shields in
1975, it is unfortunate that these gentlemen did not recall the
commitments that had been made to the residents of the area concerning
-9/f
0 0
Eagan City Council
Page 2
May 4, 1982
the development of the Pilot Knob Park. We would certainly invite all of
the City Council out to view that "park", a euphemistic term for a grass -
filled swamp surrounded by an asphalt ring, which, in its present
condition, only serves as a mosquito breeding ground.
The water level is artificially maintained at its present low condition by
means of a storm sewer system which was also installed against the
wishes of the neighborhood residents, but at their cost. Because of this
unwanted project, Mr. Shields has been able to reclaim a larger area for
sale to the developer as building sites, all to the detriment of the
neighborhood as a whole. Back in 1975, when the arrangement was made
to rezone the Martin Shields property, the plans for the Pilot Knob Park
called for the establishment of a water level such that an attractive pond
with bridges, a floating platform and walkways would result.
If the City Engineer's firm has properly installed the water level control
structures, it should be possible to raise the water level to the point
where the pond comprises open water rather than an unsightly slough. We
request that such an action be taken and that the promised amenities be
constructed.
It is unfortunate that the City Council does not pay more heed to the
wishes of the existing residents, but instead caters to the money interests
of the developers who momentarily come upon the scene, plant their high -
profit, low-cost, crowded building sites and then move on, leaving the
citizens to cope with the blight and other problems that such practices
portend.
Respectfully submitted,
TIMBERLINE CIVIC ASSOCIATION
es' ent
r�
PROTFCTIVf? zs criorS •
M)NTRLY RPPORT
APRIL, 1982
MSP=ON/OFFICF FOMS
Type
Units
valuation
Pewmat Fee
Year -Tb -Date
Building
��
Sin ie Famil
Plumbing
101.0
354.0
AVAC
49.5
176.5
Admdnistrative/Office
76.0
785.0
Fire Marshal
87.0
150.0
Miscellaneous
22.0
89.0
General Office
153.0
535.0
Permit Process'F,
108.5
348.5
city Council Meetings
0,0
1.5
NU MER OF PMMTS ISSUED
$ 5,859.50
0
Industrial
This Month
Year -Tb -Date
Building
53
159
Plumbing
46
119
74VAC
43
135
Electric
59
188
Water Softener
1
20
[Jell, Cesspool, Septic Tank
0
0
Sighs
7
19
NATURF. OF B=IMG PELl=S ISSM
Nkriber
Type
Units
valuation
Pewmat Fee
Plan check Fee
Thtal*�
21
Sin ie Famil
21
$1,178,500.00
$ 6,7.98.50
$3,149.25
$36,182.7.5
6
]hmlex
6
$ 282,000.00
$ 1,600.50
$ 800.25
$10,012.25
8
1SAti-Rmdly
8
$ 2,98,000.00
S 1,760.00
$ 880.00
$12,744.00
1
Commerical
1
$ 82,000.00
$ . 379.00
$ 189.50
$ 5,859.50
0
Industrial
0
0
0
0
0
0
Institutional
0
0
0
0
0
2
Res. Garage
2
$ 15,800.00
$ 137.00
$ 68.50
$ 213.50
2
Scrim. Pool
2
$ 17,000.00
$ 143.00
$ 71.50
$ 223.00
13
Miscellaneous
13
S 59,495.00
$ 559.00
$ 122.50
$ 713.00
53
TOTALS
53
$1,922,795.00
$10,877.00
$5,281.00
$65,947.50
* Total Fees Include: P.uildinr, Permit Fee, Sur-(h3rge, Plan Check Fee, SAC Lhit Fee,
I -titer Connection Fee, Ihter Meter Fee and Road Licit Fee.
ED
April 15, 1982
TO: City Managers, Administrators, Clerks
(Please pass a copy along to your city planner or zoning administrator)
FROM: Duke Addicks, Legislative Counsel
Cathy Quiggle, Research Assistant
RE: Mobile/Manufactured Housing
Minnesota Laws 1982, Chapter 490 amending M.S. 462.357, Subd. 1 changes the Municipal
Planning Act to prohibit the exclusion of mobile/manufactured homes from cities. (The
complete text of the law as amended is enclosed. New language is underlined, old
language is stricken.) These new provisions are not effective until August 1, 1982.
Until then, any manufactured homes are subject to the zoning ordinance presently in
effect in a city.
Pursuant to this new legislation, by August 1, 1982, cities may wish to amend their
zoning ordinances to establish the following:
1, design standards for dwellings in residential districts such as: minimum width,
minimum square footage, siding material, roof lines, type of foundation requirements;
2, residential district(s) in which only dwellings meeting the Uniform Building Code
are permitted;
3. residential district(s) in which manufactured homes as defined by M.S. 327.31-327.35
(not required by law to meet the Uniform Building Code) are permitted as well as site
built homes which meet the Uniform Building Code, i.e. a mixed district;
4, mobile home park district(s) for those mobile homes unable to meet design standards
in residential districts.
There is some confusion over whether the establishment of the above mentioned design
standards is now the only legal method of regulating the location of manufactured
homes within a city. The Michigan Supreme Court held in Robinson Township v. Donald
Knoll, 302 NW 2d 146 (Mich, 1981), that a municipality's exclusion of mobile homes
(OVER)
87
.,eadr sccear- miinnesccR -J Ir_ _
C
j
r
.eu•...1
.d..� ..rY.
.....
•-_....ru r -,.fir.,
r.... ...�.
-1
April 15, 1982
TO: City Managers, Administrators, Clerks
(Please pass a copy along to your city planner or zoning administrator)
FROM: Duke Addicks, Legislative Counsel
Cathy Quiggle, Research Assistant
RE: Mobile/Manufactured Housing
Minnesota Laws 1982, Chapter 490 amending M.S. 462.357, Subd. 1 changes the Municipal
Planning Act to prohibit the exclusion of mobile/manufactured homes from cities. (The
complete text of the law as amended is enclosed. New language is underlined, old
language is stricken.) These new provisions are not effective until August 1, 1982.
Until then, any manufactured homes are subject to the zoning ordinance presently in
effect in a city.
Pursuant to this new legislation, by August 1, 1982, cities may wish to amend their
zoning ordinances to establish the following:
1, design standards for dwellings in residential districts such as: minimum width,
minimum square footage, siding material, roof lines, type of foundation requirements;
2, residential district(s) in which only dwellings meeting the Uniform Building Code
are permitted;
3. residential district(s) in which manufactured homes as defined by M.S. 327.31-327.35
(not required by law to meet the Uniform Building Code) are permitted as well as site
built homes which meet the Uniform Building Code, i.e. a mixed district;
4, mobile home park district(s) for those mobile homes unable to meet design standards
in residential districts.
There is some confusion over whether the establishment of the above mentioned design
standards is now the only legal method of regulating the location of manufactured
homes within a city. The Michigan Supreme Court held in Robinson Township v. Donald
Knoll, 302 NW 2d 146 (Mich, 1981), that a municipality's exclusion of mobile homes
(OVER)
87
.,eadr sccear- miinnesccR -J Ir_ _
n
u
-2-
1]
from all areas not designated as mobile home parks had no reasonable basis under the
police power and was therefore unconstitutional. The Court stated, however, that a
mobile home could be excluded if it failed to satisfy reasonable standards designed
to assure favorable comparisons with permitted site built housing. Thus, regulation
by design standards applicable to both site built and manufactured housing seems to
be the preferred approach.
It can be argued, however, that under the city's authority to regulate by class of
building (M.S. 462.357, Subd. 1) it can establish some residential districts which
permit manufactured homes and some which do not. The fact that manufactured homes
are subject to a different building code than site built homes would seem to be a
recognition that they are, in fact, a different class of building.
It can also be argued that the intent of the legislature in passing the new law was
to prohibit only the total exclusionof manufactured homes from a city. Lira 24 of
the bill originally read, "No regulation or single family zoning ordinance may
prohibit ... manufactured homes built in conformance with sections 327.31,Subd. 6,
or any other single family dwellings that comply with all other zoning ordinances
promulgated pursuant to this section." It would seem that if the legislature intended
to prohibit the exclusion of manufactured homes from all single family districts it
would have passed the bill as originally written instead of passing the amended
version which deleted the phrase "single family zoning ordinance". Therefore, if the
city were to establish some district permitting manufactured homes within the city,
it would seem to be in compliance with the intent of the law.
Again these changes in the Municipal Planning Act do not become effective until
August 1, 1982. Because the application of the law is unclear we will pass along
further information as it becomes available. If you have further questions please
call Cathy Quiggle at the League office. Through April 23rd our phone number will
be (612) 222-2861; thereafter, it will be (612) 227-5600.
DA: CQ:rmm
Attach.
0
Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 1980, Section 462.357, Subdivision 1, is amended to
read:
Subdivision 1. (AUTHORITY FOR ZONING.) For the purpose of promoting the public
health, safety, morals and general welfare, a municipality may by ordinance regulate
the location, height, width, bulk, type of foundation, number of stories, size of
buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size
of yards and other open spaces, the density and distribution of population, the uses
of buildings and structures for trade, industry, residence, recreation, public
activities, or other purposes, and the uses of land for trade, industry, residence,
recreation, agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply conservation,
conservation of shorelands, as defined in section 105.485, access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems as defined in section 116H.02, flood control or other
purposes, and may establish standards and procedures regulating such uses. No
regulation may prohibit earth sheltered construction as defined in section 116H.02,
subdivision 3, or manufactured homes built in conformance with sections 327.31 to
327.35 that eempies comply with all other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuan to
t- iii s section. The regu ations may divide the municipality into districts or zones
of suitable numbers, shape and area. The regulations shall be uniform for each class
or kind of buildings, structures or land and for each class or kind of use throughout
such district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other
districts. The ordinance embodying these -regulations shall be known as the zoning
ordinance and shall consist of text and maps. A city may by ordinance extend the
application of its zoning regulations to unincorporated territory located within
two miles of its limits in any direction, but not in a county or town which has
adopted zoning regulations; provided that where two or more noncontiguous municipali-
ties have boundaries less than four miles apart, each is authorized to control the
zoning of land on its side of a line equidistant between the two noncontiguous muni-
cipalities unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted zoning regulations.
Any city may thereafter enforce such regulations in the area to the same extent as
if such property were situated within its corporate limits, until the county or town
board adopts a comprehensive zoning regulation which includes the area.
/rmm
4/15/82
m
0 0
40
association of
metropolitan
municipalities
NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING
DATE: Wednesday, May 26, 1982
PLACE: Sheraton Inn - Northwest
I-94 & Hwy. 52
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota
5:30 to 6:30 P.M. 6:30 to 7:30 P.M. 7:30 P.M.
Social Hour Buffet Dinner Annual Business Meeting
(sponsored by '.!filler Entree:
& Schroeder Munici- Roast Round of Beef
pals, Inc.) and Baked Turkey
COST: $15.00 per person
BUSINESS 11EETING AGENDA
1. Call to Order - James Krautkremer, President
2. Introduction of Guests and Retiring Board Members.
3. Keynote address: Representative John Brandl, Chairman of the
Legislative Commission on Metropolitan Governance. "What are
we learning from the study of Metropolitan Governance".
4. Annual Report: President James Krau.tkr.emer.
5. Election of Officers and Directors - Dick Asleson, Nominating
Committee Chairperson (Committee report enclosed).
6. Comments: President Elect
7. Announcements.
8. Other Business.
9. Adjournment.
PLEASE NOTE:
A. Each City should send at least one delegate to cast its vote. Cities
are encouraged, however, to send as many additional representatives
as possible. Spouses and guests welcome.
B. Dinner reservations must be confirmed to Carol Williams at the AMM
office (227-5600) by noon on Monday, May 24th.
C. This notice is being sent to Mayors, Del-egates and City Administratil
Officials.
300 hanover bldg. 480 cedar street, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 222-2861
1]
May 5, 1.982
TO: Member City Officials
0
FROM: Dick Asleson, Chairperson,
Nominating Committee
RE: Nominating Committee Report
Pursuant to Article IX, Section 3 of the By -Laws,
a Nominating Committee was appointed by the AMM
Board of Directors on March 4, 1982. The Committee
has completed its work and has nominated the below
listed persons for consideration at the Annual sleeting
on May 26th.
For President:
Plary Anderson, Councilmember, Golden Valley
For Vice -President:
Jack Irving, Manager, Crystal
For Board of Directors:
Two -Year Terms (8 to be elected):
Ron Backes, Councilmember, St. Louis Park
Bill Barnhart, Senior Planner, Minneapolis
Jerry Dulger, Manager, Anoka
Laura Fraser, Councilmember, Lal.e Elmo
Jim Miller, Manager, Minnetonka
Jackie Slater, Alderman, Minneapolis
James Spore, Manager, Burnsville
Bob Sundland, Mayor, St. Anthony
One -Year Terms (2 to be elected):
Gary Bastian, Councilmember, Maplewood
Neil Peterson, Councilmember, Bloomington
* Additional candidates may be nominated by any voting
delegate from the floor at the Annual fleeting.
(over)
0 0
?Member City Officials
May 5, 1952
Page 2
Board members whose terms expire ;.fay, 198
Greg Blees, Budget Director, St. Paul
Bea Blomquist, Mayor, Fagan
Bill Sandberg, Mayor, North St. Paul
Dennis Schneider, Councilmember, Fridley
Joanne Showalter, Councilmember; St. Paul
Bob Thistle, Manager, Coon Rapids
.1c..bers of the ..'Omi aL 7.n— CoIIH^Lt?: ce
Dick Asleson, Administrator, Apple Valley
Tim Flaherty, Legislature Liaison, Minneapolis
Jack Irving, Manager, Crystal
Don Masterson, Mayor, Spring Lake Park
Carl Meissner, Administrator, Cottage Grove
Connie Morrison, Councilmember, Burnsville
Bill Sandberg, :Mayor, North St. Paul
Tom Spies, Councilmember, Bloomington
9�
BANCO MORTGE COMPAN
794 Pillsbury Build Y
Program Administ Department
608 2nd Avenue South
Minneapolis. MN 55402
612/343-3741
May 6, 1982
Mr. James Ehrenberg
First Trust Company of St. Paul
332 Minnesota Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
RE: Eagan BMIR Program
Dear Mr. Ehrenberg:
Attached is the monthly transaction report for the period ending
April 30, 1982.
If you should have any further questions regarding this report,
please do not hesitate to call.
BANCO MORTGAGE COMPANY
ADMINISTRATOR-SERVICER/CITY OF EAGAN
i
J
Karen Hengel
Bookkeeper
Enc.
CC: Tom Hedges / City of Eagan
Paul Ekholm / Miller 6 Schroeder
cf.-�
9
DATE: May 6, •
CITY OF E7CAN
: 41'
Statistical Data--
Amount of Program $16,940,000
Total Amount of Pre-:amtitted Loans
$ 16,907,275
Percentage of Loans Pre-Cortmitted
99 %
Low Income
Basic Income
Total Number of Loans
155
141
Average Mortgage Amount
$ 53,011
$ 61,635
Average Sale Price
59,423
67,030
Average Appraisal Value
59,890
68,105
Average Adjusted Gross Incane
20,274
25,047
Average Gross Income
21,581
26,742
Type of Iran:
Insured Conventional
7
21
Uninsured Conventional
g
7
FFA
47
69
VA
28
39
Graduated Pledge
65
5
Average Iran to Value Ratio:
Insured Conventional
88%
Uninsured Conventional
90%
71%
74%
Number of New Construction Loans
120
106
Number of Existing Loans
35
35
Type of Dwelling:
Single Family
80
Townhouse
22
97
Condominium
53
28
16
Mobile Hanes
0
0
Average Previous Residents
17%
23%
Number of Renters
111
100
Number of Owners
Average Age
44
41
Sex:
'10
Male
29.6
Female
106
131
49
10
Average Fatmily Size
1.8
2.4
Average Number of Children
.4-�--
.
Marital Status:
Married
68
Single
96
Joint
78
25
Divorced
5
14
FUNDING: -„
4
6
Dollar, Amount of Loans Funded
$
16,903,100
NCffber OL loans
296
: 41'
DATE: May 6, 1982
CITY OF EAGAN
$16,940,000 --Amount of Program
Dollar Amount of Funds Remaining $ 32,725
PLEASE NOTE: This amount can be utilized in any of
the following categories:
Single Family, Townhouse, Condo,
Mobile Home; Low or Basic Incomes;
or any Conventional Loans, including
Conventional 95%.
This does,not include the Graduated
Pledge Account. At this time, there
are no Graduated Pledqe Funds available.
Total Pre -Commitment Amount $ 16,907,275
Total Reserved (Yet to be Pre-Comnitted) $ -0-
$ 16,940,000
9S
F
nO0�p1NESpTq 20
Minnesota
Department of Transportation
Transportation Building
TRPay¢0 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
��1rOF
office of Commissioner
May 6, 1982
Honorable Beatta Bloomquist
Mayor of Eagan
4504 Oak Chase Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Dear Mayor Bloomquist:
•
(612) 2963000
Enclosed for your information are guidelines for the
implementation of the Metropolitan Transit Service Demonstration
Program established by the 1981 Legislature. This program,
commonly referred to as the "Opt Out" program, provides for local
communities in certain circumstances to qualify for transit funds
equivalent to 90% of the property tax levied by the Metropolitan
Transit Commission in the community. Please contact Mn/DOT staff
if you are interested in the program.
Sincerely,
Richard P. Braun
Commissioner
Enclosure
cc: Lou Olson, M.T.C.
in
An Equal Opportunity Employer
METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SERVICE
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES
�r�rtrsESprq
yt ` i D -A43
or
April 198?
97
• INTRODUCTION •
The enclosed guidelines have been drafted to facilitate
implementation of the Metropolitan Transit Service
Demonstration Program, more commonly known as the "Opt Out"
Program. This program was established by the 1981 Legislature
in order to "provide financial assistance for projects designed
to test the efficiency and effectiveness of alternative methods
of providing public transit service for communities that are
within the metropolitan transit taxing district but are not
adequately served by existing regular route transit."
In effect, this legislation authorizes the Commissioner of
Transportation to contract with a city or group of cities that
proposes to replace MTC transit service with an alternative.
The contract would be funded by withholding state funds
appropriated for the MTC. The withheld amount would be up to
or equal to 90% of the local property taxes levied by the MTC
in the "opt out" community. In order to receive those funds,
an application must be submitted to and approved by the
Commissioner. Approvals will be subject to conformance with
the guidelines outlined below.
The guidelines focus on three parts:
1. Eligibility Criteria: These criteria must be met by
a community before an application can be considered
by the Commissioner of Transportation. The criteria
are based on a liberal interpretation of legislation
so as to permit consideration of_as many proposals as
possible.
2. Replacement Service: Service criteria must be met
before the Commissioner can approve an application.
These criteria, based on legislation, are intended to
ensure that all relevant service cost, efficiency and
effectiveness factors are compared. Failure to fully
evaluate the proposed service may result in
"surprises" for the local. officials and possible
lower service quality for users.
3. Application Processing: This part described what
will happen to applications submitted to the
Commissioner. This process is established by
existing legislation that permits little discretion.
All applications will be considered in an expeditious
manner.
Questions regarding these guidelines should be addressed to:
Robert J. Menke, Manager
Transit Planning Unit
820 Transportation building
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
612-297-2069
Gt
I. Eligibility Criteria: These criteria shall be used to
determine if a city or group of cities are eligible to
receive financial assistance and if the proposed service
meets the program purpose.
A. Recipient Eligibility: The recipient city or group
of cities shall:
1) Be located within the metropolitan transit taxing
district per M.S. 473.446, subd. 2, and
2) (a) Not be served by the MTC. (This will include
those communities served by private operators who
are not funded by the MTC.), or
(b) Be served only with routes which end or being
within the recipient area, and
3) Receive three or fewer weekday scheduled runs
during the hours of 9:00 am to 3:00 pm.
(Scheduled runs are defined as round trip
opportunities into or out of a recipient's area.)
Eligibility determinations will include consideration
of pending MTC service reductions. If an applicant
requests funding on the grounds that the applicant -'s
area is "not adequately served" by routes meeting
criteria 2(b) and 3, the request will be considered
and evaluated by Mn/DOT on the following criteria
(based on MCAR 1.4026, 1.4027 and 1.4028):
4) The extent that routes penetrate the applicant's
developed area,
5) The extent that residents have convenient access
to existing service,.
6) The extent that scheduled service meets the
desired time for service usage.
B. Service Eligibility: The service proposed for
funding shall:
1) Be designed to replace and substitute for
existing MTC service. (Replacement will be
defined so that similar origin/desti.nation travel
opportunities must be provided. Alterations in
vehicle types and service frequency will be
considered.)
2) Require a subsidy per pas!alnnger no greater than
the average subsidy per passenger pec route and
the average subsidy per passenger per trip set by
the MTC as its standard in its current
transportation development program.
WWI
II.
Application Requirements: The application for funding for
replacement service must evidence a thorough 'management
plan per 14 MCAR 1.4028. Actual operating data should be
obtained from the MTC where possible. Specific items that
should be included are:
A. Existing Service Analysis
1) Current routes and ridership
2) Current schedules
3) Current fares
B. Proposed Service Description
1) Anticipated routes and ridership
2) Proposed schedules
3) Proposed fares
4) Coordination with other public and/or private
service
C. Financial Analysis
1) Existing service cost and subsidy
2) Proposed service cost and subsidy
3) Total available local transit funds
4) Percent of local funds to be used
5) Amount of state funds requested
D.
Service Objectives
1) Clientele to be served
2) Performance standards to be met
3) Community objectives to be served
E. Program Commitment
1) Resolution(s) from applicant governing bodies
that indicate intent to operate the replacement
service for a minimum of one year.
2) Statement describing the. opportunities for public
input to the service plan.
3) Statements of support
groups (e.g., Chamber
Citizens, etc.).
/00
from appropriate community
Of Commerce, Senior
,• .. .So .. M•b.AveeilL aar�,Nq A�.Y,Yh'/
III. Application Approval Process: Applications for funding
will be processed in accordance with review and approval
requirements stated below. Upon receipt, Mn/DOT will
submit copies to the MTC for review and comment and to the
Metropolitan Council for review and concurrance per
statutory requirements (14 MCAR 1.4025, Sec. C).
A. MTC Review - The MTC will review and comment on:
1) Accuracy of the existing service description
2) Anticipated impact on the MTC system
3) Current subsidy analysis
B. Metropolitan Council Review - The Met Council will
review and approve based on:
1) Consistency with metropolitan system plans
2) Consistency with metropolitan system policies
C. Mn/DOT Review/Approval - The Mn/DOT will complete its
review and render its decision within 45 days of
receipt- of the proposal. Approved replacement
services will be funded for the balance of the
initial calendar year. Subsequent years' service
will be funded on a calendar year basis in accordance
with budget cycle deadlines used for all recipients
of state funds. In approving the replacement
service, adequate provisions for phase out of
existing service will be required.
Requests for additional services requiring state
funds to be matched with available local funds not
used for replacement service, or matched with other
local funds, will be approved only on a calendar year
basis in accordance with budget cycle timetables.
Request approval will be subject to availability of
program funds.
IV. Termination of Replacement Service-_: In the event that a
community chose to discontinue its replacement service,
assistance funds will revert to the MTC. Where
applicable, resumption of MTC service will be managed sc
as to ensure minimum disruption of service availability.
/Q
,..AGENDA
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
REGULAR MEETING
CITY HALL
MAY 18, 1982
6:30 P.M.
SPECIAL NOTE: Due to a school board election in Independent School District
#196 on May 18, 1982, no formal business can be transacted until
after 8:00 p.m. Therefore, the City Council will use the period
of 6:30-8:00 p.m. as a workshop session. The public hearing
section of the agenda will begin at 8:00 p.m. with all other
formal items to follow.
I. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES -
III. DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS
Q. A. Fire Department e' C. Park Department
B. Police Department D. Public Works Department
QQ'
IV. CONSENT ITEMS (One motion approves all items)
A. 911 Emergency Telephone Grant Agreement
C,11 B. Temporary 3.2 Beer License — Dale Goergen
1\ C. Temporary 3.2 Beer License — Arnold Doering
Q 11 D. Contract 82.2, Change Order #1 (Briar Hill 4th Addition)
e.l2 E. Project 356, Present Feasibility Report/ Order Public Hearing
(Comserv)
P%I -F. Excavation Permit — Oakwood Hts. Condominiums (Countryside
Builders, Inc.
P,►1 G. Contract 80-21, Change Order #1, Blackhawk Lake Trunk Storm
Sewer Outlet
V. 8:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS
Q•13 A. Project #264A, Reassessment Hearing, Twin View Manor Utilities
e,lg B. Project #274, Reassessment Hearing, Silver Bell Raod Area Streets
& Utilities
C. Project #264B, Assessment Hearing, Twin View Manor Streets
e
VD. Project #284B, Assessment Hearing, Windtree Addition Streets
e 23 E. Project #293B, Assessment Hearing, Windcrest Addition Streets
Q ZSF. Project #308B, Assessment Hearing, Duckweed Trail Streets
e 13G. Diamond Lake, Inc., for Industrial Revenue Bond Financing in the
Q Amount of $750,000
VI. OLD BUSINESS
VI1. NEW BUSINESS
�ltt, A. Gerald & Shirley Smith for a 10' Variance from a Front Yard
Setback Located at 4367 Onyx Dr., Lot 22, Block 3 Cedar Grove 4
p 40� B. McDonald's Corporation for a Variance to Exceed the Allowable
` Height for a Pylon Sign Located on Lot 1, Block 1, Mari Acres
(�O C. Roger Kreidberg of Scheutt Investment Co. for Preliminary Plat
B Approval, Berry Ridge Addition, Consisting of Approximately 3.65
Acres, Located on Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop Estates
Q%S D. Pilot Knob Shopping Center, IRB Financing/Request for Extension
'f? E. Lone Oak Heights for Temporary Sales Office
Q
0
Eagan City Council Agenda
May 18, 1982
Page Two
6
VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS
Q1 A. Contract 82-4 (Twin View Manor 2nd Addition, et al, Streets)
Receive Bids/Award Contract
Q 0 B. 1982 Health Insurance Bids
C. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commission Update
IX. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda)
X. ADJOURNMENT
i 0
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COLNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 14, 1982
SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION
After approval of the April 20 and May 4 regular City Council
minutes and the May 18, 1982 City Council agenda, the following
items are in order for consideration: (Special Note: The page
or pa'g'es to be corrected by the City Attorney regarding the April
20, 1982 regular City Council minutes are enclosed on page
FIRE DEPARTMENT
A. Fire Department -- There are no items
the Fire Department at this time.
POLICE DEPARTMENT
to be considered for
B. Police Department -- There are no items to be considered for
the Police Department at this time.
PARK DEPARTMENT
C. Park Department -- There are no items to be considered at this
time for the Park Department.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
D. Public Works Department -- Item #1: Request of Ann Pietsch
Mrs. Pietsch's request to the City Council was a sc e u ed agencTa
item under Public Works Department at the May 4, 1982 regular City
Council meeting. In the absence of Mr. or Mrs. Pietsch, this item
was continued until the May 18 meeting. Mrs. Pietsch has informed
me that they are planning to be present. For your information,
Mr. and Mrs. Pietsch were granted a deferment by the City Council
for certain assessments against their property located on Dodd
Road. The property is recorded in the names of both Mr. and Mrs.
Pietsch and therefore the agreement of record between the City
of Eagan requires both Mr. and Mrs. Pietsch's signatures. Mrs.
Pietsch has requested special consideration by the City to waive
the signature of her husband which would allow her to proceed with
the assessment deferment. If the assessment deferment agreement
is not exercised, the assessments will be levied with the property
taxes this year. The City staff, including both the City Adminis-
trator and City Attorney, has explained to Mrs. Pietsch that the
City staff cannot waive this right of signature. Due to the Pietsch
situation, there are too many uncertainties providing risk to the
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Two
City. Mrs. Pietsch was advised that she consult legal counsel
in an effort to work out this problem on a personal level. Mrs.
Pietsch has asked to appear before the City Council and therefore
was scheduled as a part of department head business. Her letter
was difficult to reproduce and therefore a copy has been typed
and is enclosed on page __!$ for your reference.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny waiving
Mr. Pietsch's signature on the deferment agreement between the
City of Eagan and Mr. and Mrs. Pietsch.
Council Minutes •
May 4, 1982 • PHH
LEXINGTON PLACE PRELIMINARY PLAT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 209 1982
After the motion made by Smith and seconded by Wachter to approve the
application with 4 conditions, on page 6 of the Minutes of the April 20, 1982
meeting, the Minutes should be worded as follows: "Mayor Blomquist recom-
mended a limit of 12 studio units and submitted a proposed Resolution in the
form of an amendment for consideration by the Council regarding approval of
the application which was rejected. Those in favor of the motion were Wachter
and Smith; those against were Blomquist, Thomas and Egan. The motion failed.
There was considerable discussion concerning the number of studio units that
should be allowed. Mayor Blomquist then submitted the following Resolution:
WHEREAS, U. S. Homes, Inc., has applied for preliminary plat approval for
a 672 -unit condominium complex consisting of 28 buildings with 168 studio
units, and
WHEREAS, the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan provides for goals
and objectives in housing; and,
WHEREAS, Table 12 p. VIII -27 provides for a goal of 50 modest cost
dwelling units within Section 14 of the City where this development is pro-
posed; and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City to distribute modest cost housing
in a reasonable manner about the City; and
WHEREAS, a reasonable upgrading of Table 13 P. VIII -30 for inflation
since 1978 would result in the studio units being classified as modest cost
housing;
NOW THEREFORE, upon motion by Blomquist, seconded Eagan, it was Resolved
as follows:
1. That the preliminary plat application of U. S. Homes be approved
subject to the following conditions:
a. That no more than 50 studio units 'as described in the applica-
tion be allowed so that additional modest cost housing may be
allowed in Section 14 within the goals of the Eagan Compre-
hensive Guide.
b. etc.
12 3
_ G-�; � , `J`� �f�•.F<Cver� r � �L�.. �e��c-aG . JF'/'L'>..;' .c_ s��:.sr�-.<
.—. -� �z%c- G[ct-or�ia�s,clu _�-i' /r.� y.,�.rc:�. G�� xe.� °• .�,� -
\,
... .�UZC.cC. �/C 1�2 .!%/L(-e'..=L� /T%FLrL iCLn.•c. �;C/C/ Z1r
.+�.0 zz 2--
4 /
_.. ---- - ��Z � G,.h�..�•c%� kip ��„ �` �Crnc.� /�,� / 7�� A .-- li.�.���
-_._---_-��.. -.� �, �.lo,� Gee �� 0�4�.•� �� .6�,�._----
"To the Honorable Mayor,�`�
"My name is Ann Pietsch. I live at 4275 Dodd Road, Eagan. My hus-
band and I are separated. I've got.a deferment for the acessments
but my husband will not sign. I make the payments. Therefore
just for this year until I know more what will happen with this
house, I would very much like for you to consider just one signature
on deferment papers. I can not afford $100.00 per month to be
attached to this payment. Also with the past record of payment
on this mortgage the mortgage company will not go along with late
payments. I have struggled all my life and I don't need a for -
closure of this house because of acessments which we did not want
here. We had to be one of the mis-fortunate people who have to
pay interest yet on this money due for acessments which we can
not come up with -- which is over $9,000.00. Is a lot of money.
I contacted city attorney for help they said I should write the
Council. I want to appear before the Council if necessary. I
am very concerned about this matter. I need a home to live in.
I can not afford to loose it because of acessments due.
Mrs. Ann Pietsch
4275 Dodd Road
Eagan, Minn."
• 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Three
Item #2: Project 257, Public Works Committee Meetin (Pat McCarth
aim or ama es -- a Pu is or s ommittee met on Tuesday,
ay at :30 p.m. on forty acres of land owned by Mr.
McCarthy located at the southwest corner of Deerwood Drive and
Pilot Knob Road to review his claim for damages resulting from the
restoration performed for the above referenced project which pro-
vided for the installation of a trunk storm sewer outlet from Thomas
Lake to Blackhawk Lake. Copies of the background information per-
taining to this Public Works Committee Agenda was forwarded to
all City Council members previously. Committee chairman Ted Wachter,
committee member Jerry Thomas, and Public Works Director Tom Colbert
met with Mr. McCarthy to walk the specific property in question.
While the soil sample analysis performed by Twin City Testing,
Inc., indicated no significant difference the soil located in the
construction zone as compared to the undisturbed soil elsewhere
on his property, the visual inspection by the Public Works Committee
did notice that there were areas where erosion had occurred, washing
away what minimal topsoil there was and exposing rocks and boulders
in certain areas. The field inspection verified Mr. McCarthy's
contention of his attempt to till this field for planting. However,
he contended that due to the type of soil provided in the restora-
tion it was not condusive to proper tillage nor an ability to sup-
port crop growth. While the contractor made every attempt to sal-
vage and replace whatever exising topsoil there was along this
alignment, it should be noted that this is the second time that
a major utility construction took place along this alignment.
The original construction was to install the trunk sanitary sewer
line that was installed in 1972. Consequently, after two con-
struction projects, what limited topsoil originally existed could
have slowly diminished and been lost in construction. It was noted
that the quality of the soil was not highly rated to begin with
or in the adjacent undisturbed areas. However, Mr. McCarthy still
contends that he is unable to make use of this field. Subsequently,
he is demanding that the City replace a foot of topsoil over the
3.72 acres of disturbed land to enable him to continue his farm
operations. To replace this amount of topsoil over the disturbed
area would take approximately 6,000 c.y. at an estimated cost of
$22,500.
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Four
Public Works Committee Recommendations
Because of the excessive costs associated with replacing new topsoil
over the disturbed area which would result in a quality of land
better than what originally existed, .it was the committee's recom-
mendation that the City consider "renting" this construction area
from Mr. McCarthy for the negotiated $100 per acre figure as agreed
to by Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy indicates his intention to con-
tinue farming this field for fifteen years which would result in
a cost to the City of $6,000 over the fifteen year period. However,
it was the committee's recommendation that the rate of $100 per
acre be approved resulting in an annual payment of approximately
$372 to be paid to Mr. McCarthy on an annual basis for each year
he is unable to make use of this property for farming purposes.
Mr. McCarthy's request for Council consideration is for the replace-
ment of topsoil. However, he has given an indication of his wil-
lingness to accept the "rental" alternative as suggested by the
committee. The Public Works Committee will be available to discuss
this item in further detail with the full Council on May 18 to
obtain a final resolution to this question.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny Mr.
McCarthy's claim for damages and establish an acceptable alternative
if City liability is determined.
R
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Five
i CONSENTI 'ITEMS!
There are a total of seven (7) items on the agenda referred to
as consent items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council.
If the City Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further
detail, those items should be removed from the consent agenda and
placed under additional items unless the discussion required is
brief.
911 EMERGENCY TELEPHONE GRANT
A. 911 Emergency Telephone Grant Agreement -- The City has received
a revised agreement from Dakota County regarding the 911 emergency
telephone service agreement. In a letter from Joseph Schur,
Director of Planning & Human Services for Dakota County, he stated
that apparently the grant agreement amount as prepared by the Mcto-
politan Council staff was in error. The correct amount of the
grant to the City is $20,799 and not $22,367 as originally indi-
cated. The original amount in the April 12, 1982 letter from Dakota
County included some network installation costs. These network
installation costs will still be paid by the County, but the direct
grant to the City must be changed to reflect the installation cost
of 911. Therefore, enclosed on pages $ through _/6- is a
copy of the letter from Dakota County Including a copy of tTie re-
vised grant agreement.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To terminate the previous
grant agreement as executed at the May 4, 1982 City Council meeting
and approve the revised grant agreement as stated.
�I'Xax'.41 ' v,LT1yf7
.IEFFRFY I. CONNELI.
UrQctor O1 Plannma PLANNING SERVICES
Phv31e31 Develom"Oril DAKOTA COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER
1560 HWv 55 - HASTINGS. MINNESOTA 55033
16121 43).0225
May 4, 1982
Thomas L. Hedges, Administrator
City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Rd.
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Tom:
JOSEPH P iCHUR
Director a! Plannmy
Hkiman Services
In reviewing the 911 Emergency Telephone Service Grant Agreement amounts with
Metro Council staff, an error was discovered. The letter dated April 12, 1982,
and the contract attached to that letter, included a grant amount of $22,367 for
the installation of 911 in your City. In talking to Metro Council staff, it was
determined that the correct amount for your City is $20,799. The original amount
in the April 12, 1982 letter included some network installation costs. These
network installation costs will still be paid by the County, but the direct grant
to the City must be changed to reflect the installation cost of 911 at your PSAP
only.
Please find attached, a revised grant agreement which reflects the change described
above. I regret any inconvenience this error may have caused. If you require .
further explanation or have any other questions, please do not hesitate to call upon
me.
JPS:vk
Enclosure
r—
r6
COMMISSIONERS—
Sincerely,
Joseph P. Schur
Director of Planning,
Human Services
IST DISTRICT 2Ho DISTRICT 3RD DISTRICT 4TH DISTRICT STH DISTRICT
JOSEPH A. HARRIS GERALD E. HOLLENKAMP JOHN S. VOSS GENE ATKINS RUSSELL STREEFLAND
HASTINGS SOUTH ST. PAUL BURNSVILLE INVER GROVE HEIGHTS BURNSVILLE
0
GRANT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the Dakota County Board of Commissioners,
•
hereinafter the Board, and the City of Eagan ,
hereinafter the City, are desirous of establishing 911 Emergency
Telephone Service within the municipality, and
WHEREAS, the Board by Resolution 81-718, adopted
December 22, 1981, has authorized the grant of $ 20,799 to
the City to reimburse the City for the expense of establishing a
Public Safety Answering Point, hereinafter PSAP, within the 911
system, and
WHEREAS, the City is willing to establish, maintain,
and operate the PSAP within the City.
..
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board and the City do mutually
agree as follows:
1. The Board will reimburse the City $ 20,799
for the expense of establishing the PSAP to be operated within
the City, such reimbursement to be made in January, 1983.
- -
2. The City will establish, maintain and operate the
.-
PSAP for the City within the countywide 911 system.
'.. -.
3. The city will assume the expense of purchasing the
power supply unit for the operation of its PSAP and will so pur-
chase the unit.
-
4. The Board shall be entitled to receipt of the 208
71
reimbursement from the U.S. Department of Transportation for
installation of the 911 system.
5. The City will hold harmless and defend the Board
3;z?.r;<;"s.:,;;:..i<s�,;-;:y;;:.:_•:;i
and Dakota County from any claims arising through the
establishment, installation, operation, or maintenance of the
PSAP - 911 system within the City.
6. The City agrees to comply with all laws and
regulations, g lations, both federal and state, relating to the expenditure
" -
of these funds, including but not limited to those laws
prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, religion,
national origin, sex, or handicap.
Q Page 1 of 2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this
Agreement to be duly executed.
Approved as to form:
Assistant County P
torney/Date
Approved as to execution:
Assistant County Attorney/Date
Approved by Dakota County Board
Resolution No. 81-718.
This instrument drafted by: DMF
Dakota County Attorney's Office
Dakota County Government Center
Hastings, Minnesota 55033
Telephone: (612) 437-0438
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
By
Gene Atkins, Chairman
Hoard of Commissioners
Date of Signature
Attest
Carl D. Onischuk, Auditor
Date of Signature
CITY OF
By
Title
Date of Signature
Attest
Title
Date of S gnature
C-82-14 Page 2 of 2
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Six
TEMP. 3.2 BEER PERMIT - DALE GOERGEN
B. Temporary 3.2 Beer Permit for Dale Goergen -- An application
for a non -intoxicating malt liquor license was applied for by Mr.
Dale Goergen residing in Apple Valley, Mn. The purpose of the
special temporary 3.2 beer license is for use at a softball tourna-
ment scheduled on July 24 and 25 at the Univac fields. The applica-
tion has been reviewed by the Eagan Police Department and has been
found acceptable for consideration. Therefore, the license appli-
cation is in order for City Council review and consideration.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve the 3.2 beer
license submitted by Mr. Dale Goergen.
TEMP. 3.2 BEER PERMIT - ARNOLD DOERING
C. Temporary 3.2 Beer Permit for Arnold Doering -- An application
for a non -intoxicating malt liquor license was applied for by Mr.
Arnold Doering residing in Eagan, Mn. The purpose of the special
temporary 3.2 beer license is for use at a softball tournament
scheduled on June 19 and 20 at the Univac fields. The application
has been reviewed by the Eagan Police Department and has been found
acceptable for consideration. Therefore, the license application
is in order for City Council review and consideration.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve the 3.2 beer
license submitted by Mr. Arnold Doering.
CONTRACT 82-2
D. Contract 82-2, Change Order #1 (Briar Hill 4th Addition) --
Upon the initiation of the contract to install utilities in the
Briar Hill 4th Addition, it was discovered that the developer did
not complete his grading to the required elevations in accordance
with his approved grading plan. Subsequently, the City's contractor
has to incur additional cost to perform this work. The City has
received a written letter of concurrence from the developer agreeing
to the acceptance of this additional cost as his responsibility
and waiving the right to objections associated with this increased
cost. The estimated cost for this additional grading is $2,080.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve Change Order
#1 for Contract 82-2 for an additional $2,080.
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Seven
PROJECT.356
E. Project 356, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing
(Comsery No. 1 Streets & Utilities) -- On March 16, the City Council
received a petition from the developer and ordered the preparation
of a feasibility report. The report has now been completed and
is being presented to the Council for their information.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To receive the feasibility
report for Project 356 (Comsery No. 1) and order the public hearing
to be held June 15, 1982.
EXCAVATING PERMIT - OAKWOOD HTS.
F. Excavation Permit, Oakwood Heights Condominiums (Countryside
Builders, Inc.) -- The City has received an application for a
grading/excavating permit for the Oakwood Heights Condominium pro-
ject, located on the north side of Wilderness Run Road east of
the Wedgewood Addition. The preliminary plat for this proposed
development was approved by the City Council on May 4, 1982. The
grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been reviewed and
approved by the staff. The insurance certificate and performance
bond are anticipated to be in order by the May 18 Council meeting.
All fees associated with this application have been paid.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve the excavation
permit for Oakwood Heights Condominiums to Countryside Builders,
Inc.
CONTRACT 80-21
G. Contract 80-21, Change Order #1, Blackhawk Lake Trunk Storm
Sewer Outlet -- During the predesign final investigation in the
vicinity of the overdepth tunneling construction, soil samples
indicated a general sandy type soil in this vicinity. However,
during the construction of the tunneling operations, the mechanical
advancement of the storm sewer was halted by large rock and boulder
obstructions. Subsequently, the contractor had to switch the means
of his operation from mechanical advancement to hand tunneling.
After several meetings and review of this force account work, it
was determined that the contractor was entitled to an additional
$11,533.41 for this unanticipated costly work. The staff recom-
mends acceptance of this change order providing for this additional
payment.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve Change Order
#1 to Contract 80-21 in the amount of an additional $11,533.41.
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Eight
PUBLIC HEAR'ING'S
PROJECT #264A
A. Project #264A, Reassessment Hearing, Twin View Manor 1st Addi-
tion (Utilities) -- On March 16, 1982, in compliance with a court
ordered directive resulting from an assessment appeal for these
utilities, the City Council vacated the assessments as established
at the public hearing on September 15, 1981 and ordered a reassess-
ment hearing to be scheduled for May 18, 1982. This was necessi-
tated by the fact that the City did not follow proper assessment
procedures in determining benefit to the property before levying
the assessments. Subsequently, this reassessment hearing will
allow the City to follow the proper procedure. In order to perform
this market analysis in determining benefit, it will be necessary
for the City Council to continue the final reassessment hearing
for any objecting property owner and order a property appraisal
to be performed. Therefore, in anticipation of the additional
costs expected with this market analysis requirement, the per lot
assessment for the twelve (12) appellants had to be increased by
$500 to cover this future financial obligation by the City which
is a cost directly related to this improvement. Subsequently,
the new per lot assessment is $6,514.85 as compared to the September
15, 1981 final assessment of $6,014.85.
The basis for the appellants' objections and subsequent appeals
is based on the amount of interest that was levied at the final
assessment hearing. The appellants felt that they were guaranteed
an 8% rate of interest at the time of the public hearing which
was held on March 18, 1980. Because the assessment rate is depen-
dent upon the rate of interest associated with bonds sold to finance
the particular project which occurs after the public hearing, the
City does not have the knowledge or the ability to guarantee an
assessment rate. Subsequently, the amount of interest levied for
this particular project was 11.0%. For the Council's information,
the following history of bond sales and their related percentages
for the past three years is presented to show how the economy has
had a significant impact on interest rates: ASSESSMENT
DATE AMOUNT BOND INTEREST INTEREST
11-1-78
$1,915,000
5.64%
8.0%
6-1-79
6,385,000
5.61%
8.0%
12-1-79
1,825,000
6.75%
8.0%
7-1-80
3,060,000
6.28%
8.0%
12-1-80
3,650,000
9.27%
11.0%
8-1-81
4,530,000
10.70%
12.5%
12-1-81
2,875,000
10.61%
12.5%
13
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Nine
This particular project was included under the bond sale dated
12-1-80 due to the bids for this project being received in September
of 1980.
As the Council may be aware, with this controversial project, there
were several irrate residents in this subdivision who have had
and continue to have complaints pertaining to this project. The
staff has continued to work with these property owners to try to
resolve their concerns,. However, it is expected that several of
these complaints will still be brought forth at this reassessment
hearing. The City Attorney and Public Works Director will be able
to discuss with the Council questions pertaining to this project
and its subsequent reassessment.
Enclosed on page 16 is a copy of the letter that was forwarded
to the twelve (127 appellants explaining to them the City's proce-
dure in this matter. The following :table is a listing of the
appellant property owners and some 'information pertaining to their
interest in this project.
Proiect 264A Reassessment Heari
1+
Petition
Connected to
Appellant
For�gainst
Sewer or Water
Wesley Berg
X
Yes
Arthur Coestner
X
No
A. Nelson
X
Yes
Tony & Elinor Villelli
X
No
Norm & Judith Mundahl
X
No
Terry & Virginia Lambert
X
No
Jim & Helen McDevitt
X
Yes
Gordon & Loraine Byers
X
Yes
Jim & Harriet Morris
X
Yes
Ben & Marlys Ruzicka
X
Yes
Larry & Linda Wittwer
X
Yes
Dennis & Claudia Mueffleman
X
Yes
1+
40
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Ten
For the Council's information, enclosed on page is a petition
that was submitted at the time of the public hearing ordering in
the installation of utilities signed by several residents objecting
to this project. It is interesting to note Item F., wherein the
people indicate their awareness of the uncertainty of the assessment
rate.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: If written objections
are received by May 18, continue the public hearing for those
specific individuals. Close the public hearing for those indivi-
duals who do not object to their reassessment or agree to drop
their original assessment appeal and authorize the staff to certify
to the County Auditor for collection.
1S
Ll
EEA EEOMOYIET
... .. .. ..
.MIA TNOI:M5 NEOGES
' OILNY:bPIY1O1
TNO, SEGA" EOOENE VAN OVEOEESE
CITY OF EAGAN
IAM., A.0..,
COY EARN
!E"VY IN0M.I
1NEOOOnE WnCNlE9 I'�ywilf PILOT NNGO ROAD "
LWNOI YfuMM
0. ADA 11,N
:""-EAGAN, MINNESOTA "0
Inn
,:Y
ENONe isaeloo '-
April 23, 1982
D.
Re:- Project 264A, Contract 80-19 (1Win View Manor Utilities)
Dear Property Owner:
As you are aware, an appeal has been filed with District Court pertaining to
.
- -- __-
the City's levying of special aacea„ONts associated with the installation of
.
the utilities Under the above -referenced project. Cne of the points of objec-
-
tion noted in this appeal referenced the City's Procedural omission of per
.
.
forming market analysis necess�; to determine benefit received through
_
the
referenced Project. While the City was aware of this requirement, it elected
not to perform this analysis due to the additional costs that would be incur-
ncurred.
red-The City has tried tam ways Provide the necessary improvements at the
...... -
most economical cost in response to the petitioned request of affected proper-
.-- . ".. .. .
ty owners.
-. �-
However, with this project being appealed through the judicial system, the
City will be required to perform this referenced market analysis before we
".
can be allowed to certify these assessments for collection. 'therefore, on
.
,.:::'•.:....
April 6, 1982, the City Council officially vacated and set aside the special
assessments levied against those property owners who officially appealed those
assessments to the District Court. The City Council then scheduled a "reassess-
mart" hearing to be held on May 18, 1982. inclosed with this let, trs you will
.
fired a form that incorporates the final assessment figure associated with the
-
property Under your owmership. Please cote that the City has had m include
..
a "estimated" figure of $500.00 to cover the costs associated with performing
the required market analysis and Property appraisal that would be incurred if
any Property owner requires this technical procedure to be followed in order
--
to Prove benefit to the affected property,
.
If this market analysis and property appraisal is required of the City by the
-
i
Property owners, the City will be required to perform that work. Alf costs
.
associated with this analysis then become a related and direct cost associated
With the installation of these utilities. SubSetpently, the City has to add
these costs together with all other costs to determine the total amount to be
assessed against the benefited properties. Subsequently, the enclosed amount
-
.
references your fair share of these additional costs associated with this pro-
.
jest.
.
the City is obligated only to assess those costs that are incurred in relation
to a particular Prefect. 'therefore, if a market analysis andapprai-
sal is not Yom!
required,mese mots can be related to reflect only those mats
associated project for the installation of utilities.
-
In summaxy, this letter is r cant to inform you the reasons why the special
....
assessments to be discussed on May 18, 1982 for the installation of utili-
ties have increased over those costs that were levied at the original final
-
assessment hearing hold on September 15, 1981.
:'-
.
If you have any questions pertaining to this procedure, please feel free to
... _
contact either the City Attorney, Mr. Paul Hauge at 454-4224 or me.
.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Colbert, P.E.
Director of Public Works
..
TAC/jachis 1
/
-
x -Ann Goers, Special Asseee„=„t Cleric
-
r..7i a M .
Paul Hauge, City Attorney
.-
i
Ic
C
C
I
• •.
March 24, 1980
T0: City of Eagan City Administrator
ATTN: Mr. Tom Hedges
SUBJECT: Improvement Project #264
The undersigned residents of Twin View Manor, after very 'serious considera-
tion, request the City Council of Eagan to rescind the approval of utilities
and street improvements for Twin View Manor approved at the council meeting
of March 18, 1980.
It seems appropriate that the following reasons should be considered by the
Council for this request:
A. Cost figures presented were not inclusive, residents were
not aware of total cost of project with information provided.
B. Petition for street improvements was misleading as it was
specified on a per lot basis rather than a cost per front
foot.
C. Petition for street improvements was (12) negative and (4)
for. This is precedent setting for the whole city.
D. Show of hands vote by audience included citizens not involved
in this project.
E. Present economic condition in our country today; unnecessary
expenditure is inflationary.
F. Not sure of interest rate projected @ 8%.
G. Most homes included in project have present utilities split;
one in front and other in rear.
In order that the maximum number of residents are available for this important
meeting, we request that this action be taken at the April 15, 1980 meeting.
NAME
ADDRESS
S"3
C _
GL....,
<177-(-�,
y,
11
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Eleven
PROJECT #274
0
B. Project #274, Reassessment Hearing, Silver Bell Road Streets
On September 15, 1981, the final assessment hearing was held
for the above referenced project which provided for the installation
of Silver Bell Road from Nicols Road to T. H. 13. Subsequent to
this, Mr. Lester Spenser, located on the northeast corner of Silver
Bell Road and Nicols Road, has appealed his assessment in addition
to filing a claim for damages against the City of Eagan on a non -
related storm sewer item. Again, this appeal points out the City's
deficiency in obtaining a market analysis to prove benefit equal
to or greater than the amount of the assessment levied. Mr. Spencer
was assessed $1,683 under this project. Therefore, the City Attor-
ney has recommended the City Council vacate the original assessment
and establish a new reassessment hearing which would allow the
City to proceed with the necessary property appraisal analysis
required by assessment law. Because this street was constructed
to a collector status greater than the normal residential street,
a residential equivalent assessment was used rather than the entire
cost of this project. However, the estimated $500 associated with
performing the required property appraisals and market analysis
should be the direct responsibility of this property. Therefore,
the original assessment in the amount of $1,683 should be increased
to $2,183 for the final reassessment hearing to be held on May
18 to cover the anticipated additional costs associated with per-
forming this market analysis as required by Mr. Spencer through
his assessment appeal action. If a written notice of objection
is received prior to the hearing on May 18, the public hearing
should be continued to allow the staff to perform this additional
work. If Mr. Spencer decides to drop his original assessment appeal
and/or does not object to this reassessment, the original assessment
amount should then be reaffirmed and reapproved by Council for
collection.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close/continue the
public hearing and approve, if appropriate, the final reassessment
for Project 274 to Mr. Lester Spencer.
11
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twelve
PROJECT 264B
C. Project 2648, Final Assessment Hearing (Twin View Manor 1st
Addition - Streets) -- Enclosed on page 'LO is a summary tabula-
tion of the final assessments associated—with the installation
of streets in the above referenced subdivision. All required
notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to
the affected property owners informing them of their final assess-
ment amount. The final cost per lot is approximately 5.67% higher
than the feasibility report estimate presented at the public hearing
on November 5, 1980. This is a result of performing some of the
boulevard restoration originally proposed under the utility project
as a part of this street construction. Subsequently, the utility
assessment was 6.9% under the feasibility report. When adding
both improvement projects together, the net result shows a. 2.8%
underrun of those costs estimated in the feasibility report to
install both streets and utilities.
Contract 81-2 was awarded in May of 1981. Subsequently, this pro-
ject was included in the 8-1-81 bond sale, resulting in an assess-
ment interest rate of 12.57. If there are any written objections
submitted by the public hearing on May 18, the public hearing for
final assessments should be continued for those objecting property
owners to allow the City to perform additional input as may be
required.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: If appropriate, close
the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project
264B and authorize staff to certify to the County Auditor for col-
lection.
/9
0 0
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT NO: 264B
SUBDIVISION/AREA: TWIN VIEW MANOR ADDITION
FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: May 18, 1982
IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED:
F. R. = Feasibility Report
FINAL F.R.
WATER RATES RATES
DArea
0 Laterals
nService
F1 Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STORM
Area
Laterals
SANITARY
Area
Laterals
Service
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STREETS
Gravel Base
QSurfacing
Res. Equiv.
NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 22 Sing Le Family Lots
NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 Years
RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5%
TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $81,130.94
CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-2
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 51 1980
we
FINAL F. R.
RATES RATES
$3,687.77/lot $3,490.00/lot
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Thirteen
PROJECT 284B
0
D. Project 284B, Final Assessment Hearing (Windtree First Addition
— Streets) -- On April 20, 1982, the City Council received the
final assessment roll for the above referenced project and
authorized the final assessment hearing to be held on May 18., 1982.
Enclosed on page ZZ. is a summary sheet indicating facts and
figures associated watt- is project. Although the final assessment
exceeded the feasibility report by approximately 29%, this is a
direct result of a written request by the developer to include
the upgrading of Elrene Road adjacent to the subdivision as a part
of this project. The developer has been informed through proper
notification of this final assessment figure and its comparison
to the feasibility report. All required notices have been published
in the legal newspaper. Staff has not received any objections
or comments pertaining to this final assessment.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing
and approve the final assessment roll for Project 284B, Windtree
First Addition Streets, and authorize the staff to certify the
assessment roll to the County Auditor for collection.
21
0 0
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT NO: 284B
SUBDIVISION/AREA: Windtree Addition
FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: May 18, 1982
IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED:
F. R. = Feasibility Report
FINAL P.R.
WATER RATES RATES
0 Area
O Laterals
E] Service
E] Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STORM
F1 Area
0 Laterals
FINAL F. R.
SANITARY RATES RATES
Area
0 Laterals
Service
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STREETS
Gravel Base
❑x Surfacing
E] Res. Equiv.
NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 14 Lots (Single Family)
NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 Years
RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5%
TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $42,425.88
CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-2
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 7, 1979
:2.z
$3,030.42/lot $2,350.00/lot
0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Fourteen
PROJECT 293B
0
E. Project 293B, Final Assessment Hearing (Windcrest First Addition
-- Streets) -- On April 20, 1982, the City Council received the
final assessment roll for the above referenced project and ordered
the final assessment hearing to be held on May 18, 1982. Enclosed
on page a -q is a summary sheet with the facts and figures asso-
ciated wit�iis project. As can be seen, the final assessment
rates are under those quoted in the feasibility report discussed
at the public hearing held on January 15, 1980. Notifications
of these final assessment figures were sent to the developer and
published in the legal newspapers for this hearing. To date, the
staff has not received any objections pertaining to these assess-
ments.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To
and approve the final assessment roll for
First Addition Streets, and authorize th
roll to the County Auditor for collection.
a.3
close the public hearing
Project 293B, Windcrest
e staff to certify the
0
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT NO: 293E
SUBDIVISION/AREA: Windcrest Addition
FINAL ASSESSMEENT NEARING: May 18, 1982
IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED:
F. R. = Feasibility Report
FINAL F.R.
WATER RATES RATES
QArea
QLaterals
RService
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STORM
0 Area
nLaterals
0
FINAL
SANITARY RATES
Area
Laterals
Service
71 Lat. Benefit/Trunk
(STREETS
0 Gravel Base
xO Surfacing
Res. Equiv.
NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 30 R-2 Lots, 20 R-3 Lots
NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 Years
RATE OF INTEREST:
F. R.
RATES
R-2 $1,889.1 lot $2—,1-17.-27—
R-3
2,11 ,2R-3 $ 944.59/lot $1,059.65.
TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $75,567.20
CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-2 & 80-25
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: January 15, 1980
a4
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Fifteen
Project 308B
F. Project 308B, Final Assessment Hearing (Duckwood Trail -Streets)
-- On April 20, 1982, the City Council received the final assessment
roll for the above referenced project and authorized the final
assessment hearing to be held on May 18, 1982. Enclosed on page
24 is a summary sheet with facts and figures as they pertain
to this particular project. As can be seen, the final assessment
rate is less than the rate quoted in the feasibility report pre-
sented at the public hearing on June 17, 1980. Proper notification
has been sent to the developer pertaining to these final costs
and the required notifications published in the legal newspaper.
To date, staff has not received any objections pertaining to this
final assessment.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To close the public hearing
and approve the final assessment roll for Project 308B, Duckwood
Trail Streets, and authorize the staff to certify the roll to the
County Auditor for collection.
a 5'
0 0
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT NO: 308B
SUBDIVISION/AREA: Duckwood Trails
FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: May 18, 1982
IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED:
F. R. = Feasibility Report
FINAL F.R.
WATER RATES RATES
EjArea
E) Laterals
Service
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
STORM
U Area
nLaterals
FINAL
SANITARY RATES
Area
Laterals
Service
Lat. Benefit/Trunk
ISTREETS
IIID Gravel Base
® Surfacing
Res. Equiv.
NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 2 Lots & 4 Outlots
NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 Years
RATE OF INTEREST:
TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $60,923.69
CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81_2
PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 17_, 1980
26
F. R.
RATES
$19.81/LF $20.00/FF
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Sixteen
IR FINANCING - DIAMOND LAKE, INC
G. Diamond Lake, Inc., for Industrial Revenue Bond Financing in
the Amount of $750,000 -- An application to consider industrial
revenue bond financing for Diamond Lake, Inc., was received and
is in order for consideration. A public hearing was set at the
April 20, 1982 and proper advertisement has been published in two
(2) local newspapers as prescribed by statute. The application
for industrial revenue financing as proposed by Diamond Lake, Inc.,
is for the purpose of acquiring equipment and fixtures to be used
in conjunction with a retail supermarket which is under considera-
tion as a part of the Pilot Knob Shopping Center. It is estimated
that the supermarket will contain approximately 25,000 square feet,
will provide approximately 90 new jobs at an estimated payroll
of $1,040,000. The estimated annual sales in the supermarket is
$14,000,000. The Pilot Knob Shopping Center issue in the amount
of $5,500,000, approved at the March 17, 1981 City Council meeting
is providing for 114 new jobs which did not take into consideration
employment proposed for one of the major anchors, a supermarket.
The bond, if approved, will be in the form of a single note with
a seven year term which will be personally guaranteed by John Sulli-
van, Sr., John Sullivan, Jr., and James Sullivan. This proposed
transaction is not a limited partnership. The proposed construction
of the supermarket as a phase of the shopping center complex is
to begin July 1, 1982 and be completed March 15, 1983. Since a
new financial statement has not been published for Diamond Lake
Inc., the review provided by Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.,
dated November 30, 1981, is valid for this application. Enclosed
on page D,8 is a copy of a letter from Ernie Clark, Miller &
Schroderu� nicipals, Inc., providing a review of Diamond Lake,
Inc. Also enclosed without page number is a copy of the application
for industrial revenue financing, financial statements and all
other pertinent information required as a part of the City's appli-
cation procedure. The City Council requested a list of the equip-
ment with the application that was considered in December of 1981
and, therefore, that list is again made available with the packet,
found on pages through9 This application was denied
o
when presented e re the City ouncil- at the December 1, 1981
meeting, the motion reading as follows: "Egan then moved, based
upon the reasons above described and the fact that a precedent
would be set by the Council in authorizing financing of the equip-
ment only, to deny the request for industrial revenue financing.
Parranto seconded the motion and all voted in favor." City Council -
member Wachter was absent at that meeting. For a copy of the dis-
cussion and action taken by the City Council at that meeting, refer
to page _+0 .
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
industrial revenue financing for Diamond Lake, Inc., in the amount
of $750,000.
';L '7
Tall Free Minnesota (800) 8626002 • •
Toll Free Other States (800) 328-6122
Ae
Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.
170 Northwestern Financial Center, 7900 Xerxes Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 • (612) 831-1500
November 30, 1981
Mr. Thomas Hedges, City Administrator
City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Re: Diamond Lake, Inc. Request for
Industrial Bond Financing
Dear Tom:
We have reviewed the request for the above and have talked with
Richfield Bank and Trust regarding their conditions for purchasing
the Industrial Note.
The Richfield Banks feel comfortable with the proposed "loan
agreement", the financial statements of Diamond Lake, Inc., and
the Sullivan's as Guarantors for Diamond Lake, Inc. Extension of
time has been given by the Bank to coincide with Council action.
Land for the facility will be leased by Diamond Lake, Inc.
Inasmuch as the project will provide additional employment, add to
the tax base of the City and adequate provisions have been made to
Richfield Bank and Trust to assure payment, we feel the City is
adequately protected if they decide to approve this request.
ELC:ps
as
Very truly yours,
MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC.
Ernest L. Clark
Vice President
Headquarters: Min neapolis,Minnesota • Branch Offices: Solana Beach, California • North brook. Illinois • St. Paul. Minnesota • Naples, Florid.
Member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation
STORE NLME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
i \
/�✓
6
RETAILER
CITY
DIV.
PAGE NO.
.Ew
RE-
AVD.,,-. O.E. OAT[
Me D.
QTY.
TY.
DATE
DATE
euc
Ra
ADCNED
IRYolc ED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
,
,
I
I
_ _
-GENER
I
, ,
I
I
�
I
I
I
I
,
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
simpping ear b.
,
I
I
17,000
I
at=d pails
I
300 130
I
I
,
I
I
, ,
I
,
I
-47
Flom Scrubbing e'G •
I
/
Web Bry u
I I ,
I
nresst2re elcancr
I
I
I
I
28fr
_1,3-0-
, ,
I
I
1
,
I
i�
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
, 5-d",
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
I
I
,
I
I
I
AIM i nanqinnc,
I
I
Arn 1) r
62-412
STONE FI:G111iOJ COFY
S
U
P
E
R
V
L
U
S
T
0
R
E
,S
N
C
STORE NAME
STREET
/_-\
PROPOSED BY
DATE
6
RETAILER
CITY
DIV.
PAGE NO.
NEw
AE•APPS,_..
MOO.
OPEN DATE
aTY
G.
OTE
A.
DATE
AD.Eo
DATE
INVOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
T r 1T
I
�
i
I
I
Typewriter
I
I
�8g+v
I
I
i
I
�
�
I
I
I
I
I
�
�
I
I
i
�
�
I
I
I
061 oo
i
La
O
I
I
I
1
I
I
�
i
I
r-micinguitI hers
ao
as pi
Fire
;
i
i
Exhaust Pans (eampresser reem)
i
I
E i
9$}fi6
i
aB I Q
LIS
)11
sbnlvl ng
1
i
I
I
i
�
001 69
I
i
, aa� e e
I
20"Q
Refrigerat on
I
i
I
c 4D-1 9 9
_@31;4tiA
I
I
62-412
Sl'O❑E EH GIN F. E I1 COPY
STORE NAME
STREET
'
PROPOSED BY
DATE
6
RETAILER
CITY
DIY.
PAGE NO.
rlEw
B[•
M 00.
Aev... 0>1B o•iE
OTY.
ED
QTY.DATE
Ro.
ADTAED
DATE
III VOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
�
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
/ ITV G
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
I
TOTAL spaw-,RA13 eii As .91 FIT e -ATT ON
I
I
1
I
/ I
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
W
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
62-412
STORE EtlGIN EEI? JJPY
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
6
RETAILER
CITY
DIV.
PAGE NO.
x[w
x[-
Moo.
Aeo: .. ae[x ori[
O TY.
TY.
DAT[
DTc
suc
IID.
coa[o
..v.ICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
T+n >• c
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
TV
n
I
1
,
1
9-7
I
I
I
1
I
^II ^
tl�tl-Q
I
1
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 1
I
7
I
Gr-eee�ry
I
I
storage shelving pallet
1
I
-
I
I
I
I 09
I
,
250
N
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
, ,
,
I
Pallet ftacks
r
I
go
I
-1 --or stanas
,) •\
I
I
1
I
1
,
I
I
I V u
,
1
1
I
ryg1Lq
1
I
I
VVI Vl
1
I
I
Forl'•
I
I
!uu
I
I
uu1
I
^;1
'
I
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
;
1
62-412
sroliE EIJGIPIE [f: ccP'r
Q
m
V
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
i r
`-
i---- 6
•an. _S. on[x DATE
RETAILER
CITY c
DIV.
PAGE NO.
fw I.E.
Moo.
C
OTT.
TY.P.xc
T.
auc
xo.
Ro[x[O
Ix voICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
I
I
I
I
I
�
a24,0001
On
- 1 261, completGoa
I
I
I
I
I
O VV
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
i
Pae Seales
�
2, 5 I
1
I
I
I
I
�
I
i
�i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J tation
goI
i
I
t
I
i
�anana DisplayI
'
i
I
I
I
�
, -86
I— —be m–aehine
I
1
I
�
7
I
I
w7lbin
I
�
'
Misuel
�
I
I
I
I
I
3[ "G;–"
I
nAT, PrOMMr,I
V 0-/-gn--gc- Q G
I
I
62-412
STGLE Cf.'P'i
U
P
E
R
V
0
L
u
[a]
is
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
47,
RETAILER
CITY
DIV.
PAGE NO.
x[w
B[-
Ael •. Ox[. obi[
MOO.
aTY.
TY.
DATE
DATE
aDD
RM
RDMED
INVOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
1
I
�.ked ffleat case
I
00
I
'
se
I
I
—/
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Heat: Rail and hooks
I
I
2001 00
I
I
ShU3:ViL11J :Lli
I
1
I
1,2001 00
I
I
I
W
u
1
00
I
I
1
I
I
Pan racks
8001 u OF
Chickendollies
i
I
.. J l Uv
•
p�'I p4
I
I
-Meat pems
I
I
I
V
I
I
I
Mcat Ings
I
I
I
I
1
V I U
Meat lay car 1
I
I
1
I
I
0-0
I
I
2 Wheal hand truck
I
I Z) I uv
sheivingu
I
I
Moat Block
I
I
81 VU
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
4H6J-0 '
I
I
I
s1xe�x Meat YimEtableCcPf 1/600 00
STORE NAME -
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
RETAILER
CITY .
DIV.
PAGE NO.
NEw
MF•
-
•iV.: _.. OVEN DAT[
Moo.
7
CITY.
TT.
CATs
0AT[
eu.
D.
ADENED
INVOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
�TFi' TrT.ApqTrTrATTrvkT r*r)m 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
,
I
I
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
1
,
,
,
-
�
I
I
I
'
'
I
1
I
,
I
I
00N
I
I
i �
Meat
I
I
I
I
1
I
n An
gria4er
on!
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
-:--phille Ur Lfti= grilldCr,
1
I
I
_ [ Pe
1
I
1
1
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
�vuI
I
I
1 _
,
I
I
I
I
1
J
51—V
I
I
oil stone
I
I
1
°ac
T4-at Pept. Desk
I
I
r'
I
I
I
I
L
"T' 2 "Tf�ATT ON
1
1
I
,
62-412
STOI[E Eli Glf: F.FN CCf•'(
U
P
E
R
V
o
U
S
T
0
R
E
,5
N
C
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
�v 6
RETAILER
DIII TY "'
DIV.
PAGE NO.
xt:w
R[-
OD.
APP..... OPEN DAT[
QTT.q".
SU 11
RD.
DAT[
RODRco
DATE
INVOICED
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
1AC,zen Food J
1
I
/vvul
I
I
Food J
I
I
/ ee
I
1
r r
I
I
,
,
91
ril
I I A r r.i
I
I
1
I
I
nr
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
�
,
IN
i
I
i
I
•
I
,
I
I
I
nn. n.
, ,
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
,
I
,
1
I
,
I
1
,
,
I
,
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
,
1
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
,
I
1
I
I
1
1
,
1
62-412
STGfiE FNGIFI F.F II CDf'!
U
I"
L
U
S
T
0
R
E
N
C
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
RETAILER
CITYi:. '•�
DIV.
PAGE NO.
9
NEW
T.cu.
-E•
APP..-A. OPEN DATE
vTr.
auc
Tr.
xD.
DATE
nvucD
DATe
Ix r-IEED
VENDOR
MANE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
Mi a
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
I
1nairly_
1
,
9
1
Cooler, 141 x 321 corn elte
1
,
13 000100
1
-Dairy
Dairy receiving desk
1
75!0
4 Wheel stock tructs
250' 00
2
I
I
,
,
pliscellannoug
I
1
I
1
1
I
m r
I
I
I
I
I
A I
—T
I
p
,
�
V�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
1
,
I
1
I
�
,
I
I
I
I
�
I
I
1
1
,
I _-
I
1
I
1
1
,
I
I -
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
I
I
I
I
J
, -
1
I
,
1
1
I
I
—
I
,
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
63-AIY
5TGf1E ENGN E!1 CCI"'I
U
P
E
R
v
�
I
L
U
5
T
0
R
E
is
r�
c
STORE NAMESTREET
i--�
4�—
PROPOSED BY
DATE
- 6
RETAILER
CITY ;•-�
DIV.
PAGE NO.
xLw
x[-
MOO.
APv... •. ov[x oAi[
0TT.0TY.
SUD
xa
DATE
Eo a [o
DATE
Ix vo1E[o
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
1
1
1
I
A J
I
I
I
I
I
1
[ �
1
I
1
I
1
-4-,-500: 00
,
/ I
I
i
J V
I
I
I
/
1
1
catse
1
I
1
I
1
I
Come
I
I
/
1
j
"m
I
I
5,
1
j
Custualex number •
I
I1
1
Dell Desk
I
I
W
;
I
•
n 7
1
1
I
,
r
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I -
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
62-412
SiDIIE ENGINEER fUPY
STORE NAME
STREET
PROPOSED BY
DATE
RETAILER_
CITV
OIV.
PAGE NO.
[w
x[•
7P.—A. OPEN DATE
MOO.
O TT.
TT.
DATE
OAT[
aoo
.o.
Rocco
Ix vo 1110
VENDOR
MAKE
MODEL NO.
DESCRIPTION
UNIT PRICE
EXTENSION
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
--------------
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
j
�
1
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
SALES
I
TAN (93cittijimmit)
I
I
I
I
ENGI• . H FFF, 26,216.25
I
I
I
I
_n ON
am
1
I
,
,
�
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
1
�
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
,
!
I
,
1
,
I
I
1
1
I
1
I
1
1
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
,
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
I
1
62.412
6TGISE ENGINEER COPY
Q
V
w
U
T
L
,S
N
C
Council Minutes
December 1, 1981
• 0 0c:
DIAMOND LAKE, INC. - I. R. FINANCING
The public hearing concerning the application of Diamond Lake, Inc, for
Industrial Revenue financing in the amount of $750,000.00 for the acquisition
of equipment and fixtures to be used in conjunction with the retail super-
market in the proposed Pilot Knob Shopping Center was convened by Mayor
Blomquist. Robert Levy, attorney for Diamond Lake, Inc. and Mr. John
Sullivan, Jr, were present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Levy stated that
Richfield Bank and Trust Company has, committed itself to finance the
$750,000.00 and that the loan will be paid off prior to the expected useful
life of the equipment. There were many questions from City Council members
and members of the audience as to whether the Council should finance equipment
and fixtures at all or in part. It was noted that this was the first example
where a request for I. R. Financing has been submitted exclusively for fix-
tures and equipment. There was questions as to whether this type financing is
an inducement to new business and whether the approximately 90 new jobs which
consist of only 30 full-time jobs, is a sufficient inducement for the issuance
of the financing. It was noted there would be no increase in taxes and
Industrial Revenue Financing had already been authorized for the shopping
center building itself. Councilman Smith suggested that the City Council
ought to consider issuing financing for fixtures but not for equipment that
has a short anticipated useful life. It was noted the total estimated cost of
the fixtures is $871,000.00, including sales tax, engineering fees, etc. The
attorney for the Pilot Knob Shopping Center was present and indicated the
supermarket is critical for the financing for the entire center. After
lengthy discussion, Smith moved to authorize up to $555,000.00 industrial
revenue financing for heavy duty equipment, including fixtures, which include
a life expectancy of at least ten years. There was no second and the motion
died. Egan then moved, based upon the reasons above described and the fact
that a precedent would be set by the Council in authorizing financing of the
equipment only, to deny the request for industrial revenue financing.
Parranto seconded the motion and all voted in favor.
4a
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Seventeen
GERALD & SHIRLEY SMITH - FRONT YARD VARIANCE
A. Gerald & Shirley Smith for 10' Variance from a Front Yard Set-
back, Located at 4367 Onyx Drive -- A public hearing was held before
the Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting
held on April 27, 1982 to consider an application submitted for
a 10' front yard setback for the construction of a 10' x 20' addi-
tion to the Smith house at 4367 Onyx Drive. The Advisory Planning
Commission is recommending approval of the variance. For additional
information on this item, please refer to the City Planning
Assitant's (Intern) report found on pages ¢1, through 4-7
For a copy of the APC minutes, refer to page ".
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to approve a
10' variance for Gerald and Shirley Smith as stated.
4�
E
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE OF REPORT:
REPORTED BY:
APPLICATION SUBMITTED:
0
CITY OF EAGAN
VARIANCE - FRONT YARD SETBACK
GERALD & SHIRLEY SMITH
4367 ONYX DRIVE
R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT)
APRIL 27, 1982
APRIL 22, 1982
DAVID M. OSBERG, PLANNING ASSISTANT
An applicaticn,has been submitted for a 10' front yard setback for the construc-
tion of a 10 x 20 foot addition to the Smith house at 4367 Onyx Drive.
The applicants are proposing to construct a 10 x 20 foot addition to their house.
The addition to the house would be 10' closer to the lot line than allowed in the
ordinance. A diagram of the house and the proposed addition have been submitted
by the applicant for review. The present house and the addition would cover 14%
of the lot, so it would not exceed the lot coverage requirement.
There appears to be no hardship related to the topographic conditions or land-
scape in order to allow the 10 foot front vard setback variance for the addition
to the house. If approved, the variance should be subject to the following con-
ditions:
1) All applicable ordinances must be followed.
DMO/jach
4z
0 0
7^I
.�3
• ' 12.67 ' ,
1 120 I IN
v N J J ...11 -�
1 J
/i�a�Iil � Nerrh I I /ilei//+ �
i
1 125 39 120 120
r ;o 30
N ? e
O N
— O d
Sol,
.44.9..• e•rovs'44' -
A,c9 �s o
. •._I � o
04
N 12 .10 120 , 1 120 30 • 3° :49.26 A•48.s4112*43ai
'�' •� ; � ••• 155.00••• 300••• :_ 79.26° I
4 ' wo N..ib Nsilb „ 1
N O
'1
�izo
Izo
75 S4.267 -A—, ( 4-5
11
II
J
120 �I.
120
I
'I
I
I
120 i
i . 120,
_
O O
W
h
J
I A
I
� =o
II
11 �
• ' 12.67 ' ,
1 120 I IN
v N J J ...11 -�
1 J
/i�a�Iil � Nerrh I I /ilei//+ �
i
1 125 39 120 120
r ;o 30
N ? e
O N
— O d
Sol,
.44.9..• e•rovs'44' -
A,c9 �s o
. •._I � o
04
N 12 .10 120 , 1 120 30 • 3° :49.26 A•48.s4112*43ai
'�' •� ; � ••• 155.00••• 300••• :_ 79.26° I
4 ' wo N..ib Nsilb „ 1
N O
'1
I 124.90 -
75
75 S4.267 -A—, ( 4-5
o�
..1 v
vl V1
�� 1e,23'al
I
�
I
I
I.
I lila.{h
_
O O
W
I
I 124.62
i
I
� =o
o
O
11 �
.O N
1
_-.. 124.33
�1
I.:. Iz3.13
_
.n �o
w w
75; 1L
_90---
-
--75-
-
90
75
75
75 S4.267 -A—, ( 4-5
o�
..1 v
vl V1
�� 1e,23'al
I
�
I
I
I
_
O O
N O
W O
Y Oti `q
i
N
N
J •D
N Nr w
11 �
1
�1
I.:. Iz3.13
75
75; 1L
_90---
-
--75-
-
ro.
oN. .
tiN
90
15
.- 43 A-7-2141*
•i•
e_16•�Z ta• � .
.1..4.03 .
30 3O F
^ >O
w W
o�
..1 v
vl V1
I
�
I
I
IZ3.43
o
I
i
N
N
J •D
N Nr w
1
I.:. Iz3.13
^ >O
LB
AR ROW
�0 L I
. i
kA6R
IC - FI uW"
,� ti A 'z
NIF
Aft GB GBPF
P
JUNI61 'N B �—
r
PF o NB '
HIGH co
Y
SCHOOL_� W I
P�
Al `may
C R F
t,Lw .i i .� "gin •.r'�i�
;PKSPK , fF
MART. SL[:t:r+�c` ��
;�:�� W .;. _ _.w,.. R-4
CSC, ' LL� .t.i�� i4t � -•` i���i.;"':` j
R -IC R-2
o
z? O __AtLj
2 Y
a
J = NS RIVER R B
l( TEST t.
U) A;LB I. � ll ENTER
zcu pq ---r � �•yI 1.
N
4'7uA
— R-1
:;.SL� ,� ., ,• . i ....'� Z i� isr"� - -
• i •
APC Minutes
April 27, 1982
GEMM & SHIRLEY S m - VARIANCE
The public hearing regarding the application of Gerald and Shirley Smith
for a variance of 10 feet from the front yard setback for construction of a 10
foot by 20 foot addition to their house at 4367 Onyx Drive was next convened
by the Chairman. Gerald Smith appeared pointing out that due to an expansion
in his family and the location of a large tree in the back of his house, the
only available expansion was to the front. He also indicated that no one in
his neighborhood objected after contacting them. Dale Runkle pointed out that
the lot was on a curve which made the placement of the addition in relation to
other setbacks in the addition, not as aesthetically displeasing as in a
normal situation. It was motioned by Wilkins, seconded by McCrea to recommend
approval of the variance. All voted in favor.
p.m.
Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned as 8:50
Secretary
M
90
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Eighteen
MCDONALD'S CORPORATION - VARIANCE
B. McDonald's Corporation for a Variance to Exceed the Allowable
Height for a Pylon Sign -- A public hearing was held before the
Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting on April
27, 1982 to consider an application submitted for a variance to
exceed the allowable height of 27' for a pylon sign located at
4565 Erin Lane, for a McDonald's Restaurant. The Advisory Planning
Commision is recommending denial of this application to the City
Council. For additional information on this item, refer to the
City Planning Assistant's report found on pages sOr through
�$ For action that was taken by the Planning Commisssion, refer
to page S19.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
Advisory Planning Commission's recommendation to deny a variance
application submitted by Signcrafters for McDonald's Corporation.
arm
0 0
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: VARIANCE
APPLICANT: CHARLES PEUGi, SIGNCRAFTERS FOR MCDONALD'S CORPORATION
LOCATION: 4565 ERIN LANE - MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT
EXISTING ZONING: CSC (CC1nwry SHOPPING CENTER)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 27, 1982
DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 19, 1982
REPORTED BY: DAVE OSBERG, pjAMING ASSISTANT
APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application.has been submitted for a variance to ex-
ceed the allowable height of 27 feet for a pylon sign located at 4565 Erin Lane;
McDonald's Restaurant.
On December 23, 1980, the Advisory Planning Commission approved the conditional
use permit application for a pylon sign for the McDonald's Restaurant on Erin
Lane. The City Council granted the conditional use permit at their January 6,
1981 meeting. There were concerns expressed by the City Councilmembers as to
the location of the sign and its impact on the Cedar Avenue freeway. The City
Council approved the pylon sign with the conditions that the sign would be no
more than 125 square feet in area and no more than 27 feet in height.
The McDonald's Corporation is requesting a variance to raise the existing 24 -
foot high pylon sign to 50 feet. The McDonald's Corporation would also like to
relocate the sign closer to the Cedar Avenue freeway. At the present time, the
sign is located on the southeast corner of the McDonald's Corporation, with the
proposed location being in the southeast corner. Included in this report is a
letter staff received from the McDonald's Corporation explaining their reasons
for seeking a variance to allow a 50' pylon sign.. The existing sign has an area
of approximately 100 square feet and the height is 24'. The proposed sign would
remain 100 square feet in area with the only changes being the increased height
to 50' and the location of the sign. Attached to this report is a layout of the
McDonald's Corporation property indicating the existing and proposed locations
of the sign with a picture of the existing sign.
Staff has received a letter from the developers of
opment, stating that the relocation of the sign to
McDonald's Corporation property would not interfere
of Mari Acres. A copy of the letter and sign plan
for review.
.SD
Mari Acres, Hillcrest Devel-
the southwest corner of the
with the overall sign plan
of Mari Acres is enclosed
CITY OF EAGAN
C[[ARLES PEUGFI, SIGNCRAFTER.S FOR MCDUAIAS CORPORATION
APRIL 27, 1982
PAGE TWO
Staff would like to point out that the McDonald's Corporation pylon sign is not
oonsidered a freeway identification sign since the McDonald's Corporation p%
perty is not located directly adjacent to a freeway. Haaever, the McDonald's
Corporation is only proposing to have one advertising sign on the property thus
complying with the pylon sign regulations in the Sign Ordinance.
If approved, the variance should be approved with the following conditions:
1) The sign shall contain no more than 125 square feet of signage.
2) No other advertising signs will be placed on the McDonald's Corporation
property -
3) All other applicable ordinances will be followed.
DMO/jack
S1
70-100 ROAD SIGN 0
Overall Height
(Variable)
0
No. 3
0
z
No. 6
SIGN: 70-100
AREA: Approximately 100 sq.
It.
STRUCTURE: Designed for 30
psf wind load
ELECTRICAL: Inspected and
approved by U.L.
NOTE: Order replacement
panels by number as shown
above
14' 2"
z
0
rr
N
N
70-100 ROAD SIGN
ILLUMINATION
4 ea. F -84 -T12 -CW -HO Fluorescent Tubes
16 ea. F -60 -T12 -CW -HO Fluorescent Tubes
4 ea. F -24 -T12 -CW -HO Fluorescent Tubes
BALLASTS
6 ea. France 458D (or equal) 4 -Lamp Ballasts
ELECTRICAL
-2 ea. 15 Amp. Circuits 120V.
Load 15.0 Amps
PLASTIC FACES
Pigmented Acrylic
Colors: Red #2157
White #7328
Yellow #2037
Acrylic Panels: 6 ea. per side
Grade Clearance
Jfgwrafters Outdoor Display, Inc.
_ m•u. er�tu .. uwin,...rwua u Oren
(Variable) S o2
3
mcDonald's
March 22, 1982
City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
RE: McDonald's Restaurant
4565 Erin Lane
Eagan, Minnesota
To Whom It May Concern:
McDonald's Gsrpurwion
x000 Nirollet Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55420
612i264.4755
McDonald's Corporation is requesting a variance to raise our
main identification sign from the existing allowable height
to 50 feet.
This variance request comes as a result of the hardship caused
us by the new interstate coming through, which adversely
affects our sites visibility. Our sign now sits below the
grade of the interstate.
Due to the fact that visibility of our restaurant is now all
but eliminated, this stores sales volume is far below what
we projected it to be with appropriate visibility. We feel
the solution to this problem lies in raising our sign to a
height of 50 feet. The store must operate at a profit in
order to benefit both McDonald's and the local community.
By increasing our sign height, we would be able to better
draw from the traffic using the interstate.
Please take our request under consideration and grant us this
variance.
Yours truly,
MCDON`ALD' S CORPORATION
�Inn
A� 2
Al Inde
Construction Engineer
Minneapolis Region
AI/vk
S3
i
PROP(X,-D'
Ao4,9T/ON OF °� E
":i4y-i_RSY§:-v'�c�.�.%:n:.:i:ir.::;�:-; u.::•4r.�. T^,'rmr.�ti r-.
I Ir 7i
(l r
R
7 EXISTING
- ea 24'NI0-
5
;.I
Memoes Roan (j
ILLCRES�
VELOPMET
April 15, 1982
City of. Eagan
P.O. Box 21-199
Eagan, MN 55121
ATTN: Dave Osbers Asst. Planner
Gentlemen:
EXECUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
METRO SQUARE
7TH AND ROBERT
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
Phone: 224-5811 Area 612
RE: Mari Acres Signage
�},'h"';; Thiswill verify hone conversation today at which time
Y our p Y
„METRO PARKING LOTS, f,¢t1,`4i you requested my input as to the effect on our property if
.%Dowmown St.,Paul �� s�"' McDonald's were allowed to move their pylon sign to the
;xJa �:(' IY �M ir.11 ,I;? I til i✓�3Cf 1�1 Alt jl
;`,;HILLCREST'SHOPPING,CENTER ,y'i" southwest property corner.
it St Paul Minnesota
�,yYd;ts titt, ,v.yNJ) , „ �' ,7�,•y� ¢ l;y, I am enclosing the signage proposal that we presented during
;VIKINGVILLAGEAPARTMENTS {'+f{ our plat approval. We have two lots left abutting Cliff Road
,"�NorthcSt, Paul Minnesota at the intersection of Cliff and Nichols. These lots pre-
, !f •Ivk J�li 'f, e, rr,.
HGNEYWELL.PLANTv sumably may be used for fast food outlets.
-Columbia Heights Minnesota cy
It would be my interpretation that we would still be in
GOODWILLI NDusTRIES BUILDING' `.;; compliance for the approval of a pylon sign because we
'S,LauderdalerMinnesota would be 300 feet from the proposed new location of McDonald's
HENNEPIN SGUARE ' ,�''�3, l7 ` 3 pylon sign. We, therefore, see no conflict if you would see
'
d,Mlnneepolia P
Minnesota q
fit to approve McDonald's request.
j,HARDING BUILDING
_Minneapohe, Minnesota Thank you for keeping us informed on the matter.
Sincerely,
CARLSON MARKETING BLDG. r,,.i,;%
.i,;
Minneapolis, Minnesota N'; , �:
HILLCREST DEVELOPMENT
NEIDHOEFER BUILDING NO 1
r
Minneapolis, Minnesota .114.:,a;rd r;, ••„
���
CLECON BUILDING r
�VErnestF. Christiansen
,;
Minneapolis, Minnesota
P. Construction
.
MURPHY -ELM INDUSTRIAL PARK
EFC: kh
Minneapolis. Minnesota i
CLEVELAND FABRICATING BLDG.
Enclosure
. Minneapolis, Minnesota
;;HILLCREST LAND INVESTMENTS
:•:For the Development of Commercial • . '.'
�;hhtdusbiel • Residential • Apartmen0
ONtea Projects in Minneapolis,
�St. Paul, and Suburbs.
CITY OF EAGAN
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 16 - SIGN ORDINANCE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA,
DOES HEREBY AMEND ITS ORDINANCE NO. 16 AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 16.06 -- FREE STANDING BUSINESS SIGNS, STANDARD:
Subdivision 4 -- FREEWAY LOCATIONS. An on -premise pylon
sign for identification purposes is allowed for a business sign
located directly adjacent to a freeway within the City of Eagan.
Any business that acquires a permit to erect a pylon sign for
freeway identification may be allowed an additional free-standing
ground sign to be located on the side of the property opposite.
of the freeway. All signs must comply in all other respects with
the provisions of this Ordinance. A freeway shall be defined as
a principal arterial highway as defined in the Comprehensive Plan.
ATTEST:
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF EAGAN
BY 4L)C�C�I.L By:
E.V% vanuver eke, City Cle'rk quist, MAyor
Original Ordinance Adopted: May 19, 1964
Amended Ordinance Adopted: -July 7, 1961
Published in the Dakota County Tribune: July 23, 1981
.5 77
�R ROVE'
h
m L31�
C .. A -
T
AR i EEN R
GB GB
PFNB^f:
e PF O Ng
HIGH m
a
B-2 ,aa
SCHOOL 0 ;
PFF-
R-3C
1 ' Fit •� +
PK :�'� PK (
w�y
MART
E :'r •"S
b /� i *yt" %, r... SLA.
C5 1.� ti:L. ,: a •�` �,��}S.j, l�/1Vr a
RZ Y '4 ^V4 -Y ti: F-
.1
csc
Al
6P LI l
10
2
J NB' )RIVER R B
TEST
Z , U-0 A: LB I rr �l ENTER
N
OC A A R B!
SuB.TEG7
Do iPRo�RTY
vi 7 Fv}r[+rtfk�� ,1
0 0
The application of McDonald's Corporation for a variance to exceed the
allowable height of 27 feet for a pylon sign located at 4565 Erin Lane,
McDonald's Restaurant, was convened by the Chairman. Mr. Jack Lawrence of
Signcrafters Outdoor Display, Inc. appeared for McDonald's Corporation. At
the request of member Wilkins, staff advised that there would be no problem
with the 300 foot limitation and that neither Burnett Realty nor Hardee's have
been allowed signs in excess of 27 feet. It was noted by member Krob and
Chairman Hall that the applicant would have had full knowledge of the freeway
prior to construction of the new McDonald's restaurant. It was noted that
according to ordinance, a freeway sign must be on property directly abutting
the freeway. The McDonald's land does not so abutt and in fact, has adjacent
to it, two other other locations for potential fast food restaurants. Wilkins
moved, Krob seconded the motion to recommend denial of the variance. Those
in favor of the motion were Wilkins, Krob and Hall. Those against were Wold
and McCrea.
S9
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Nineteen
PRELIMINARY PLAT - BERRY RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS
C. Roger Kreidberg of Scheutt Investment Co. for Preliminary Plat
Approval, Berry Ridge Addition, Consisting of Approximately 3.65
Acres, located on Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop Estates -- A public
hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at their
last regular meeting held on April 27, 1982. The Advisory Planning
Commission is recommending approval of the preliminary plat. For
additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's
report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages ( f through
'7/ for your reference. For action that was taken�y`tFe Advisory
Planning Commission, refer to a copy of the minutes, found on pages
through -7 3. Park recommendations are enclosed on page "7+
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission to approve the
preliminary plat for Berry Ridge Addition.
�
0 0
CITY OF EAGAN
APPLICANT: ROHM KREIDBERG - SMUTP INVESTN4SIT CO.
LOCATION: LOT 11, BLOCK 3, HILLTOP ESTATES, SW; OF SECTION 22
EXISTING ZONING: R-3 (RESIDENTIAL TOWNH(XJSE DISTRICT)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 27, 1982
DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 22, 1982
REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER
APPLICATION SUBMITTED
An application has been submitted requesting a preliminary plat, Berry Ridge Condo-
miniums, consisting of approximately 3.65 acres and containing 26 dwelling units
located on Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop Estates.
ZCNING AND LAND USE
Presently the parcel is zoned �3 (Residential Townhouse District) and would only
allow a townhouse development proposal. The proposed land use plan designates this
parcel as R-1 (Single Family Development). Since the parcel is zoned R-3 (Residen-
tial Townhouse),the zoning takes precedence over the proposed land use plan.
The parcel is the last parcel in Hilltop Estates to have a development proposal
submitted. As stated above, the parcel is zoned R-3 (Residential Townhouse District)
and would allow a townhouse development proposal.
The parcel is 3.65 net acres. There are no ponding areas, streets rights-of-way or
any other dedications to be subtracted from this plat than what has already been de-
ducted in the platting of Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop Estates. The applicant is pro-
posing to provide a looped private drive to provide access to the development pro-
posal. There will be two accesses onto Berry Ridge Road which will provide adequate
circulation for this development proposal.
The applicant was originally proposing 30 dwelling units for the subject parcel.
According to the zoning ordinance, the maximum density for this 3.65 acre parcel is
26.49 dwelling units. The applicant has reduced the 30 -unit townhouse project to
26 dwelling units, which is just under the maximum density allowed in an R-3 zoning
district. The building coverage for this site is 7.42% which is substantially low-
er than the 20% maximum allowed for the subject parcel. The reason for this low
building coverage is that the developer is proposing to have 2 -story units which
each story would be owner -occupied or individual units. The reason for this lou
lot coverage is that the applicant is also proposing underground parking for this
development plan.
61
0 0
CrrY OF EAGAN
BERRY RIDGE CONDMINIUMS
APRIL 27, 1982
PAM TWO
The applicant has taken the existing topography and vegetation into this site de-
sign. The buildings are designed in accordance with the contours of the property
and they are leaving as many of the natural amenities to the site as possible.
The applicant is also proposing to leave as many of the existing pine trees which
are located on the north side of Berry Ridge Road. The only place these pines
would be disturbed is where the access points would be into the development pro-
posal. The applicant has also minimized the site disturbance with this particular
development proposal.
The applicant is proposing to construct 15 one -bedroom units and 15 two-bedroom
units for a total of 26 dwelling units. The one-bedroan units would contain ap-
proximately 750 square feet and the two-bedroom units would contain approximately
1,200 square feet. It is staff's understanding that the project will be designed
with energy conservation in mind and that the proposed project will exceed all
energy code requirements. The proposed project will contain one garage space or
underground parking space and one parking space per dwelling unit. The building
meets all setback requirements as required in Ordinance 52. In reviewing the
parking layout, the westerly parking lot, or the parking area abutting Pilot Knob
Road, should be shifted easterly to provide a 20' green area for the parking area
along Pilot Knob Road.
In reviewing the site plan, the proposed site plan shows 30 dwelling units. The
easterly two buildings will be removed so that only 26 units will be allowed.
With the reduction of the two easterly dwelling units, staff is suggesting that
the applicant may consider parking on the easterly side of the building. Also,
the parking should be extended, or a driveway should be extended, on each side of
the building in order to get fire protection around the entire building. Staff
has suggested that the developer may consider a trail or sidewalk running on the
northerly side of the development proposal in order to allow direct access to the
north side of the building for pedestrian as well as fire and rescue. The pro-
posed building will have individual entrances to each of the dwelling units.
Therefore, the project is more of a townhouse development than a condominium unit.
Staff would like to mention that the applicant has made an attempt to hold a neigh-
borhood meeting to discuss the developent proposal with the neighborhood prior
to the Advisory Planning Commission holding the public hearing. Staff was in at-
tendance at the neighborhood meeting and only three residents from Hilltop came
to this neighborhood meeting. Staff would like to acknowledge that the applicant
has made every effort to inform the neighborhood as to their development proposal.
If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following conditions:
1) A development agreement shall be completed prior to the construction of any
of the dwelling units.
2) A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by City staff and an adequate
landscape bond shall be submitted with the final plat and not released un-
til one year after the landscaping has been completed.
3) The developer shall provide the City with a copy of the homeowner's asso-
ciation by-laws for review.
6a
0 0
CITY OF EAGAN
BERRY RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS
APRIL 27, 1982
PAGE THREE
4) The plat should be subject to the Park Committee's recommendations and
comments.
5) The development plan should be shifted to the east in order to provide a
20' green area between the westerly property line and the parking area.
6) The developer should consider putting parking areas on each side of the
building and extending a drive or path around the north side of the build-
ing to provide adequate fire protection.
7) No more than 26 dwelling units shall be allowed for this development pro-
posal.
8) All other City ordinances shall be applicable for the overall development
proposal.
DCR/jach
9) A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan must be reviewed and
approved prior to final plat approval.
10) Adequate utility easements must be provided to allow a connection to the
existing trunk sanitary sewer along the north property line and the requir-
ed internal water main looping and fire hydrant location.
11) A storm sewer detention ponding system must be constructed in the north-
east corner of this proposed plat to minimize the increased runoff from__:.
this development.
12) An 8' wide bituminous pathway must be constructed along the northern side
of these units a minimum of 15' from any structure for potential future
fire access. other trailway installations along Berry Ridge Road should
be in conformance with the requirements of the Park and Recreation Committee.
13) This development shall provide for a residential street eauivalent assess-
ment escrow for the 283' of frontage adjacent to Pilot Knob Road to cover
this plat's financial responsibilities for the future upgrading of Pilot
Knob Road. This escrow shall be determined on the residential street
equivalent rate for multiple dwelling zoning at the time of final plat ap-
proval.
TAC/jack
63
P
0
TO: THE PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER
FROM: ROBERT W. ROSENE, CONSULTING ENGINEER
DATE: APRIL 21, 1982
RE: BERRY RIDGE ADDITION
The Public Works Department has the following information and concerns rela-
tive to approval of the above referenced plat:
UTILITIES
Water service is available from an existing 8" diameter water lateral in Berry
Ridge Road. Hydrants are located on this line near the southeast and the
southwest corners of this property. It will be necessary to add not less than
two additional hydrants, one near the east end and one near the west end of
the proposed condominium building to provide adequate fire protection.
Sanitary sewer service is available from the existing sanitary sewer trunk
which lies 10 feet north of the north line of this property. Due to the heavy
slope of this property away from Berry Ridge Road, it is not possible to pro-
vide gravity sanitary sewer service to the existing lateral sanitary sewer in
Berry Ridge Road.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
The existing topography of this site shows a relatively heavy slope from Berry
Ridge Road to the north edge of the property. The proposed grading plan util-
izes this slope in the location of the buildings and to provide a walkout on
the northerly side of each of the lower units.
Drainage from approximately the westerly one-third of the property will be to
the northwest to the ditch on Pilot Knob Road. The major parking lot is loca-
ted adjacent to Pilot Knob Road and is shown with surface drainage to the
north. It is recommended that a catch basin in the parking lot and a short
section of lateral storm sewer be required to carry the parking lot drainage
to the existing ditch. In the future, when Pilot Knob Road is updated, this
storm sewer will be connected to lateral storm sewer that will be required for
the Pilot Knob Road upgrading.
The easterly two-thirds of the site drains generally to the northeast. The
preliminary site plan shows catch basins in the parking lot and driveway dis-
charging on the surface approximately 100 feet north of Berry Ridge Road. To
minimize erosion and adverse effects on the adjacent property, it is recom-
mended that this storm sewer be extended to a point near the northeast corner
where a small ponding area should be excavated. This small pond will minimize
any adverse effect which the drainage from this area would have on adjacent
property. With the pond, an overflow across the natural vegetation can be al
Page 1
9313a
64
0 0
lowed which will create no greater problems than the present drainage causes.
The Master Plan for Storm Sewer shows that drainage from this parcel flowing
to Pilot Knob Road will continue north to Pond JP -36 which is just south of
the St. John Neumann Church. Drainage from the easterly portion will flow in-
to Pond JP -48 which ultimately overflows into Pond JP -7. At the present time,
there is no overflow outlet from Pond JP -7. However, it is relatively large
and, with the proposed pond to be added in the Berry Ridge Addition, we do not
believe that the drainage from this Addition will cause any significant prob-
lems with the water level of this pond. As more development occurs in the
area and particularly when Pilot Knob Road is upgraded, an outlet to Pond JP -7
should be considered in accordance with the Master Plan.
Due to the steep slopes involved on this property, an extensive erosion con-
trol plan will be required to minimize problems with erosion during construc-
tion,and to prevent the washing of soil onto the adjacent property north of
this site.
STREETS
Berry Ridge Road will provide street access for this property. Internally, a
private drive and parking lot will be provided. Underground parking beneath
the units is to be provided for one space per unit. The balance of the park-
ing will be in a parking lot to the west of the units and on the widened por-
tion of the access drive in front of the units. Street grades of the access
driveways must provide a relatively flat spot immediately north of Berry Ridge
Road to allow cars to stop on a level area before proceeding into Berry Ridge
Road. Also, drainage from Berry Ridge Road should be preventedfrom flowing
down either driveway by raising the elevation of the entrance driveway above
the center of Berry Ridge Road at the property line.
It appears that the above ground parking is concentrated on the south and
westerly side of the condominium units. Consideration should be given to sur-
face parking near the east end of the units. Such location would provide more
convenience for the owners of the easterly units and would provide the poten-
tial for more adequate fire truck access to serve the north side of the east-
erly portion of the development.
EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY
The existing plat of Hilltops Estates provides the necessary right-of-way on
Berry Ridge Road and the future widening of Pilot Knob Road. An easement will
need to be acquired between this property and the trunk sanitary sewer line to
the north to allow a connection to this trunk'sewer line. All other standard
easements will be required at the time of final plat approval.
SITE PLAN
The engineering department has no other concerns pertaining to the proposed
layout of the site plan. However, the sharply sloping topography of this site
may require minor modifications during the preparation of the detailed site
grading and development plan. The presently shown access points to Berry
Ridge Road are satisfactory from a setback consideration from Pilot Knob Road
for traffic purposes.
9313a Page 2.
4s
0 0
TRAILS/SIDEWALKS
An existing trail on Berry Ridge Road leads from the east to a point near the
southeast corner of this proposed plat. The trail then turns to the south
along the proposed future street to County Road 30. It is understood that the
Park Committee will be considering the desirability of providing a sidewalk or
trail connection from the entrance of this development to that trail.
Consideration should also be given to the installation of an 8' wide bitumin-
ous surfaced walkway from the parking lot on the west end of the building
around the northerly side of the development. Such a trail would provide con-
venient access for the residents from the parking lot to their lower level en-
trances and could be used as an emergency driveway by the fire department for
fire protection purposes.
ASSESSMENTS
Trunk sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water area assessments have been levied
under the Hilltop Estates Development. Also, all lateral sanitary sewer,
water and street assessments along Berry Ridge Road have been levied to this
property. The only other assessment required is for the future upgrading of
Pilot Knob Road. Current policy would require a residential equivalent as-
sessment for the 283.0 ft. of frontage on Pilot Knob Road. A current esti-
mated residential equivalent is $35.00/front foot, resulting in an assessment
of $9,905.00. This amount would be put in escrow and utilized for the Pilot
Knob project when it is carried out in conjunction with the Dakota County
Highway Department.
I will be available to discuss in further detail any aspect relating to this
report at the Planning Commission meeting of April 27, 1982.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Rosene
Consulting City Engineer
RWR:1i
9313a Page 3.
!y
_1 67 ,
_. •i' j ,.0 nu I C A .I r�
/BC�2P7-/02n5\ �(�/�-_ '/'". ; /-.o-4��✓I :! '\ 1 I \�l��. I
C�B4sUO�
J
:1 1 DP -98200 I .1 #_E- 7
V„7ESC07_r-I
WooM.1 864.062i�0.0 13-\GPREN
O�--TLfs
PJ-BB20
_P-61. "" f DP -IB - e�
s)71.0• 00efoei
820 _
'•.r--V`/�-I 79s0 BP3i c "Jl:MJ1Yis L'Jt1. Jp-4 PJ -46 JP-'
1')8060 Q8300 , r °8660 UP 45 � V 832
����••••"�ll-�yy,�yy,,, 8890 3 892.2
7, I I l Jf 872.0 B9zolk.V 40 JP -41/ 896
839.2 • I h ,,(P-47,i-�. \, / L"[ BB70
BP-301^� 1 \ / �, •/ 884/0 x 847.p JP -42 LD1,/ L5: 15i
��ppQ�gg C1 '..J -I ^'BS/t)• /
'_�£Y , ar�K - FiS9"�I vt �y -.C.st -� C BaeO Z. �I�•Jgp_640- 5
U� MILL$ �� arr-/ e4 4 I Jr -32
'!,AH JPi5 L^ 8860/
�g�, I /," P 4� - r8390 '\. JP -II ---� 8900 I i
I�BLA(,`��/ \�. 83'. 4�, B4a0 6! 8157 JP -44 / 13J 1-31 ^b
_7 / BP 26'1 i._ B830'a � 9.7
7913 x9940
°aV J+l
J -m- 2i
�� I `4 -
BLAAKXAN% 1I �T4_K ",n0�� I moi} J70.2 ,_ 1\
PARK i ` Jp- �� j 87.0
:SBP -2 1 Bze.o9 / m} _a
JP -30 8740 �.
/ 794. B2B, JP -10 } 872.7
f �79a.0 %' 820.8 t 882.0
E, 8278
7iNip 6
C�
q \
r,�y teFgp7-J„_gb_I I t�l_�13JP_B
_
zBP \1Y 881-28 LS -12 sV189.0 866,0
// 18-b Oy j o
22 -
J wA ' j i L✓ 9706 IIP=35 BPRO ;. �.
L -r 873:2 1869.4 ; J -d8 JP_ -34 /
/ BB�P-3 / 42 I �d/ 872.9 .z• i�. -iZ. 8840 J-4 _A -e,
881.3 B•cr� BSOO yJ r
ALE BB- (-4 12/JJP-48 tee` �� /dR i� PATRICK ~
=1 f / 4ti isI BB 0 LI 872} 59. _ r.464N II
1;':
BP -25
924.0 1i eN o - e200 JP -29
B-4 9J0.0 DSII 8800 ' P-63 a 9233 ei
i 111 I 856.0 1 -\ ``1 940.0 i
JI '• _36 GB I,N e�, 12' ld B 0 }'I
-gP-24_• m 1 T,. J+4a Nil J -t
y I 918.011
929,0 % P-� - •«I
I I " 74.0-- 1 R-44 _ LP -43
11 � 1 d � - mmrrs'��: •..�T r, }��j7 �� es3.o ! 1 X11
SBP-23�JP,/
• 9]6028
531 3 BP�
-IB �� Q886.0 :�rr..••,, ��,
S O�Q'BB'�-9-0. 4u1 Fx�: ���� -� LOCRN 11
03 /
�! r 9030 , /e 9a1o6
8-91, LS..31Udi ra 902.Or v' (iii I� _ e - 1 \ LP -40 C _LP -61 -
_ .�_ L _41' B9B.0--_�'H-SO
I2 --BP- 5 abNU * 884.0 /,f+�' -903Q gggg20 --- 8884.4
BA44 -� N �]
Iia _�_ j�.i;m,>r L 1 eee.o �:
I.,
fS � r \ �. � - BP• \ syl
LP -q 70,0 J BB0 - 1 -N LIP '
x{1881-19 '�. -'� n '1 BP II 879.
915hT 6.6 92
�9/901Vrtt168 /V'°� ��1..h�E� I'1 -'r�st,�9ovo_I�__•.>_ t.LiC s-' .::>4ee: std 100 -t---�,¢g6G'n� tiC!
u -P 0, V. 'ak LS-Zb
.`i m I// / /e•L��•I f r P ./ \'"�` i'.1 \III�__- I.i I�.`•� I11�YR.M�d FOP /
GO_ULNTY
!` -
62 .0
888630
867069ggB0
,
C?p LP -389110 u 1661.3 LP
8730\/90 t LS -2 7 LP -6 Zc
09TA 9025
B
-74.35
([A��A.`
L -.S---20_ _ f :9 1
4 2Y.0
/ 9/30
9010
-LP-20CP10L
0 '
_5 LP -24
8,0
�
683.2
h/ 92LO � � \ 9 cxCEPr10N J'�� 8860
LP_ 56
19 I Li -19 ! 9640 LP
9700 912
•^_ ILeB7.0 �L?� ) SI`%�. STOM SEWM PIM
891..0 KOTA 9 LP -7 r .,
1\\ 9 Fj '918 6 'S LS- �'• -` J`DISF,}L- _.
1 - r 'v 9380 E• i \•,_ / 1
LP -12 / �/ LP -IT
DAKOA COUh.Y 92d21K 67 LP -15 Sze,
1 LP -60 __t /--•7 14(�0))�'lxtr� __.716
n I 9600 II-
0
4
B" wage Rom y .:
i
t�
Site flan
lie,rryy Ridge
CorxJoniigm
/mnu
omi
.St.0 FlfF4 ,aC111[Cl5 ryC
II
1
l
.1 4
Preliminary Plat, iP-�
6lYW SII
iCSo�
I
R-3
Fi wOp c
R-1 l
• / � fit r (-�
R-1
cirr R -I
I I H4L L'
..I PF A X� R-1 R' 1
,.:
Es Ort
K
7-7
AD
2
' PF �` C
O-
1 •�ttt•�� �y4 L~� -
a Y A.
• <, , y •:.
.f •�. � t 4�£\. i1 u yjy i.
,..� .t �•� L. !. !ti i i�i¢�T]}'!V^'i A III
CL R-3
P1 •} �, � Y•'it •r r tiJt_..1� 4iL'ti 1 •,\.�1
R -I ,
J t �. ' R,z I
PF s
t f.
Lp T
J U • r' • r -t • 1 � I
oi6' PF
- j' T ice::.,, �'�-•�' I
I \ e
TS
Ic
RB aGB.
�� _./ ..., �'- i t'.....i:•. <^^.:. Ind„„, - COMMERCIAL
.'�•-{ PL.ANNEDDEVELOPMENT
:. .... R-f
I�.,,� ,Ind
•°R Er/nnI.�IlI1 I.1-B M '• R-II
RIII
I /R A
Ind rw.m.r�r^'i � \• r '” '':�
_ F781�-/ •R-IV R-III i1�S
'b .I:� �j oa �.�nix i,� i � sn ' � /: RI-1 p •-1 �� O C3
NB
v � I II
/'y i-�� P 1 l,I : - R•19/�iA' - R-III R-III �n\�
1n �LBf R-II LLJJ if;CSC- din%i;r-= .a'I/nd
�tT r' R-11 R4 �P J� .GOLF — R-[r-L U6
•
P ^tet FR•�I n� C x
�'I.i Int 1 till i�+% ' �� - R-0 ..P • Ind. <' w
RII n.• �. a .. R-I-. �{ I „` � ^� E �� I.- :_jlj ..R II ->�iCr - \ O R-� -
. •fi-IV, .', e`."``7 I ..,?. i. 6 moi`_' ... •� ',\ W
_R-III HALL R-11 'Ell
- _ R ILs' R..�N
%Y gym., R-il� r F-�--• .-,..;HS...[ I- I
,1iC”. m �f-,.R-11 ��� s.T I•�, ReR 11 i
Rt
R NB
RB �J, R•III S ?se; rho-i5`.•'." e - ... 'r
-R-111 R It R-II!' R'1t..6� ,t,° i �r�IN��� `\ R-III CSC/GBIIB R-II` � - R-il
p j `.r? C`^� zr E [ II�.Y ..t• L.,i; PQ
R-11 / ;,,q• R II R-II P -� nr � s rim � -'< 1 ® '� R-II eri r
�^ �•�'. �_ ay. a/i.i 1, lbltr 1-, ° �i' lyJ f
SIC
R_I IrN7-
R-I
i PIT '11'd1 SIA - P
GbLI �..,. l ;: p
R-II v.xe
3
p R-11
_. AI P e. ',.i• n' p an J,r .�ryaM �l ` �':� q. ) I ��.�—__
ILI
\r
VALLEY:---eROSENOUNT�. q I n
APC Minutes
April 27, 1982
JOAN A. TMM - JMTM, INC.
The application of Roger Erickson and Ed Leier, dba Jatco, Inc_., for a
conditional use permit to allow,a Mexican fast food restaurant in a Neighbor-
hood Business District located at 1973 Silver Bell Center was convened by the
Chairman. It was noted that there appeared to be adequate parking for this
type of restaurant, which was to expect 508 sit-down and 508 take-out busi-
ness. This was assuming that this Shopping Center continued to be a low-
volume center and that the once proposed, hamburger and beer establishment was
not being developed. The members also expressed concern that the applicant be
responsible for any necessary receptacles for customers that would choose to
eat their food outside of the building and dispose of the waste. Member Krob
moved to recommend approval of the conditional use, subject to compliance with
applicable ordinance provisions It was seconded by McCrea. All voted in
favor.
The public hearing for the application of Schuett Investment Co. for
preliminary plat approval of Berry Ridge Condominiums was convened by the
Chairman. This application would include 26 condominium units in 13 townhouse
type structures, each containing an underground garage, first floor one -
bedroom unit and a two-bedroom unit on the second and third floors. The plat
consists of approximately 3.65 acres, located on Lot 11, Block 3, Hilltop
Estates, which is zoned R-3 allowing for this amount of density. ,Roger
Kreidberg appeared for Schuett Investment Co. along with a representative of
an architectural firm.
It was pointed out that these were condominiums as opposed to townhouses,
due to the fact that one unit would be under/over another unit. Member McCrea
expressed concern about the method of figuring the density of the plat. It
was requested that several points of concern be addressed by the developer and
staff prior to final plat. It was noted that the 20 foot green area along the
westerly property line in condition 5 could be obtained either by shifting the
entire project to the east, or by shifting all or part of the parking area to
the east side of the property. The members also requested consideration for
minimizing the drive or path around the north side of the building for fire
protection. The consulting engineer was requested to consider whether the
storm sewer retention pond proposed for the northeast corner of the proposed
plat could be deleted. It was also noted that the developer may change the
entrance to the garages bo the east end of the property and that fire hydrants
would probably be installed at each end of the structures to allow adequate
fire protection to the back side. There were no objections to the applica-
tion. Krob moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the
application, subject to the following conditions:
1. A development agreement shall be completed prior to the construction
of any of the dwelling units.
Z
APC Minutes
April 27, 1982
2. A detailed landscape plan shall be approved by City staff and an
adequate landscape bond shall be submitted with the final plat and not re-
leased until one year after the landscaping has been completed.
3. The developer shall provide the City with a copy of the Declaration
of Condominium, Articles and By -Laws for review.
4. The plat shall be subject to the Park Committee's recommendations
and comments.
5. The development plan should be shifted to the east in order to
provide a 20 foot green area between the westerly property line and the
parking area.
6. The developer should consider installing parking areas on each side
of the building and extending a drive or path around the north side of the
building to provide adequate fire protection.
7. No more than 26 dwelling units shall be allowed for this development
proposal.
8. All other City ordinances shall be applicable for the overall de-
velopment proposal.
9. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan must be re-
viewed and approved prior to final plat approval.
10. Adequate utility easements must be provided to allow a connection to
the existing trunk sanitary sewer along the north property line and the re-
quired internal water main and two fire hydrants.
11. A storm sewer detention holding pond must be constructed in the
northeast corner of this proposed plat to minimize the increased runoff from
this development.
12. Trailway installations along Berry Ridge Road should be in confor-
mance with the requirements of the Park and Recreation Committee.
13. This development shall provide for a residential street equivalent
assessment escrow for the 283 feet of frontage adjacent to Pilot Knob Road to
cover this plat's financial responsibilities for the future upgrading of Pilot
Knob Road. This escrow shall be determined of the residential. street equiva-
lent rate for multiple dwelling zoning at the time of final plat approval.
All voted in favor.
3 -13
0
May 11, 1982
JMEMO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
RE: ADVISORY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION -
BERRY RIDGE PRELIMINARY PLAT
On Thursday, May 6, 1982 the Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee
reviewed the preliminary plat for Berry Ridge.
The parks dedication has previously been satisfied for this parcel.
The committee did review the plat for possible trail construction. After
review the committee's motion was not to include any trails or additional
parks requirements within the plat.
cc: Dale Runkle, City Planner
Paul Hauge, City Attorney
Judy Chaffee, Planning Secretary
Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works
-74
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty
IRB FINANCING REQUEST - TIME EXTENSION
D. Pilot Knob Shopping Center, IRB Financing/Request for Time
Extension -- Mr. Ronald Krank, representing the architect interior
design firm of Korsunsky Krank Erickson Architects, Inc., is
requesting on behalf of Kraus Anderson a time extension on the
pending preliminary approval for industrial revenue bond financing
for the Pilot Knob Shopping Center. The resolution was adopted
at the March 17, 1981 City Council meeting, approving industrial
revenue bond financing in the amount $5,500,000 for construction
of the Pilot Knob Shopping Center. According to the guidelines
set forth by the City, each industrial revenue financing approval
is for a period of fifteen months. Therefore, the industrial finan-
cing will expire on June 17, 1982 for this issue unless a time
extension is granted. The City has provided a time extension during
the past two years for other industrial bond applications. For
a copy of the letter requesting a time extension, refer to page
76 . If the City Council desires a time extension, one (1) year
is the period of time that has been granted for previous time
extension requests. The reason for the request is due to the in-
ability to obtain satisfactory financing as a result of high in-
terest rates and the depressed construction economy.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
time extension for considering industrial revenue bond financing
for the Pilot Knob Shopping Center Project.
75
11
KORSUNSKY KRANK ERICKSON ARCHITECTS. INC.
February 12, 1982
Mr. Tom Hedges
City Administrator
City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Re: Pilot Knob Shopping Center
Comm. No. 80-124
Dear Tom:
ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS • INTERIOR DESIGN
According to our records, it appears that the industrial revenue bond
resolution which we received approval of on March 17, 1982 will expire
on June 17, 1982.
As you are aware from our prior conversations, we have had difficulty
in obtaining satisfactory financing. We are still very optimistic about
our ability to resolve the financing and still proceed this year.
However, this is taking longer than expected and it is, therefore,
extremely important for us to obtain an extension of the preliminary
resolution.
Would you please advise us as to how we should proceed to process the
approval application from the City Council.
Yours very truly,
KORSUNSKY KRANK ERICKSON ARCHITECTS, INC.
Ronal ,Krank, A I. .
RK:kt
570 GALAXY BUILDING 330 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55401 (612)339-4200
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty -One
LONE OAK HEIGHTS/TEMPORARY SALES OFFICE
E. Lone Oak Heights for Temporary Sales Office -- Midwestern Asso-
ciates was given authorization to proceed with the Lone Oak Heights
condominium and town house project by the City Council at its April
20, 1982 meeting. It was the intention of the applicant to request
at the time of preliminary platting a temporary sales office that
would be occupied for display and sales office only. This type
of request is normally addressed as a condition of the preliminary
plat approval and therefore should be processed as a revision to
the preliminary plat. The sales office would be temporary until
all condominiums and townhouse units are complete. The trailer
would be approximately 10' x 26' in size and it would be located
next to the existing construction trailer.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
temporary sales office for Lone Oak Heights preliminary plat as
requested.
"77
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty -Two
CONTRACT 82-4
E
A. Contract 82-4, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Twin View Manor
2nd Addition et al, Streets) -- On Tuesday, May 11, 1982, formal
bids were received at City Hall for the above referenced contract.
The results of the bid opening and the low bid's comparison to
the feasibility report are presented on page -77 for the Council's
information. Please note that the bids received for Project 335B
under this contract exceeded the feasibility report estimate by
10.24%. In accordance with the new City policy, the developer
has been informed that the bids received have exceeded the feasi-
bility report estimate by more than 10%. The developer has been
requested to sign a letter stating his knowledge of this overrun
and his acceptance of the bids as submitted. If the staff has
not received this letter of concurrence by the May 18 Council
meeting, it is recommended that this project be deleted from the
contract award consideration, resulting in the contract being
awarded to the low bidder, Bituminous Roadways, deleting Project
335B (Twin View Manor 2nd Addition). Upon checking the extensions
and additions of the bids submitted, an error was discovered in
the low bid resulting in a corrected amount of $180,600.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER:
Contract 82-4 and award the contract to
Roadways, Inc., in the amount of $180,600.
No
To receive the bids for
the low bidder, Bituminous
6
Our File No
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
CITY CONTRAC'r N0. 82-4
PROJECTS 335B, 340B,341B, s 346B�
LAGAN, MINNESOTA
CONTRACTORS
1. Bituminous Roadways
2. McNamara Vivant Contracting Co.
3. Alexander Construction Co.
4. Hardrives Inc.
5. Pine Bend Paving Co.
6. Northwest Asphalt Inc.
BID TIME: 10:30 A.H., C.D.S.T.
BID DATE: TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1982
TOTAL BASE BID
$180,420.00
187,686.40
196,568.10
197,375.20
199,044.50
203,035.85
(F. R. ) Over (+)
Project Location Feasibility Report Eng.Est. Low Bid % UnderF.R.
335B Twin View Manor 2nd
340B Windcrest 2nd
341B Windtree 2nd
346B Cinnamon Ridge 1st
TOTALS:
$16,680.00
$17,400.
$18,387.70
10.24 (+)
43,400.00
33,800
30,836.20
28.95 (-)
81,855.00
67,740
62,491.30
23.66 (-)
88,540.00
75,240
68,704.80
22.40 (-)
$230,475.00
$194,180
$180,420.00
21.72 (-)
-79
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty -Three
1982 HEALTH INSURANCE BIDS
B. 1982 Health Insurance Bids -- At the April 6, 1982 City Council
meeting, the City Administrator reported that the City had received
a proposed health insurance increase of approximately 28% and fur-
ther that any amount exceeding a 20% increase requires by statute
that the City bid the health insurance coverage for all City em-
ployees. Authorization was given at that City Council meeting
to proceed with the preparation of plans and specification for
health insurance, advertise for bids•, with a bid opening scheduled
for May 14, 1982 at 3:00 p.m. The bids will be opened at that
time, reviewed by the City Clerk and City Administrator on Monday,
May 17, 1982, with a brief memorandum, bid tabulation and analysis
provided with the administrative packet for each member of the
City Council on that same date. As a reminder, the present family
coverage for health, life and disability insurance averages from
$92 to $100 per month and the proposed package will be approximately
$120 to $128 per month per family. The City budgeted $120 for
each employee during 1982. Since three months are at the old rate
and 9 months will be at the new rate and some employees are on
single coverage which is considerably less, the new costs proposed
by Mutual Services Insurance or some bidder that may have a lower
amount will be within the budget for this year. The reason there
is a range in the family coverage is due to the different rates
for disability insurance per employee. The City Administrator
and City Clerk are recommending that health, disability and life
insurance be bid on a calendar year basis to stay more consistent
with union negotiations, and, therefore, in order to make a conver-
sion from the fiscal year, April 1 through March 31, this insurance
package will be in effect until December 31, 1982. The City is
presently paying the new premium to Mutual Service Insurance for
the months of April and May, and if they are the successful bidder,
the City will continue on with the payment schedule as presented.
If a new insurance company is contracted by the City, the effective
date of agreement between the City of Eagan and that insurance
company would be June 1, 1982 for the remainder of the year. Tradi-
tionally, the City has negotiated union contracts and employee
agreements during the fall of each calendar year with no idea as
to what may occur with insurance premiums which are normally pre-
sented to the City in February or early March for an April 1 re-
newal. By changing from a fiscal to a calendar year, the City
should receive any proposed adjustments to the health insurance
premium in October or November which is more consistent with con-
tract negotiations.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the
successful health insurance bid.
h e
0 0
Agenda Information Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Twenty -Four
BECC UPDATE
C. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commission Update -- The joint
commission met on May 13, 1982 to discuss the following agenda
items: proposed bylaws, local ownership structures, demographic
discussions, and a policy decision overview. Commission vice chair-
man Jim Smith was acting chairman in the absence of Paul Wood and
will provide an update to the City Council at the meeting on Tues-
day. There is no action required by the City Council.
01
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 14, 1982
SUBJECT: INFORMATIVE
Lone Oak Heights Development
The City has received a letter from Mr. John Gustin, President
of Timberline Civic Association, a copy of which is enclosed on
pages SAC through 0.5 for your reference.
Protective Inspection Report
The monthly report for April 1982 and year to date totals for the
Protective Inspection Department are enclosed on page S& . The
City Council will notice in this monthly reporting t ah t a brief
labor distribution is shown for actual inspection and office hours
for the inspection department. Our new payroll system, LOGIS,
has allowed all departments to accurately record labor distribution.
In the future, the City Administrator will attempt to provide more
labor distribution information to the City Council for all depart-
ments.
Mobile Manufactured Housi
The City received an action alert from the League of Minnesota
Cities stating that Minnesota Laws, 1982, Chapter 490, amending
MS 462.357, Subdivision 1, changes the Municipal Planning Act to
prohibit the exclusion of mobile/manufactured homes from cities.
These provisions are not effective until August 1, 1982. In order
to provide some control so that mobile/manufacured homes are not
placed ramdomly throughout the City of Eagan in single family zoning
districts, it is recommended that certain zoning ordinance amend-
ments be given consideration. Please refer to the attached informa-
tion from the League of Minnesota Cities found on pages 137 through
$9 for further information. If the City Council so desires,
further staff input and an amendment to the zoning ordinance can
be drafted and placed on a future City Council agenda for considera-
tion.
AMM Annual Meeting
The AMM Annual Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 26, at the
Sheraton Inn Northwest in Brooklyn Park. Enclosed on pages
1 through --mber is a copy of the notice and nominating committee
report. Any meof the City Council. who wishes to attend should
notify the City Administrator at the meeting on Tuesday so reserva-
tions can be made for you. Please note that spouses are welcome
to attend the annual meeting as was the case last year.
.52
0 0
Informative Memo
May 14, 1982
Page Two
Tax Exempt Mortgage Financing
Enclosed on pages 73 through 9 S is the most recent information
pertaining to the tax exempt mortgage financing program. As stated
on the information, 99% of the loans are pre -committed and only
approximately $33,000 remains for the program. There have been
296 loans including both low income and basic income provided under
the program.
Conciliation Court
The City of Eagan appeared in conciliation court as the defendent
in a case involving Stacy Marie Malcolm who resides at 1919 Silver
Bell Road, the plaintiff, over a charge that due to the discolora-
tion of the water, her laundry was ruined and she requested payment
for her laundry by the City of Eagan. The City Clerk appeared
before Judge Mitchell on May 3, 1982, and upon listening to the
case stated by Stacy Malcolm and the City's position on the matter,
the judge has ruled that the City does not owe Ms. Malcolm any
amount of money as a judgment for her claim. The City of Eagan
had taken the position in conciliation court that discoloration
of the water does not ruin the clothes, it merely changes the color,
and in fact, the City had given Ms. Malcolm a solution called Rover
to restore the natural color of the laundry and there was no valid
claim or judgment against the City of Eagan.
MTC "Opt Out" Program
Mayor Blomquist received information from MnDOT Commissioner Richard
Braun that outlines the program referred to as the "Opt Out" program
providing for local communities in certain circumstances to qualify
for transit funds equivalent to 90% of the property tax levied
by the Metropolitan Transit Commission in the community. Enclosed
on pages through /� is a copy of the letter and the Metro-
politan Transit Demonstration Program.
[!'
r�
May 4, 1982
Eagan City Council
Eagan City Hall
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Re: Lone Oak Heights Development
Gentlemen:
In the opinion of the Timberline Civic Association, the City Council's
recent decision to approve the plat of Midwestern Associates and thereby
allow the construction of another apartment/townhouse development in
Section 9 borders on the irresponsible. The City's own Comprehensive
Plan recognized, as early as 1978, the overcrowding which is taking place
in this area. We would remind you that you were presented with a
petition signed by approximately 300 homeowners in the neighborhood
surrounding the Lone Oak Heights Development requesting that steps be
taken to rezone that property to a lower density classification. You, as a
City Council, completely ignored that petition. At least, no public
hearings were held on it and no City Council vote was taken.
With hindsight, it would not appear that the Council would have had the
resolve to down -zone anyway. One reading the Eagan Chronicle's account
of the hearing where the Lone Oak Heights plat was approved would get
the definite impression that all one has to do to push through a plat
approval is to threaten the City Council with a lawsuit.
Your own City Attorney, Mr. Hauge, provided you with an opinion which
would have supported the ability of the City Council to rezone that
property without the need for "buying back" the zoning. Just why that
opinion was ignored in the face of a threat from Mr. LeVander is most
puzzling.
Commissioners Smith, Wachtler and Egan apparently felt that the
dedication of four acres of land back in 1975 for park purposes entitled
Mr. Shields, the landowner, to perpetually have his land zoned RAII and
RAV, irrespective of how the remainder of the area developed from 1975
through 1982. In their concern for the deal struck with Mr. Shields in
1975, it is unfortunate that these gentlemen did not recall the
commitments that had been made to the residents of the area concerning
-9/f
0 0
Eagan City Council
Page 2
May 4, 1982
the development of the Pilot Knob Park. We would certainly invite all of
the City Council out to view that "park", a euphemistic term for a grass -
filled swamp surrounded by an asphalt ring, which, in its present
condition, only serves as a mosquito breeding ground.
The water level is artificially maintained at its present low condition by
means of a storm sewer system which was also installed against the
wishes of the neighborhood residents, but at their cost. Because of this
unwanted project, Mr. Shields has been able to reclaim a larger area for
sale to the developer as building sites, all to the detriment of the
neighborhood as a whole. Back in 1975, when the arrangement was made
to rezone the Martin Shields property, the plans for the Pilot Knob Park
called for the establishment of a water level such that an attractive pond
with bridges, a floating platform and walkways would result.
If the City Engineer's firm has properly installed the water level control
structures, it should be possible to raise the water level to the point
where the pond comprises open water rather than an unsightly slough. We
request that such an action be taken and that the promised amenities be
constructed.
It is unfortunate that the City Council does not pay more heed to the
wishes of the existing residents, but instead caters to the money interests
of the developers who momentarily come upon the scene, plant their high -
profit, low-cost, crowded building sites and then move on, leaving the
citizens to cope with the blight and other problems that such practices
portend.
Respectfully submitted,
TIMBERLINE CIVIC ASSOCIATION
es' ent
r�
PROTFCTIVf? zs criorS •
M)NTRLY RPPORT
APRIL, 1982
MSP=ON/OFFICF FOMS
Type
Units
valuation
Pewmat Fee
Year -Tb -Date
Building
��
Sin ie Famil
Plumbing
101.0
354.0
AVAC
49.5
176.5
Admdnistrative/Office
76.0
785.0
Fire Marshal
87.0
150.0
Miscellaneous
22.0
89.0
General Office
153.0
535.0
Permit Process'F,
108.5
348.5
city Council Meetings
0,0
1.5
NU MER OF PMMTS ISSUED
$ 5,859.50
0
Industrial
This Month
Year -Tb -Date
Building
53
159
Plumbing
46
119
74VAC
43
135
Electric
59
188
Water Softener
1
20
[Jell, Cesspool, Septic Tank
0
0
Sighs
7
19
NATURF. OF B=IMG PELl=S ISSM
Nkriber
Type
Units
valuation
Pewmat Fee
Plan check Fee
Thtal*�
21
Sin ie Famil
21
$1,178,500.00
$ 6,7.98.50
$3,149.25
$36,182.7.5
6
]hmlex
6
$ 282,000.00
$ 1,600.50
$ 800.25
$10,012.25
8
1SAti-Rmdly
8
$ 2,98,000.00
S 1,760.00
$ 880.00
$12,744.00
1
Commerical
1
$ 82,000.00
$ . 379.00
$ 189.50
$ 5,859.50
0
Industrial
0
0
0
0
0
0
Institutional
0
0
0
0
0
2
Res. Garage
2
$ 15,800.00
$ 137.00
$ 68.50
$ 213.50
2
Scrim. Pool
2
$ 17,000.00
$ 143.00
$ 71.50
$ 223.00
13
Miscellaneous
13
S 59,495.00
$ 559.00
$ 122.50
$ 713.00
53
TOTALS
53
$1,922,795.00
$10,877.00
$5,281.00
$65,947.50
* Total Fees Include: P.uildinr, Permit Fee, Sur-(h3rge, Plan Check Fee, SAC Lhit Fee,
I -titer Connection Fee, Ihter Meter Fee and Road Licit Fee.
ED
April 15, 1982
TO: City Managers, Administrators, Clerks
(Please pass a copy along to your city planner or zoning administrator)
FROM: Duke Addicks, Legislative Counsel
Cathy Quiggle, Research Assistant
RE: Mobile/Manufactured Housing
Minnesota Laws 1982, Chapter 490 amending M.S. 462.357, Subd. 1 changes the Municipal
Planning Act to prohibit the exclusion of mobile/manufactured homes from cities. (The
complete text of the law as amended is enclosed. New language is underlined, old
language is stricken.) These new provisions are not effective until August 1, 1982.
Until then, any manufactured homes are subject to the zoning ordinance presently in
effect in a city.
Pursuant to this new legislation, by August 1, 1982, cities may wish to amend their
zoning ordinances to establish the following:
1, design standards for dwellings in residential districts such as: minimum width,
minimum square footage, siding material, roof lines, type of foundation requirements;
2, residential district(s) in which only dwellings meeting the Uniform Building Code
are permitted;
3. residential district(s) in which manufactured homes as defined by M.S. 327.31-327.35
(not required by law to meet the Uniform Building Code) are permitted as well as site
built homes which meet the Uniform Building Code, i.e. a mixed district;
4, mobile home park district(s) for those mobile homes unable to meet design standards
in residential districts.
There is some confusion over whether the establishment of the above mentioned design
standards is now the only legal method of regulating the location of manufactured
homes within a city. The Michigan Supreme Court held in Robinson Township v. Donald
Knoll, 302 NW 2d 146 (Mich, 1981), that a municipality's exclusion of mobile homes
(OVER)
87
.,eadr sccear- miinnesccR -J Ir_ _
C
j
r
.eu•...1
.d..� ..rY.
.....
•-_....ru r -,.fir.,
r.... ...�.
-1
April 15, 1982
TO: City Managers, Administrators, Clerks
(Please pass a copy along to your city planner or zoning administrator)
FROM: Duke Addicks, Legislative Counsel
Cathy Quiggle, Research Assistant
RE: Mobile/Manufactured Housing
Minnesota Laws 1982, Chapter 490 amending M.S. 462.357, Subd. 1 changes the Municipal
Planning Act to prohibit the exclusion of mobile/manufactured homes from cities. (The
complete text of the law as amended is enclosed. New language is underlined, old
language is stricken.) These new provisions are not effective until August 1, 1982.
Until then, any manufactured homes are subject to the zoning ordinance presently in
effect in a city.
Pursuant to this new legislation, by August 1, 1982, cities may wish to amend their
zoning ordinances to establish the following:
1, design standards for dwellings in residential districts such as: minimum width,
minimum square footage, siding material, roof lines, type of foundation requirements;
2, residential district(s) in which only dwellings meeting the Uniform Building Code
are permitted;
3. residential district(s) in which manufactured homes as defined by M.S. 327.31-327.35
(not required by law to meet the Uniform Building Code) are permitted as well as site
built homes which meet the Uniform Building Code, i.e. a mixed district;
4, mobile home park district(s) for those mobile homes unable to meet design standards
in residential districts.
There is some confusion over whether the establishment of the above mentioned design
standards is now the only legal method of regulating the location of manufactured
homes within a city. The Michigan Supreme Court held in Robinson Township v. Donald
Knoll, 302 NW 2d 146 (Mich, 1981), that a municipality's exclusion of mobile homes
(OVER)
87
.,eadr sccear- miinnesccR -J Ir_ _
n
u
-2-
1]
from all areas not designated as mobile home parks had no reasonable basis under the
police power and was therefore unconstitutional. The Court stated, however, that a
mobile home could be excluded if it failed to satisfy reasonable standards designed
to assure favorable comparisons with permitted site built housing. Thus, regulation
by design standards applicable to both site built and manufactured housing seems to
be the preferred approach.
It can be argued, however, that under the city's authority to regulate by class of
building (M.S. 462.357, Subd. 1) it can establish some residential districts which
permit manufactured homes and some which do not. The fact that manufactured homes
are subject to a different building code than site built homes would seem to be a
recognition that they are, in fact, a different class of building.
It can also be argued that the intent of the legislature in passing the new law was
to prohibit only the total exclusionof manufactured homes from a city. Lira 24 of
the bill originally read, "No regulation or single family zoning ordinance may
prohibit ... manufactured homes built in conformance with sections 327.31,Subd. 6,
or any other single family dwellings that comply with all other zoning ordinances
promulgated pursuant to this section." It would seem that if the legislature intended
to prohibit the exclusion of manufactured homes from all single family districts it
would have passed the bill as originally written instead of passing the amended
version which deleted the phrase "single family zoning ordinance". Therefore, if the
city were to establish some district permitting manufactured homes within the city,
it would seem to be in compliance with the intent of the law.
Again these changes in the Municipal Planning Act do not become effective until
August 1, 1982. Because the application of the law is unclear we will pass along
further information as it becomes available. If you have further questions please
call Cathy Quiggle at the League office. Through April 23rd our phone number will
be (612) 222-2861; thereafter, it will be (612) 227-5600.
DA: CQ:rmm
Attach.
0
Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 1980, Section 462.357, Subdivision 1, is amended to
read:
Subdivision 1. (AUTHORITY FOR ZONING.) For the purpose of promoting the public
health, safety, morals and general welfare, a municipality may by ordinance regulate
the location, height, width, bulk, type of foundation, number of stories, size of
buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size
of yards and other open spaces, the density and distribution of population, the uses
of buildings and structures for trade, industry, residence, recreation, public
activities, or other purposes, and the uses of land for trade, industry, residence,
recreation, agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply conservation,
conservation of shorelands, as defined in section 105.485, access to direct sunlight
for solar energy systems as defined in section 116H.02, flood control or other
purposes, and may establish standards and procedures regulating such uses. No
regulation may prohibit earth sheltered construction as defined in section 116H.02,
subdivision 3, or manufactured homes built in conformance with sections 327.31 to
327.35 that eempies comply with all other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuan to
t- iii s section. The regu ations may divide the municipality into districts or zones
of suitable numbers, shape and area. The regulations shall be uniform for each class
or kind of buildings, structures or land and for each class or kind of use throughout
such district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other
districts. The ordinance embodying these -regulations shall be known as the zoning
ordinance and shall consist of text and maps. A city may by ordinance extend the
application of its zoning regulations to unincorporated territory located within
two miles of its limits in any direction, but not in a county or town which has
adopted zoning regulations; provided that where two or more noncontiguous municipali-
ties have boundaries less than four miles apart, each is authorized to control the
zoning of land on its side of a line equidistant between the two noncontiguous muni-
cipalities unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted zoning regulations.
Any city may thereafter enforce such regulations in the area to the same extent as
if such property were situated within its corporate limits, until the county or town
board adopts a comprehensive zoning regulation which includes the area.
/rmm
4/15/82
m
0 0
40
association of
metropolitan
municipalities
NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING
DATE: Wednesday, May 26, 1982
PLACE: Sheraton Inn - Northwest
I-94 & Hwy. 52
Brooklyn Park, Minnesota
5:30 to 6:30 P.M. 6:30 to 7:30 P.M. 7:30 P.M.
Social Hour Buffet Dinner Annual Business Meeting
(sponsored by '.!filler Entree:
& Schroeder Munici- Roast Round of Beef
pals, Inc.) and Baked Turkey
COST: $15.00 per person
BUSINESS 11EETING AGENDA
1. Call to Order - James Krautkremer, President
2. Introduction of Guests and Retiring Board Members.
3. Keynote address: Representative John Brandl, Chairman of the
Legislative Commission on Metropolitan Governance. "What are
we learning from the study of Metropolitan Governance".
4. Annual Report: President James Krau.tkr.emer.
5. Election of Officers and Directors - Dick Asleson, Nominating
Committee Chairperson (Committee report enclosed).
6. Comments: President Elect
7. Announcements.
8. Other Business.
9. Adjournment.
PLEASE NOTE:
A. Each City should send at least one delegate to cast its vote. Cities
are encouraged, however, to send as many additional representatives
as possible. Spouses and guests welcome.
B. Dinner reservations must be confirmed to Carol Williams at the AMM
office (227-5600) by noon on Monday, May 24th.
C. This notice is being sent to Mayors, Del-egates and City Administratil
Officials.
300 hanover bldg. 480 cedar street, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 222-2861
1]
May 5, 1.982
TO: Member City Officials
0
FROM: Dick Asleson, Chairperson,
Nominating Committee
RE: Nominating Committee Report
Pursuant to Article IX, Section 3 of the By -Laws,
a Nominating Committee was appointed by the AMM
Board of Directors on March 4, 1982. The Committee
has completed its work and has nominated the below
listed persons for consideration at the Annual sleeting
on May 26th.
For President:
Plary Anderson, Councilmember, Golden Valley
For Vice -President:
Jack Irving, Manager, Crystal
For Board of Directors:
Two -Year Terms (8 to be elected):
Ron Backes, Councilmember, St. Louis Park
Bill Barnhart, Senior Planner, Minneapolis
Jerry Dulger, Manager, Anoka
Laura Fraser, Councilmember, Lal.e Elmo
Jim Miller, Manager, Minnetonka
Jackie Slater, Alderman, Minneapolis
James Spore, Manager, Burnsville
Bob Sundland, Mayor, St. Anthony
One -Year Terms (2 to be elected):
Gary Bastian, Councilmember, Maplewood
Neil Peterson, Councilmember, Bloomington
* Additional candidates may be nominated by any voting
delegate from the floor at the Annual fleeting.
(over)
0 0
?Member City Officials
May 5, 1952
Page 2
Board members whose terms expire ;.fay, 198
Greg Blees, Budget Director, St. Paul
Bea Blomquist, Mayor, Fagan
Bill Sandberg, Mayor, North St. Paul
Dennis Schneider, Councilmember, Fridley
Joanne Showalter, Councilmember; St. Paul
Bob Thistle, Manager, Coon Rapids
.1c..bers of the ..'Omi aL 7.n— CoIIH^Lt?: ce
Dick Asleson, Administrator, Apple Valley
Tim Flaherty, Legislature Liaison, Minneapolis
Jack Irving, Manager, Crystal
Don Masterson, Mayor, Spring Lake Park
Carl Meissner, Administrator, Cottage Grove
Connie Morrison, Councilmember, Burnsville
Bill Sandberg, :Mayor, North St. Paul
Tom Spies, Councilmember, Bloomington
9�
BANCO MORTGE COMPAN
794 Pillsbury Build Y
Program Administ Department
608 2nd Avenue South
Minneapolis. MN 55402
612/343-3741
May 6, 1982
Mr. James Ehrenberg
First Trust Company of St. Paul
332 Minnesota Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
RE: Eagan BMIR Program
Dear Mr. Ehrenberg:
Attached is the monthly transaction report for the period ending
April 30, 1982.
If you should have any further questions regarding this report,
please do not hesitate to call.
BANCO MORTGAGE COMPANY
ADMINISTRATOR-SERVICER/CITY OF EAGAN
i
J
Karen Hengel
Bookkeeper
Enc.
CC: Tom Hedges / City of Eagan
Paul Ekholm / Miller 6 Schroeder
cf.-�
9
DATE: May 6, •
CITY OF E7CAN
: 41'
Statistical Data--
Amount of Program $16,940,000
Total Amount of Pre-:amtitted Loans
$ 16,907,275
Percentage of Loans Pre-Cortmitted
99 %
Low Income
Basic Income
Total Number of Loans
155
141
Average Mortgage Amount
$ 53,011
$ 61,635
Average Sale Price
59,423
67,030
Average Appraisal Value
59,890
68,105
Average Adjusted Gross Incane
20,274
25,047
Average Gross Income
21,581
26,742
Type of Iran:
Insured Conventional
7
21
Uninsured Conventional
g
7
FFA
47
69
VA
28
39
Graduated Pledge
65
5
Average Iran to Value Ratio:
Insured Conventional
88%
Uninsured Conventional
90%
71%
74%
Number of New Construction Loans
120
106
Number of Existing Loans
35
35
Type of Dwelling:
Single Family
80
Townhouse
22
97
Condominium
53
28
16
Mobile Hanes
0
0
Average Previous Residents
17%
23%
Number of Renters
111
100
Number of Owners
Average Age
44
41
Sex:
'10
Male
29.6
Female
106
131
49
10
Average Fatmily Size
1.8
2.4
Average Number of Children
.4-�--
.
Marital Status:
Married
68
Single
96
Joint
78
25
Divorced
5
14
FUNDING: -„
4
6
Dollar, Amount of Loans Funded
$
16,903,100
NCffber OL loans
296
: 41'
DATE: May 6, 1982
CITY OF EAGAN
$16,940,000 --Amount of Program
Dollar Amount of Funds Remaining $ 32,725
PLEASE NOTE: This amount can be utilized in any of
the following categories:
Single Family, Townhouse, Condo,
Mobile Home; Low or Basic Incomes;
or any Conventional Loans, including
Conventional 95%.
This does,not include the Graduated
Pledge Account. At this time, there
are no Graduated Pledqe Funds available.
Total Pre -Commitment Amount $ 16,907,275
Total Reserved (Yet to be Pre-Comnitted) $ -0-
$ 16,940,000
9S
F
nO0�p1NESpTq 20
Minnesota
Department of Transportation
Transportation Building
TRPay¢0 St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
��1rOF
office of Commissioner
May 6, 1982
Honorable Beatta Bloomquist
Mayor of Eagan
4504 Oak Chase Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Dear Mayor Bloomquist:
•
(612) 2963000
Enclosed for your information are guidelines for the
implementation of the Metropolitan Transit Service Demonstration
Program established by the 1981 Legislature. This program,
commonly referred to as the "Opt Out" program, provides for local
communities in certain circumstances to qualify for transit funds
equivalent to 90% of the property tax levied by the Metropolitan
Transit Commission in the community. Please contact Mn/DOT staff
if you are interested in the program.
Sincerely,
Richard P. Braun
Commissioner
Enclosure
cc: Lou Olson, M.T.C.
in
An Equal Opportunity Employer
METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SERVICE
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM
IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES
�r�rtrsESprq
yt ` i D -A43
or
April 198?
97
• INTRODUCTION •
The enclosed guidelines have been drafted to facilitate
implementation of the Metropolitan Transit Service
Demonstration Program, more commonly known as the "Opt Out"
Program. This program was established by the 1981 Legislature
in order to "provide financial assistance for projects designed
to test the efficiency and effectiveness of alternative methods
of providing public transit service for communities that are
within the metropolitan transit taxing district but are not
adequately served by existing regular route transit."
In effect, this legislation authorizes the Commissioner of
Transportation to contract with a city or group of cities that
proposes to replace MTC transit service with an alternative.
The contract would be funded by withholding state funds
appropriated for the MTC. The withheld amount would be up to
or equal to 90% of the local property taxes levied by the MTC
in the "opt out" community. In order to receive those funds,
an application must be submitted to and approved by the
Commissioner. Approvals will be subject to conformance with
the guidelines outlined below.
The guidelines focus on three parts:
1. Eligibility Criteria: These criteria must be met by
a community before an application can be considered
by the Commissioner of Transportation. The criteria
are based on a liberal interpretation of legislation
so as to permit consideration of_as many proposals as
possible.
2. Replacement Service: Service criteria must be met
before the Commissioner can approve an application.
These criteria, based on legislation, are intended to
ensure that all relevant service cost, efficiency and
effectiveness factors are compared. Failure to fully
evaluate the proposed service may result in
"surprises" for the local. officials and possible
lower service quality for users.
3. Application Processing: This part described what
will happen to applications submitted to the
Commissioner. This process is established by
existing legislation that permits little discretion.
All applications will be considered in an expeditious
manner.
Questions regarding these guidelines should be addressed to:
Robert J. Menke, Manager
Transit Planning Unit
820 Transportation building
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
612-297-2069
Gt
I. Eligibility Criteria: These criteria shall be used to
determine if a city or group of cities are eligible to
receive financial assistance and if the proposed service
meets the program purpose.
A. Recipient Eligibility: The recipient city or group
of cities shall:
1) Be located within the metropolitan transit taxing
district per M.S. 473.446, subd. 2, and
2) (a) Not be served by the MTC. (This will include
those communities served by private operators who
are not funded by the MTC.), or
(b) Be served only with routes which end or being
within the recipient area, and
3) Receive three or fewer weekday scheduled runs
during the hours of 9:00 am to 3:00 pm.
(Scheduled runs are defined as round trip
opportunities into or out of a recipient's area.)
Eligibility determinations will include consideration
of pending MTC service reductions. If an applicant
requests funding on the grounds that the applicant -'s
area is "not adequately served" by routes meeting
criteria 2(b) and 3, the request will be considered
and evaluated by Mn/DOT on the following criteria
(based on MCAR 1.4026, 1.4027 and 1.4028):
4) The extent that routes penetrate the applicant's
developed area,
5) The extent that residents have convenient access
to existing service,.
6) The extent that scheduled service meets the
desired time for service usage.
B. Service Eligibility: The service proposed for
funding shall:
1) Be designed to replace and substitute for
existing MTC service. (Replacement will be
defined so that similar origin/desti.nation travel
opportunities must be provided. Alterations in
vehicle types and service frequency will be
considered.)
2) Require a subsidy per pas!alnnger no greater than
the average subsidy per passenger pec route and
the average subsidy per passenger per trip set by
the MTC as its standard in its current
transportation development program.
WWI
II.
Application Requirements: The application for funding for
replacement service must evidence a thorough 'management
plan per 14 MCAR 1.4028. Actual operating data should be
obtained from the MTC where possible. Specific items that
should be included are:
A. Existing Service Analysis
1) Current routes and ridership
2) Current schedules
3) Current fares
B. Proposed Service Description
1) Anticipated routes and ridership
2) Proposed schedules
3) Proposed fares
4) Coordination with other public and/or private
service
C. Financial Analysis
1) Existing service cost and subsidy
2) Proposed service cost and subsidy
3) Total available local transit funds
4) Percent of local funds to be used
5) Amount of state funds requested
D.
Service Objectives
1) Clientele to be served
2) Performance standards to be met
3) Community objectives to be served
E. Program Commitment
1) Resolution(s) from applicant governing bodies
that indicate intent to operate the replacement
service for a minimum of one year.
2) Statement describing the. opportunities for public
input to the service plan.
3) Statements of support
groups (e.g., Chamber
Citizens, etc.).
/00
from appropriate community
Of Commerce, Senior
,• .. .So .. M•b.AveeilL aar�,Nq A�.Y,Yh'/
III. Application Approval Process: Applications for funding
will be processed in accordance with review and approval
requirements stated below. Upon receipt, Mn/DOT will
submit copies to the MTC for review and comment and to the
Metropolitan Council for review and concurrance per
statutory requirements (14 MCAR 1.4025, Sec. C).
A. MTC Review - The MTC will review and comment on:
1) Accuracy of the existing service description
2) Anticipated impact on the MTC system
3) Current subsidy analysis
B. Metropolitan Council Review - The Met Council will
review and approve based on:
1) Consistency with metropolitan system plans
2) Consistency with metropolitan system policies
C. Mn/DOT Review/Approval - The Mn/DOT will complete its
review and render its decision within 45 days of
receipt- of the proposal. Approved replacement
services will be funded for the balance of the
initial calendar year. Subsequent years' service
will be funded on a calendar year basis in accordance
with budget cycle deadlines used for all recipients
of state funds. In approving the replacement
service, adequate provisions for phase out of
existing service will be required.
Requests for additional services requiring state
funds to be matched with available local funds not
used for replacement service, or matched with other
local funds, will be approved only on a calendar year
basis in accordance with budget cycle timetables.
Request approval will be subject to availability of
program funds.
IV. Termination of Replacement Service-_: In the event that a
community chose to discontinue its replacement service,
assistance funds will revert to the MTC. Where
applicable, resumption of MTC service will be managed sc
as to ensure minimum disruption of service availability.
/Q