Loading...
09/07/1982 - City Council RegularAGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 7, 1982 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 — ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:33 — ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. 6:35 — RECOGNITION OF RETIRED FIREFIGHTERS IV. 6:40 — DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS e.\ A. Fire Department a,3 C. Park Department e,\ B. Police Department e,3 D. Public Works Department V. 6:55 — CONSENT ITEMS (One motion approves all items) 3 A. St. John Neumann Church for Combination Gambling License for September 12, 1982 13 B. September Conditional Use Permit Renewals P 114C. Annual Sign Permit Renewals P,,4 D. Resolution for Rahn Park Grant P i7 E. James Moore for 3.2 On—Sale Beer License/Umpires Assn. for 9-18 & 9-19 P ATF. Project #361, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing Wescott Road Sanitary Sewer) e.1 -S G. Project #365, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Northview Meadows First Addition — Trunk Sewer & Water) e.1$ H. Contract 80-21, Final Payment Acceptance (Blackhawk Lake Outlet) III. Contract 81-10, Final Payment/Acceptance (Tomark 1st Addition, el et aL, Streets VI. 7:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS pp ZO A. Project 297, Final Assessment Hearing (Blackhawk Lake Trunk 1 Storm Sewer Outlet) — Continued from the July 20, 1982 City Council Meeting for those Persons Who Submitted Written Objections Q q.1 B. Vacation of a Ponding Easement in the Vicinity of Lot 12, Block 9, Beacon Hill Addition e, Art C. Parcel 10-02500-021-25, Final Assessment Hearing (Trudi Johnson) L{3 D. Project 307A, Final Assessment Hearing (St. Francis Woods 2nd Y Addition Utilities) e.dt5 E. Project 324A, Final Assessment Hearing (Safari at Eagan Utilities) e,¢ 7 F. Project 328A, Final Assessment Hearing (Ches Mar East 4th Addition Utilities) e. q.9 G. Project 329A, Final Assessment Hearing (Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition Utilities) VII. OLD BUSINESS P S' A. City Hall Expansion Project Update p SJ B. Concepts for Land Use Changes to the Proposed Handicapped �1 FaciLity Location in Meadow Land Addition (Betty Bassett) Eagan City Council Agenda September 7, 1982 Page Two VIII. NEW BUSINESS IX. X. i 6i A. Special Assessment Committee Recommendations k03 B. Patricia Leahy for a Conditional Use Permit for Carry Out Food P in a Neighborhood Business District, Silver Bell Center 10% C. Italian Pie Shoppe (James Basta) for License for One Amusement Q Device 106 D. Road Machinery & Supplies Company for Extension of Industrial P' Revenue Financing Bond Preliminary Approval X12 E. J.P.K. Park Company for Extension of Industrial Revenue Financing P Bond Preliminary Approval 1f.05 F. Coca Cola Corporation for a Variance to the Sign Ordinance t%j G. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company for a Special Permit for an P' Advertising Sign to be Located in Cedar Ridge'Second Addition P, j'LS H. Temporary Advertising Sign — Thornwood Townhome I. Michael DuBois for a Temporary 3.2 Beer License for September 11, 1982 at 3155 Hwy. 13 p.130 J. Stop Sign Petition — Jade Lane at Pumice Lane f'13a' K. Consideration of a Wind Energy Systems & Radio/TV Towers Ordinance e.jj.k L. Consideration of a Contractor Licensing Ordinance ADDITIONAL ITEMS 14 6A. Joint Burnsville/Eagan j*I.B. Contract 82-10, Receive e Streets) e.jj-jC. Contract 82-11, Receive Utilities) e.150 D. Contract 82-12, Receive Surfacing) Cable Commission Update Bids/Award Contract (Tower View Road Bids/Award Contract (Hilltop Plaza Bids/Award Contract (Galaxie Avenue E. Establish 1983 Budget Hearing for 9-21-82 City Council Meeting 1 VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) XI. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 1982 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of the August 17, 1982 regular City Council minutes, the special City Council minutes for August 10, August 24, August 30 and August 31, and the September 7, 1982 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration: Recognition is planned for six (6) fire fighters who have retired from the Eagan Volunteer Fire Department in recent months. Those fire fighters are as follows: Dean Jensen (7/1/63 - 12/31/81), James (Bud) Malaske (7/1/63 - 7/2/82), Mervin (Mac) Carll (7/1/63 - 7/2/82), Duane Gaudette (7/24/67 - 8/1/82), Donn Smith (7/1/63 - 7/3/82), and Jay Berthe (7/1/63 - 7/2/82). Certificates will be presented by Mayor Blomquist. FIRE DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department -- There are no items to be considered for the Fire Department at this time. POLICE DEPARTMENT B. Police Department -- The City Administrator and Chief of Police will discuss a proposal to take formal action against the General Motors Corporation for the problems that were experienced by the City of Eagan with the operation of diesel squad cars. Enclosed on page ;L t�eugbis an update provided by the City Attorney's--o-f-flce along w T some suggested action on this issue. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a recom- mendation as set forth by the City Attorney's office to proceed with formal action against the General Motors Corporation in an effort to seek reimbursement incurred with the high maintenance expenses and rapid depreciation. 0 0 HAUGE, SDIITH, TIDE & F ELLER, P. A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW CEDARVILLE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 3508 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY EAGAN (ST. PAUL). MINNESOTA 55122 PAUL H. HAUGE BRADLEY SMITH KEVIN W. EIDE DAVID G. KELLER Mr. Thomas Hedges City Administrator CITY OF EAGAN 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 September 3, 1982 RE: EAGAN POLICE DIESEL SQUAD CARS Dear Tom: AREA CODE 512 TELEPHONE 454.4224 On November 4, 1981, the City Council discussed problems with GM diesel squad cars. The Police Department had at least five and each of them has had several defects. It is my understanding that they have all either been sold or in one case, converted to gaso- line powered. We have sent several letters to the Area Zone Manager for GM with no satisfaction and in addition, the dealers from whom the City bought the cars. Two maintenance supervisors from Grossman Chevrolet have been in- terviewed and have indicated that the engine was not adequate for normal consumer use. A letter has recently been sent to the Zone Fleet Office and no response has been received. The options would be as follows: 1) Do nothing; 2) Continue to press General Motors through letters; 3) Bring an action against General Motors and possibly the dealers claiming defects and damages for costs and losses by the City. The problem with this alternate is that it could be quite expensive with little guarantee of what the outcome may be, but often, of course, results in some type of negotiated settlement during the process of the action. PHH:me z 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Two PARK DEPARTMENT C. Park Department -- There are no items to be considered for the Park Department at this time. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT D. Public Works Department -- Item #1: Gerald Kuhn Letter A letter was received from Mr. and--Rrs. Gerald Kuhn who reside at 1722 Cochrane Avenue. Mr. and Mrs. Kuhn are concerned about the inconvenience and damage caused their property by water that is drained onto their property from the backwash of their neighbor's swimming pool. Mr. and Mrs. Kuhn are recommending the City adopt an ordinance that would require adjoining property owners who install swimming pools to install dry wells or pump water to the storm sewer to reduce any impact water run off on adjoining property. Enclosed on page his a copy of the letter sent to the City Council by Mr. and Mrs. Kuhn. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To tion of the City staff to investigate an amendment that would provide the type of hoods as addressed by Mr. and Mrs. Kuhn. 3 approve or deny authoriza- ordinance or an ordinance protection for neighbor - 0 0 August 24, 1982 Eagan City Council: My family and I reside at 1722 Cochrane Avenue in Eagan. We moved into this residence in March of 1979. For the last 4 summers we have had a problem with sitting water in our back yard. This sitting water comes primarily from the backwash of a swimming pool in the neighbors yard. The backwash hose is positioned so that the water from the pool runs right into our yard as there is no where else for it to drain. We have contacted Dale Peterson, City Inspector; and Tom Colbert, City Engineer; and discussed the problem with them. They have stated that there is no city ordinance that has stipulations about drainage of swimming pools; and said our only recourse was to re -landscape our yard or hire legal representation. Both of these alternatives would be very costly; and we do not feel either would be a fair solution to keeping drainage water out of our yard; or anybody else's yard who may have the same problem. We have checked with Burnsville Cith Inspectors; and were told they protect tax payers adjoining property from water drainage by having swimming pool owners build a dry well or pump water to the storm sewer. The City Inspector advised that our problem could be a health hazard also - (excessive weeds, mosquito breeding; etc.) We, as taxpayers feel there should be an ordinance in the city books as a protection against such problems as these happening. An ordinance of this type would also eliminate the breaking of harmony with neighbors, which should be a concern of the Eagan Council. Thank You Mr. and Mrs. Gerald Kuhn 0 D Agenda Information mo • September 3, 1982 Page Three Item #2: Safari Estates 4.0 M.G. Water Reservoiirr Sieg Property Un—Wednesday, August 2-5, t e ity Attorney, Pu i1'c W—oLrs Mector and Councilman Wachter met with the Sieg family in Lakeville to discuss one last offer pertaining to negotiated acquisition of the 2.09 acre site for the above referenced water reservoir. At this meeting, it was explained to the Siegs that, at this point, the City has only two alternatives: 1. To get a negotiated agreement for acquisition of the site, or 2. To proceed with acquisition through eminent domain pro- ceedings (condemnation). While the Siegs are very hesitant to enter into any kind of verbal and/or written agreement regarding the acquisition of this land, a negotiated price of $8,000 per acre for permanent easement acqui- sition (2.09 acres) and $4,000 per acre nor temporary construction easement (0.63 acres) was agreed upon .as a final figure to be pre- sented to the City Council for consideration and approval. These acquisition prices would result in approximately $19,240 for a negotiated purchase price for our water reservoir site. In addition to this amount, the City would have to assume responsi- bility for all existing assessments upon the 2.09 acres land to be acquired. This would amount to an additional $2,466. These costs are guaranteed by a maximum $50,000 letter of credit as pro- vided by Mr. Watchke in consideration of final plat approval for Safari Estates. In addition to acquisition of the site, the letter of credit guarantees reimbursement for extra costs incurred to relocate the water reservoir and extend the trunk water main to this site rather than the one previously selected within the Safari Estates Addition. At the present time, the following estimated costs have been expended in pursuing a water reservoir site at this location: Legal - $1,400; Engineering - $2,000; Surveying - $1,000; Appraiser - $600. Therefore, at the present time, the acquisition of this site will cost at least $25,000 in addition to extra costs incurred to extend the trunk water main to this site which have not yet been determined. The end result of staff's meeting with the Siegs indicates that if the City Council will authorize the $8,000 per acre acquisition for permanent right-of-way and $4,000 per acre cost for acquisition of temporary easements together with assuming all existing assess- ments on the 2.09 acres of land, the Siegs have indicated that they will more than likely accept this offer from the City. This is approximately twice what was previously authorized by Council action. However, staff feels that this is the best price that can be negotiated with the Siegs and that the additional cost would certainly be expended through eminent domain proceedings through the courts. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To authorize the acquisition of 2.09 acres for a 4.0 M.G. water reservoir site on the Sieg pro- perty for $8,000 per acre permanent easement, $4,000 per acre for temporary easements and the assumption of all existing assessments over the property to be acquired. Ir 9 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Four Item #3: Major Intersection Street Lighting Report-- The engineering division as eva uate the City ot Eagan's major inter- section street lighting needs in addition to reviewing several requested installations by residents of the community. Presently, the City is billed monthly for energizing costs for seventy street lights at major intersections throughout the community. These monthly enengizing costs are the responsibility of the City's gen- eral fund budget. In 1981, the City spent $8,220 providing energy to these existing major intersection street lights. The 1982 budget allocated $7,000 to provide for the installation of new major intersection street lights throughout the community. Rather than respond on a first request/first response basis for the installation of these street lights, the engineering division has reviewed all requests in addition to evaluating the needs of the City pertaining to other major intersections. The results were reviewed, evaluated and prioritized. The criteria for priori- tizing the requests incorporated the following perimeters: 1. Traffic Patterns: This condition includes the average daily traffic vo ume, peak hour volumes, speed and composition of traffic volumes. 2. Road Conditions: This category includes vertical alignment, orizonta a ignment and visibility of the intersection. 3. Intersection of County Road and City Collector Streets. Attached on pages9 through // is a subsequent priority listing of request-e-d-`an3 required street light locations which incorporates the associated installation and monthly energizing costs based on the above stated criteria. Dakota Electric Asso- ciation, which has the major service area for the City of Eagan, has a policy that if the City provides a greater contribution toward the installation of the street lighting, the monthly energizing costs are less. Subsequently, the report tabulated both the instal- lation and the long term monthly energizing costs for both options. A summary of the total installation and monthly energizing costs are as follows: Requested Overhead Street Lights A. Installation Costs (22 lights) 1. Addt'l City Contribution 2. Limited City Contribution Difference in Capital Expend B. Monthly Energy Cost (22 lights) Addt'l City Part. on Installation Limited City Part. on Installation Difference in Annual Energy Costs $24,870.00 5.070.00 $19,800 115.75/mo or $1,389/yr 218.45/mo or $2,625/yr $1,236/yr Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Five The annual energy cost saving that would be incurred by a greater up front capital expenditure for the street light installations would have a "buy back" of sixteen years, after which the City would be incurring related annual energy cost savings from there- after. Enclosed on page I'Z_ is a location map of the City of Eagan showing the existing major overhead street lights that are presently the City's monthly energy responsibilities and the recom- mended location for new installations. The City would be able to install all 22 street lights with the 1982 budget as approved which would result in higher monthly energy rates. However, with the existing $7,000 budget allocation in 1982, we would only be able to install approximately 30% of the requested street lights if the City wanted to provide a greater capital contribution toward their installation to achieve a reduced monthly energy savings. Therefore, the staff would like direction from the Council as to any change in priority listing and the method of financing to be used for the installation of these street lights. If a greater up front capital contribution is determined to be the most feasible for a long time annual energy savings, this program could be instal- led over a four year period with the capital expenditures budgeted with each subsequent year's budget. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To review the proposed major intersection street light proposal and authorize the installation of street lights in accordance with specific Council direction on financial contributions. 0 150 Watt HPS Street Lights APnendix B U171'I'fCNJ 1i7� .'1'tN(. ` -- lackhawk NJUITTC)4 INSI'AI, M",'j Ptf•1191LY RAIIINS'I'N,.C(75'I Y P4JI9"'Y IU"' INS'1'/U, (T),5'IIf1r1171LY I+A'17 INS'1'IU,.0 )S'I' 1 4 171LY I+A'11: and 1• T.P. $120.00 $9.85 $620.00 $5.50 Silver Bell I Road County Rd 2. T.P. 30 and $165.00 $11.35 $665.00 $7.00 ( Easter in McCarthy 3. T.P. Rd and Hwy. 13 R.C. t $250.00 $8.60 9,950.00 $3.25 Oak Pond 4. T.P. Road and Cliff Rd R.C. $225.00. $9.85 $725.00 $5.50 Lakewood 5. T.P. Hills and Cliff Rd R.C. $225.00 $9.85 $725.00 $ 5.50 Slater and 6. T.P. Cliff Rd $1,075.00 $11.35 $1,575.00 $7.00 Pilot Knob 7. T.P. Rd. and 3aster $225.00 $9.65 $725.00 $5.50 -1 J 0 150 WATT BPS STREET ISGBI'S • . % .APPENDIX B I�['A'I'iON Int .'1' rN(, Sibley NlDi1'i(NJ 8. T.P. INS1'AI. CC ;l' "MulY 1+11'17: IN -21'811 -Mil it PQJMIN 811'1'1 INSTAL Ct).S'I`PYJ171LY 811'17 INSTAL,U)5I' 11 17 ICTIT ,Y RA'17: IHDr. I & & Hwy. 13 R.C. $250.00 $8.60 $1,950.00 $3.25 Pilot Knob 9. T.P. and $100.00 $9..85 $600.00 $5.50 Amaryllis Bladchawk 10. T.P. Rd & Cliff $223.00 $11.35 $725.00 $7.00 Lexington 11. (1) Ave & Wescott Rd. - $165:00 . $11.35 $665.00 $7.00 Fhglert Rd 12. T.P. & County R.C. $60.00 $9.85 $560.00 $5.50 Rd. 31 Shale Rd 13. T.P. and Nicols,' $450.00 $8.60 $1,950.00 $3.25 Keefe Rd. 14. T.P. and Loexi We. $60.00 $8.60 $1,950.00 $3.25 7 I APPENDIX B $220.00 I $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 $60.00 I $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 $60.00 I r $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 150 WATT HPS STREET LI($1TS ;x •',I )P )ITT WescottSq IN:>1'AL O((71' P4117ILY IIA99: INS'1'N,.CSI;I P411711,Y I 15, 5100.00d $985$600.00. $5.50 gescott 1d 16. $60.0059.85 $560.00. $5.50 17. Rd & Eagan Ave. , Avalon Ave 18. & Pilot Knob Rd w O ' Eagan Ind. 19. Rd & Pilot Knob Rd. Ltmar in 20. q$I-IJ5$500.00 & Lone oak Rd. $7.00 Neil Arnr 21 strong Elv & Lone Oak Rd. $11.35 $500.00 $7.00 APPENDIX B $220.00 I $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 $60.00 I $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 $60.00 I r $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 I I CAUON ISlaters Rd 6 Janes St 150 MTP Bps STREET LIGHTS $975.00 1 -.$11.35 $1,475.. 1 $7.00 0 APPENDIX B L.. _ MENDOTA pTS. • _ _ ,a ®=max• •.• �` • Y IF .o c r �� w• 9 � a _ y�. _ // 4.1 • // Rte;! /.. � c•��'q • s. � � - �li r � ..+�- f .,•:G epi — .. - 1 / Q 23 24 Offyf �� l �4K'P 26 211 2 i•I_., L fix.: d n. _ �"ie w G 4 :s....':.. 4.11. ��.�" •f r �; e � v i r.ms��`Y.'§'Y. _O _ ; R`s7�..J � 7"4- NF In 36. [! (� APPLENOSEYDU6Np j iJ ti I vALLEY rJ I • INSTALLEII OVERHEAD.STREET LIGHTS 150 HPS-400MV i E RECOMMENDED OVERHEAD STREET LIGHT REQUESTS 150 HPS RESIDENTIAL'LIGHTING. --" - _ - - P!EA '•SERVICES. AREA WITHIN BORDER&INES _.:. 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Six 0 There are eight items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council. If the City Council desires to discuss any of the items in further detail, those items should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Addi- tional Items unless the discussion required is brief. ST. JOHN NEUMANN CHURCH/COMBINATION GAMBLING LICENSE A. St. John Neumann Church for Combination Gambling License for September 12, 1982 -- An application was received and processed for St. John Neumann Church to consider a combination gambling license to be used at St. John Neumann Church on September 11 and 12 for the annual fun fair. The combination license is in order for consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the combination gambling license application for St. John Neumann Church. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RENEWALS B. September Conditional Use Permit Renewals -- There are four (4) conditional use permit renewals to be processed for the month of September. Those renewals are as follows: 1. Carl Case, 540 Diffley Road, for a repair shop in the garage 2. Michael Neisius, 4855 S. Robert Trl., for a storage and repair for up to ten vehicles. 3. E. L. Murphy Trucking, 3303 Terminal Dr., to allow a trailer for office use. 4. Walter Wosje, 3945 Pilot Knob Road, to permit the raising of ten head of cattle on 3 acres. All conditional use permits are being reviewed by the Building Inspection Department and, unless otherwise noticed by the City Administrator, are found to be in order. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the conditional use permit renewals for the month of September. 13 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Seven SIGN PERMIT RENEWALS C. Annual Sign Permit Renewals -- The Chief Building Inspector has completed a review of all existing signs throughout the City of Eagan. The following sign permits are due for renewal: 1. 115 ground signs 2. 238 building signs 3. 57 business pylon signs 4. 42 advertising signs 5. 15 temporary advertising signs. Chief Building Inspector Peterson is also recommending that due to the depressed market for homes and Eagan's large lot inventory there are no temporary advertising or real estate "for sale" signs that should be denied. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the annual sign permits in the categories as described above. RESOLUTION/RAHN PARK GRANT D. Resolution for Rahn Park Grant -- As previously authorized by the City Council, the resolution "authorizing filing of applica- tion and execution of grant project agreements to develop open space under the state natural resources fund" is now in order for consideration. This resolution authorizes the filing of the appli- cation and is estimating of developing Rahn Park as outlined in the park master plan in the amount of $159,500. The amount of the grant requested from the Department of Energy, Planning & Devel- opment Office of Local Government from the natural resources fund is estimated to be $78,979. Enclosed on pages i S through /& is a copy of the resolution for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the resolution which authorizes the filing of the application and execution of grant project agreements as previously authorized by the City Coun- cil. /4 CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FILING OF APPLICATION AND EXECUTION OF GRANT PROJECT AGREEMENTS TO DEVELOP OPEN SPACE UNDER THE STATE NATURAL RESOURCE FUND. WHEREAS, the State Natural Resources Fund provides for the making of grants to assist local public bodies in the acquisition and development of outdoor recreation projects, and WHEREAS, the City f Eagg desires to develop certain land known as Fahn Park? w is land is to be held and used for permanent open space, and WHEREAS, in order for the proposed project to be eligible for approval, there must be proof that it is part of a comprehensive outdoor recreation plan and 5 -year capital improvement, and WHEREAS, the City of Ean has an original or revised 5 -year action program whicag h includes Rahn Park, and WHEREAS, it is estimated that the cost of developing said interest(s) shall be $159,500.00, and WHEREAS, upon project approval the Cityof Eagan must enter into formal grant project agreements wit t e state for the specific purpose of developing Rahn Park. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA: That an application be made to the State of Minnesota, Department of Energy, Planning and Development, Office of Local Government for a grant from the Natural Resource Fund (Minnesota Laws, 1979, Chapter 333, Section 31, Sub- division 3, paragraphs (c) and (d) for an amount presently estimated by to $78,979.00 and the applicant will pay the balance of the cost from other funds available to it. That the Director of Parks and Recreation and City Administrator are and directed to execute and file A) such application and B) the 5 -year action program with the State of Minnesota, Department of Energy, Planning and Development, Office of Local Government, and to provide additional information and furnish such documents as may be required by said Department, and C) to act as the authorized correspondents of the applicant. I: That the proposed development is in accordance with plans for the allocation of land for open space uses, and that should said grant be made, the applicant will develop and retain said land for use(s) designated in said application and approved by the Office of Local Government and the National Park Service (NPS). 4. That the United States of America and the State of Minnesota be, and they hereby are, assured of full compliance by the applicant with the regulations of the Department of the Interior, effectuating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That the City of Eagan enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Energy, Planning and Development, Office of Local Government to provide such grants as are specified in numbered paragraphs 1 and 2, above, for the year(s) 1983 - 1985. That the Ma or of the Cit of Ea an and the City Administrator are aut orize and directed to execute sucE agreement and any supplemental agreements thereof. On a motion by , seconded by with all members voting in avor. DATED: ,1982 City Council City of Eagan Beatta Blomquist, Favor CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Eagan at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of , 1982 as shown by the minutes o�1U meeting in my possession. Gene Van Over eke City Clerk FT 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Eight 3.2 ON -SALE BEER LICENSE FOR JAMES MOORE E. James Moore for 3.2 On -Sale Beer License/Umpires Association for 9-18 and 9-19 -- An application for a 3.2 on -sale non -intoxi- cating malt liquor license for James Moore representing Etter Umpires Association is in order for consideration. The license will be granted for September 18 and September 19 for a tournament scheduled at Univac Softball Field. The application has been re- viewed by the Police Department and found to be in order for City Council consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the 3.2 on -sale beer license for James Moore representing the Etter Umpires Associa- tion. PROJECT #361 F. Project #361, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Wescott Road Sanitary Sewer) -- In response to a petition received on June 1 and presented to the Council on June 15 by several de- velopers/property owners of the area around the intersection of Wescott Road and Lexington Avenue, the City Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report providing for the extension of the trunk sanitary sewer from Deerwood Drive through the Wind - crest Addition to this intersection. This report has now been completed and is being presented to the City Council for their review. Staff intends to conduct an informal informational hearing with the affected property owners prior to the scheduled public hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project #361 (Wescott Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer) and order the public hearing to be held on October 5, 1982. k7 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Nine PROJECT #365 0 G. Project #365, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Northview Meadows First Addition - Trunk Sewer & Water) -- In response to a petition received on July 15 and presented to the Council on July 20 by the developer/property owner of the proposed Northview Meadows First Addition, the City Council authorized prepa- ration of a feasibility report to provide for the easterly extension of the turnk water main along County Road 30 and the northerly extension of trunk sanitary sewer from Wilderness Run Road to ser- vice this proposed addition. The development of the internal lateral utilities will be performed privately by the developer. However, this development is dependent upon the extension of these referenced trunk utilities. This report has now been completed and is being presented to the Council for their review. It is staff's intention to hold an informal informational meeting with the affected existing property owners along County Road 30 prior to the formal public hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project #365 (Northview Meadows First Addition - Trunk Sewer & Water) and order the public hearing to be held on October 5, 1982. CONTRACT 80-21 H. Contract 80-21, Final Payment/Acceptance (Blackhawk Lake Outlet) -- The City has received a request for final payment by the contrac- tor, Lametti & Sons, Inc., through the consulting engineering firm together with a statement of compliance with all plans and specifi- cations and a recommendation for acceptance for perpetual main- tenance by the City of Eagan. Final inspections have been performed with representatives of the Public Works Department. All items are in order for consideration of final acceptance at this time. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the ninth and final payment to Lametti & Sons, Inc., for Contract 80-21 (Blackhawk Lake Outlet) in the amount of $14,732.41 and accept for perpetual maintenance. /t 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Ten CONTRACT 81-10 I. Contract 81-10, Final Payment/Acceptance (Tomark 1st Addition, et al, Streets) -- The City has received a request for final payment to Pine Bend Paving, Inc., for the completion of Contract 81-10 providing for the installation of streets to the Coachman Land Company 1st Addition (Project #323B), Safari at Eagan (Project #324B), and Tomark 1st Addition (Project #336B) along with a certi- fication of compliance with City plans and specifications by our consulting engineering firm which is also recommending formal acceptance for perpetual maintenance by the City of Eagan. Final inspections have been performed by representatives of the Public Works Department and have been found to be acceptable. It is now appropriate to issue the final payment to this contractor for this contract. ACTION TO BE final payment 1st Addition, for perpetual CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the seventh and to Pine Bend Paving, Inc., for Contract 81-10 (Tomark et al, Streets) in the amount of $7,072.58 and accept maintenance. I 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Eleven PROJECT 297 0 A. Project 297, Final Assessment Hearing (Blackhawk Lake Outlet) - Continued from July 20, 1982 Meeting -- On July 20, 1982, the City Council held the final assessment hearing for trunk area storm sewer assessments associated with installing the outlet from Black - hawk Lake under Project 297. At that meeting, the City received four formal objections from property owners pertaining to their assessments. Subsequently, the final assessment roll was approved, adopted and ordered for certification to the county with the excep- tion that the public hearing was continued until September 7, 1982 for those four individuals who had submitted written objections at the July 20 meeting. Subsequently, each individual will be discussed separately, as follows: 1. Harry & Pearl Lemieux (Parcel #10-01600-010-05) -- Enclosed on pages ZI through a.7 is the background information pertaining to the reviewer—the written objection as pre- sented to the Special Assessment Committee on August 30. The result of discussion before the Special Assessment Com- mittee resulted in the understanding their appeal of the assessment would be dropped if the City of Eagan agreed to assess only that portion of their property that lies within the drainage district of the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin. This dismissal and special assessment area adjustment would be delineated in an agreement to be prepared by the City Attorney's office and executed by the property owner. If the agreement has not been executed by the September 7 Council meeting, staff recommends that the public hearing be continued until September 21 to allow the details to be worked out. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve a special assessment in accordance with the executed agreement and certify for collection; or, con- tinue the public hearing until September 21, 1982. a SAC 8/30/82 B. PRa= 297, BLACKHAWK LAKE OUTLET - ASSESSMEU OBJ=ON 1. Harry and Pearl Lemieux (Parcel No. 10-01600-010-05) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Enclosed on Pages 7t. through are copies of the letter that was submitted by Mr. & Mrs. Lemieux at the final assessment hearing on July 20, 1982 together with a copy of Notice of Appeal to District Court pertaining to their assessments. Mr. & Mrs. Lemieux contend that less than 40% of their property drains into the Blackhawk lake drainage basin and that the proposed assessment of July 20, 1982 provides no benefit to their property. Enclosed on Page -f%W is an area map referencing the lo- cation of this parcel in respect to the overall assessment area for Project 297. Enclosed on Page M is a topographic overlay of the Lemieux's property actually defining the drainage limits of the Blackhawk drainage basin. Mr. and Mrs. Lemieux's parcel is 10 acres. After applying a 208 credit for future dedication of easements and rights-of-way, 8 acres was included in the assessment for this project. If the actual area that drains into the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin is computed, a gross assessable area would be 5.08 acres. After the applica- tion of a similar 20% credit, the net assessable area would then be 4.06 acres. As can be seen, the Lemieux's property is pretty evenly distributed between two ma- jor drainage basins. The northwestern portion of their 10 acres is located within the Coachman Road drainage basin. In the past, the staff has historically includ- ed the area of the entire parcel if any portion of it was within a drainage basin to be assessed. Subsequently, the entire 10 acres was included within Blackhawk Lake outlet assessment project. Enclosed on Page M is a storm sewer drainage map showing the location of the Lemieux property to the affected drainage basins. STAFF -RECO MENIDATICN Due to the fact that the Lemieux's property is equitably split between two drain- -_ age basins, staff would recommend that the 5.08 acres actually contained within the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin only be used for calculation of assessments associated with Project 297. This would result in a revised assessment of $6,013.00 as compared with the original assessment of $11,848.00 as presented at the final assessment hearing on July 20, 1982. This results in a credit of $5,835.00. How- ever, because this portion of the Lemieux's property does lie within the geograph- ical boundaries of the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin, the staff feels that this property should be included in the trunk area stoun sewer assessments accordingly. The remainder of the property would then be included in some future trunk area assessment when and if major trunk storm sewer improvements were performed in the Coachman Road drainage basin. CCMMENTS X 41 • 0/ LX 9-2b July 20, 1982 11'a Eagan City Council c/o Eagan Mayor Eagan City Hall 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota Dear Mayor and Council Members, I wish to appeal the assessment being levied against our our property listed as parcel 10-01600-010-05. At the first meeting we had last year I was advised that our property is on the North boundary and could go to €et*er assessment. Less than 40% of the run off goes to the South and over 60% drains to the North. The South drainage goes to a pond that is at the Southeast corner of our property and is land locked in to a hill. The North drainage goes to a pond on the Northwest corner of our property and is also locked in by hills. I feel this is a very unfair assessment that will in no way benefit my home or property. I therefore wish to have consideration of this assessment being dropped. Respectfully, �Hacr i Pearl Lemieux C-�°'� HOWARD A. KNUTSONej0 A'rTDRNEY AT LAW / 1 PARKWAY PLACE OC j 101 WEST BUwNSV1LLE PARKWAY BURNSVILLE, MINNESOTA 55M TELEPNONE ��>> 16121 899-X%BOC `i 8 4 .: RESIDENCE !6121 890.1218 Aagust 5, 1982 Mr- E.j. Janoverb-eke, City Clerk City of Eagan City Hall 3795 Pilot Knob _Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Assessment; Storra Sewerproject Blackhawk Lake and Highway 13 Project No. 299 Parcel 10-01600-010-05 -Appeal of said assessment to the District Court Dear 11-r. Vanoverbeke: Notice is hereby given that the undersigned appeals to the District Court, Dakota County, Minnesota from the decision of the City Council of the City of Eagan, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota, rendered on June 20, 1982 establishing an assessment roll in the City of Eagan for the purposes set forth in the assessment roll and especially from the decision of the City Council on an objec- tion made by this appellant at or prior to the July 20, 1982 meeting, to the assessment of $11,848.00 on the following described property owned by the.appellant The objections of this appellant are as follows: 1. There is no special benefit conferred on this property by reason of the project. 2. :Market value of this property is not increased at all. 3. Tc1e assessment is not uniform upon the same class of property. X� a3 Dakota Cou,:ty Dorict Caurt Clerk. • Page Two August 5, 1982 4. The assessment is not proportionate to benefits received. 5. The assessment procedure was not proper. Harr LemieuxIX Pearl Lemieux j Howard A. Knutson Attorney for Appellants 101`West Burnsville Parkway Suite 212 Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 Telephone: (612) 894-8882 -k4 A. Yid . / � �...� -1 R -t2 -1PK. A GB.. � 297 aE� P ' • - ASSrSS ARI 71JB A :r,r. ip4 :fir, B RB FP Pic •ar y ,I� „' R —RnA{: CSC LI ' �� i ...1 _____- ( N -• OUSC IA PFR A � - •fie• / ` p / u Qp CEFIT IT Ll B\ ., LI \` • suaIn \4 it PF R -I / LI LBP. ��R ..a_, tlpp �.,.` >� S .P61Hpp4 II?i1+O a R•1! �� Ii _. F. `R+47r• . ,F NaaehitaE zhNR A /•, GB • r_O.R ,�. I 'aEEN \`r4 /jl ,-1fI A p� rPi.. ` Pte"4 pR9 g' C/( :I ' .3 PF PF 3'2 se•eaa' II RB 1`• iso c: R i A - ' II{I- _•a.r.:r �. FFw- : jl •. �J/ _ P�K R_4 •:.'R:j-'' -Y�w . I�l �• l A •'yl�itae j A" iii 7t� j - Rte. REl".-j •�, ..,,` .:Ce.rr ynol�o-J!•• na;,�:� ( - Oa v: :.o PF -: - r.RrR.-a R•I�_, —.___ R•4 R•4 �,` A '}. �`-4R'4, I •'.°..et- wZ�Ri CSC`-� Cj• I?t`� :'j: , I�_n ( �'qK �• Ft', r.OE. CGS/JtR-l' _vttc � CSC �L.i^tlrLT "'1r4 ` �-P2°- +"�� I R_I --�K :• /w+E ,? N100 �I � ,Q` L"�>E T: ,•`, PK / � � IA• .4a L ''�f ,_ :+.'r` -r 1. i;,v�. - ' I' •� fl .- PENN, r susRl W �• j I \� !�r aq .'•�,.;' A LE "�C�pyp�. ,T' .•N. _ I EAGaN/i� �,YrE E(.•-i/L. '1.. i•L.t RNLR 2 \ IIS A IPF ENTER : ..R •2 (r /eA �` LB i�- `i��''I. R-li�}il`11 1• �^ s_ "'%' _ - --- - -- .._ NR m ;F�L,: •ar ie, i''d F R•I .R.uRt,•YIIJ soN•t l 'A nO%np9r R•3 R:�t I�-rr -- / R -I j , 11 �rl. eQ j A. , !. L r ,••. i ra , R - .,ejl l,, vJ vltsPK yY� A I ✓i A / f iani ;t 'Sf u(iI�Rrori)n� ltrtrgy rt'.t�:+-r., a � t w � r c�F• '`�Y'if•L :. er • 2J • /' ,! 1 � J w'] �., •-1-w E� i •l�[ �tt.� .�.�.yr; •,`� f, l* ] } t'� � A •/ S� t ly.d,'+ �;.0-. ,: Y. �.: !. ,I .. �":,... }Y:•`(_ ,S .t %ri .�•�' II!`�r M A �� , •yB58 � ;, Ll MAKE _ r ! I ^. in �_ %/- �'� PARK c,Ls /I n Ilr rL`{p\ ,R •H-1/0`�/ IL --F �..;�1���'\� M1 -� Il/ •C �71LZ� p`REF� 4CRE5 II - ;jI i /I� D-2 I -�V FD-6'rDmIO- u �� — j f D=11'—x/ D-15 I Eec / ZEKROFA i, it E- R�/ 'CIA TEADS MA S D-1 771T, 21 C-15 ) r' it \l D.S. POST__ II C_18��+'P>]gu•>` \ SERVICE ��/�r�% ..Q +' D-13 / IJADDIT10% 1-m 7 I t7 -D_ .�!I11 io 21 .I E +�*�/\\.% / \. ��iy Pa` /.'C- / \.• /_C"Y21cL' RIDGE F 1— D40 -1 D 18 ` MoD 1 / C-6ra N( �coA' �� T AllC-3 /, -� .�171C �. \IPaEr47 C-10 - X ` s 29, 1 `. •,��`/( �! Dcll Ir 5T zn / II; D-19 ' c 111 �%D-21;7 Y.� jJ�'/ • cErmc�ir`-` J -I Vf.' 'r /•'. �',/ IiS Ir ".:7 - i J -II 1 /A-ACRESMCI 8-39 arvl. •F A 8 Ar �/. /1'q..JLAr� l \,� ' / / ,�. ~ / U lAKF 9 L--BI\.!(t✓` ,I �;'11`I4- � _ 1� r l ..I ' A IS �•_ sseD:*T�ir I"'�, —. `_'LaeKRA.TK - : [a>rR� ..I J-6� %— �%.I� PARK � L1�6R .?elfl / / `w -J-63. 1\ I NO J-5 \B-3 r J _58�J_5 a N, 8-34 A I' �:y A-21,. �J 1 �I � r. RICK q-61 A-23 ..\\ /♦'- 8'35 / _:` J-�6 Loo "' If, �Y r- 8-37 �-36I`�--_►- -f-Y'� �, �-A-31II ' /A_35 I '%� °� c� .. /- F `r 3 �u y I m nd;, 8.9 ._ I-'. :`.....�rw��� i L-7 k li 8-26 I /B�4 2L J-65 �/ J �� 8-25 /B-8 \o�7i y� \ s r 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twelve 2. Henry Englert (Parcel #10-01600-010-50) -- Enclosed on pages 2.11 through 31 is a copy of the background information pertaining to __M _Englert's written objection and staff recommendation as presented to the Special Assessment Com- mittee on August 30. Prior to the Special Assessment Com- mittee meeting, staff received a telephone call indicating that Mr. Englert wishes to withdraw his objection based on the fact that his assessment will be deferred through Green Acres or a Senior Citizen Deferment. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment as established at the July 20 final assessment hearing and order certification to the county for collection with deferment in accordance with either Green Acres or Senior Citizen qualifications. to 0 0 SAC 8/30/82 / B. PRQ7DCr 297, BLACKHAWK LAKE OUTLET -ASSESSMENT OBJECTION 4. Henry Englert (Parcel No. 10-01600-010-50) BACKGROUND INEURMATION Enclosed on Page A is the written objection submitted by Mr. Englert at the final assessment hearing of July 20, 1982. Also enclosed on Page aV is an area location map referencing this parcel in respect to the total assessment area for Project 297. The gross area of Mr. Englert's parcel is 40 acres. After applying a 20% credit for Potential future right-of-way and easement dedication, the net assessable area was 32 acres (1,393,920 square feet) which was assessed at the agricultural rate of 3.0 per square foot resulting in a total assessment of $47,393.28. Presently, this pro- perty is in Green Acres. Mr. Englert is also requesting senior citizen considera- tion for this assessment. tuy.uszsvowe e, Lin, 0 A c Because this property lies within Blackhawk Lake Drainage Basin and is subsequently benefited by major trunk improvements to this drainage basin, the staff feels that the assessments as determined and levied are fair and equitable. Mr. Eaglert's request for senior citizen consideration would fall under current ordinance #66 which provides for deferment of assessments for senior citizens. However, because the property is presently Green Acres, it is automatically deferred in accordance with the same conditions as our Ordinance #66. Subsequently, staff recommends ends that the assessments as levied at the final assessment hearing of July 20, 1982 remain as is. '�'3 a9 Pie ,v 0 q -2f _ ..--- -- _ ...._..e- .._/i erc �j%r LJ ,'s' � Te —f •�t Q.� O!✓d�c �r •� s e. e— —yam �1 2L 16 PFdL17ICT 297 ASSI;SSt�1r AREA �e -le_LA A ,.. R .11� J ..r.��,, CSC w 1 'AnA ! 11 , Ll :.I '--------- A--- -----A ..- �_, !/ ` • ' 4Vy / I t Ivor r CSC , Y s4 in� FilIl j �c s ♦ FI - LI _ _ rEr ICE TER \ • I \ /` 0 \ PF i !F LI ° i�1 _ ;,•� CSC 4.• 8':0 <)t-rr _ s "t `:". °- ' -1 LSP E w I r� 1��.i L_a d PF L `\/\., i 'Pn[BaWI itrTi' •�' pi.1 xv.'-a_N�IIE r- ' A e G9 �`� '" 1 - EEx R-4 -_{4 f I a R -3.E 1/�1/Il?III PF.. pK.• I'r77 L A;4 q .'iM RB n i ° PF II i1 -T pF . iii R i f;" • PA B h8 �•-ir�1 ` PF / r I b PF rn R-4 1^I•• .p? u• =e 17 C drowns I Ql.� _- Pia. ' P°"��`r' R-4 i� AJ _X`i<oaj A i `T 4RyY",� R '•I '� X4.1- ,° •:Sex Sxd2�D_I n,.. � - t=,u""'="r xE �7t �� .-�tia ' MINI • � �,h iPF ...: - ( � R q _ ` R Imo. p� rK. CSC '' F L L r4Y_ R-4 R•4 1' �y�j! h ' �ri� R•4 -?� ( i�.)raS� I�'I. t. >60, .t6S41 ^•' tic •,J' CSC NIDN �• •,I \ \` ` t�l _ j`PK Ir. 1 -RY . R IArr brr' suaNl .tAaG _ ^.y�+..•e W 111a �� •�- c ` A i .r ar „', A w�;. :'I, EAcnr✓i� .in , R•..: RLE! _�— _�-�� J�� J. dtr ts R_I "_:.�. "_-,._�R_3— N A IP rrsr ill• ^- C A `. LB R•z I , ,,1• !? �}: �' ::.car . R-1 03 NIML,N/Jat130M'\.: er _ r s-Zllr��c- aJ R•) . ,, y '1 % � -' l r -, � y3 tet. I I i� .. 1� 6, ✓.� , y L j r.., J rJr , R L/TLyV�''"�'��y�� 4 i, J' V,.. ��( . ly PK 4' ,x••31 R l "r`?--' II A A , /� ) w4SorFa.4.th(Y•"�_AF - V���I^wwN:)�v� .y.#� '�. • es�- r ,�:''+' ISSs f�Sf �' '�'��%.�,-Y.�'<TY jf'T•)rr.. !S�4, FA �-•. RIA31 A?=L-c5y A A' 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirteen 0 3. David Ashfeld (Parcel #10-02100-010-02) -- Enclosed on pages 3 through 35' is a copy of the background information pertaining to --Mr Ashfeld's written objections submitted at the final assessment hearing on July 20. Mr. Ashfeld questions the benefit received to his property by the trunk storm sewer project and has expressed concerns of his lack of knowledge pertaining to this project. Research by staff has indicated that this particular parcel was inadvertantly omitted from the mailing list for individual notification of the public hearing for Project 297 that was held on May 20, 1980. Based on the written objection received at the night of the final assessment hearing combined with a techni- cal defect in the public hearing notification process, it is staff's recommendation that this parcel be eliminated from the final assessment roll for Project 297 as presented on July 20 and that this project be reassessed in the near future in accordance with all proper notification procedures combined with a property appraisal analysis pertaining to benefit. The Council should consider whether the future assessment should retain the 1980 trunk storm sewer rates or if they should use current trunk area storm sewer rates for the new hearing process. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and cancel the assessment as proposed for Project 297 presented on July 20, 1982 and order this property to be reassessed. 3:Z . k' • E SAC 8/30/82 "• 7 Y� 1 • " I •' 7 • 2. David Ashfeld (Parcel No. 10-02100-010-02) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Enclosed on Page is a copy of the written objection received frau Mr. Ashfeld regarding his trunk area storm sewer assessment from the above -referenced project. Also enclosed on Page i'If is an area location map referencing this parcel to the assessment area for this project. Mr. Ashfeld's gross area for this parcel is 16.95 acres. After applying a credit of 20% for potential future rights-of-way and ease- ments, the net assessable area was 13.27 acres (577,989 square feet) which was as- sessed at the agricultural rate of 3.4fi per square foot equaling his assessment of $19,652.00. a • is •11 •: This parcel lies within the drainage basin benefited by the outlet fxan Blackhawk Iake. All assessments were based in accordance with existing City policies. Therefore, the staff feels that the assessment as levied is fair and equitable and should remain as is. 33 P. ,;L I i #0Z q-2,0 O o A sHFr`n —A 1, .e— �^• '�SJ�z j ,I �owG3-2ti J'vG P2oTzLi -H 0997 ;I Lo k., c AIV en L„ oa L--,-� Noo ,I -A /`iz>7 -r nl (J . v V I c f�'j('j�I � d l • wcE A PRAT T 297 — ASSGSSMUjT ARE71 • e `•• .. - •_ . i . _. .LI ._ I � ,w: � 4 ny°.Jr1 Lr 8 RB.: ,.. , csc ..i-;• •'• MOUS 14L\.Ppq ��� A ' BLOT sc _ FI ..`• LI •-SLI I L 1 • \\ LI .fl ii . �- GE .OEc�..:Er PF LI • • i /l'e. ``I ~CSC \ e._�.r0a,e,� . 3 A I e LI 7° IE rm .• ,... "§, `1 �. 1PEl84Wl I 'F /eILUNGaLE ,y - o I_— -RB �\� I I 'REFY R_4 �. �j J D a R-3 :! Pi.. II Ptt.' I .......... pF - . - R /; J` '/ NB R•3 - ea.. ts ic. PF ,� N9 _tCs•I :9do:EmRB l,; B- aewODL i / '-Iry-Lv PF„ L •.\ 1 ..- ,� A R-4 —t.In:. I— N. _ 3C `PK •:'- I'" .I�j�(r'�!/ ! y� R- ..rj `tel• R`•- yD!=L A 3f MEIWf� -�'1 � iA ify� , E n� PF— I Ry 4 S 1 YE4r 1 CJ✓l C V ~ R R•4 R•4 I SUu TR 4 xganOf J atl. r 1E7 t -• , ! !F i/�'ll ` \gree S. � p. CSC^ ..tI.SApI •� � tsnrc - I CSC C� �•?'Y� �`�.��ti 0 £Pt='L_ � `wl ( R-I � 'lK•` ••+H,mr .. 41p6 tt�;,I \ r •� � - • I -�` pl(' _ 1 IAS . D•• L It j9i' ..+. iT'r �lYlwr"C'-. T 54{•RI � . CQKf '•rRr!1 [x r r,! I LE y �`,I\.L`oa�. it ..� Es4cse✓i� -moult R.bL -" IWE J �- Ir A ` .' "J J .k•1 LA -'ItL : - `\ ;` IB ; !_ TIVE' RB it I A 4 "r A 4 A r. r(%--J .\.1..,7:.-L.. q.lvR:3- 2 /\' 'I A . PF is -u1TLR R-2 rl%-•1 / _ �j`Fa _ R•I 7A _) r1 r� LB i[ ®1 1;�'-r,Rl �'_ 'K)r-•A - R-1 // w�R:EfLr . AI IL. R 1 nw.Lur,•y'VSOw •� , __ / 'A `;..'.: • a R-3 R'S y !�'s.h .rl �1 �:. :- 0:1rrOR J _Tlnr I�•�?w0, i '.rI '. A A K p, � � � vJ.r•t R 1 �I4 is .i' Y rf lY PK .. ` /�• A A n I,, V M 3.-r r^+.0 _ 1' �, Y J . • J x. '��,J J ri „ > PK f II - - . Ea-• J tJY \ ' '� , �f 4�.' 1\`,`J •Yhi'L -r„' X.. v{Y'J.ri II��, • it w ., \...;tIN••, J F.-_W i,�i:_'r ^J '� -JJ�xb. I T�"T'j. �_3 yuy: • f S' �y'.=N Sr = AI • ., r J. _. I JH y..J JJ �. ..4 ) ar .J_'"I 1 _ T'.I.' C �• I /,� R-IA 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Fourteen Pi 4. James Horne (Lot 7, Block 1, Kings Wood Addition) Horne Development Corporation (Lots 1-6, 8-10, Outlots 1- 3, Kings Wood Addition & Parcel 10-02100-010-01) -- Enclosed on pages 3-7 through +6 is background informa- tion pertaining to Mr. Horne's written objection presented at the July 20 final assessment hearing. Mr. Horne objects to the defect in the public hearing notification process and as to the benefit received by his property from this project. In researching the public hearing notification mailing list, it appears that these parcels were also inad- vertantly omitted from individual notification of the May 20, 1980 public hearing for Project 297. Mr. Horne has requested that a formal property appraisal and analysis be performed to determine benefit to his property in rela- tionship to total amount of assessments levied. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and cancel these parcels from the final assessment roll as presented on July 20, 1982 and order these parcels to be assessed under a future project in accordance with required procedures combined with performing a property appraisal analysis. 3G 0 0 SAC 8/30/82 I: •>1 M� P � •8ti7 181 •: �7y,1 ��+ and Arvella Horne (Parcel No. 10-02100-010-01 and King's Flood Addition I:tiT la:J: �� Enclosed on Page 3?k4 is a copy of the written notice of objection that was sub- mitted by Mr. Horne at the final assessment hearing held on July 20, 1982. En- closed on Page iyAcis a referenced location map showing the relationship of these Parcels to the overall assessment area for Project 297. Mr. Horne's first cbjeo- tion pertains to a procedural requirement pertaining ni ng to notification of public hearing for the project which was held on May 20, 1980. This contention is correct in that these parcels were inadvertently omitted from the official individual par- cel notification for that public hearing. However, formal notices were published in the legal newspapers and this area is, in fact, included within the proposed and designated area assessment for Project 297. Their second objection pertains to trunk area storm sewer assessments against pro - �that "can contain its present and future water drainage". Enclosed on Page s the location of this property in relationship to the drainage basin and existing storm sewer facilities that presently service this property. The present pond QP -5) that is contained within portions of Mr. Horne's and Horne Development Corporation's property presently has a positive storm seer gravity outlet prcvi- ding direct drainage into Blackhaak lake. The gross acreage of parcel 10-02100- 010-01 is 27.59 acres. 7/10 of an acre was deducted for the existing pond (JP -5) and a 20% credit was applied for potential future right-of-way and easement dedi- cations. This resulted in a net assessable area of 21.51 acres (936,975 square feet) which was assessed at the agricultural rate of 3.4C per square foot. This resulted in an assessment figure of $31,857.17. All lots within the King's Wood Addition were assessed at the single family/agricultural rate based on their ac- tual square footage. These assessments ranged from $442.00 per lot to a nk-wimlml of $3,213.00 per lot for Outlot 3 (2.17 acres). If Mr. Horne will not agree to a waiver of the procedural requirement of individual public hearing notification, the City should pursue a new public hearing process: with a new final assessment hearing. However, because the property owned by Mr. Horne, or Horne Development Corporation, lies within the drainage basins benefited by the Bladchawk lake Outlet and due to the fact that the pond lying within this property (JP -5) has a positive storm sewer gravity outlet into Blackhawk Iake, the staff feels that the assessments should remain as determined and presented at the final assessment hearing held on July 20, 1982. o 3-7 0 0 �L9 .45- .x2fv ,ea� 14W.e ij ,e z/ui 3v PRaTECI. 297 -04EI' A _.. • _ _I. _ .LI - .. A$$}'$$JvjQ�1'1• AR13F1 48 B' 4 A .cA! ab "sI R -'FtR4 1.J �y/•' Cs6 LI ,• INDUS IAAmor .PGR / IVy V CExr \\ ..Rc I. GB. pFL p (p LI _ �� da q.Lr jcE � [' R -r- .._ 1 LI \` v LTTa3 °y x94Yp' it '' 1i, P .zFi�h^ •� PF LI�� csc q\ BDw I Yom` � t , sC PF \• � � LI{E LBP . �^�r�x•�., , i. � R -b / PF L \' _ s _?ELa,uN. 'I-Rt4T*' A - GB g ��...� I I - EExR-4 A C R-} R8 •I/I Qf� PP v 11 1 PF.. li PK. pF R /•:I a� by mx c I Ipr: L e a • . NB PF RB IIB ) :Ee?!I oow ux - \ is • i . RB • 1 PF _ o. yy('i -. V wof• p _s.lw i. PFS• '!�'' '\. �JJ- ri-i�, �y''s N R'4 Pia:. E�v. R:1 . ,pK - - .` PK ` sz - I 1 . _ , FiiC_ PF IJ•RI `\\ ifi C •fPF .. .: /• __..... R 1� R•4 R•4 I 9 � i t.Icixv9''K x pp YG C?M 1 nwa rc�,J1 \ ADDJma K \ �� PK i II A�1'h S,'q� '•+I�1`'' `- i' ,. \\d• r $1i•RI � L4N- .SAR� , " '•n'Y't, L%',' A��•c°' E]ecae✓id •°"L IR-+"'' "'Y �RtiE! W -I - / Il.—�\..q.,'•r}y _:.w�._oz Z - � I PK �- - MR RB c A A'\ A 41A�.�.J.\...` ; R.I '-- 1 A rPF_r rrsr R i Z c A > \` I LR RIMILR IJWSOM \'. 1: % 11.E Y�D�^JII Y R.} I PK~ sLnt ✓ / A ff ! R {\.. I. .]r/ !,!.e .fel %::" �.. •7,•':� R alta' �2 I I �: ..�_y .,,. ;... •�"PN ,.r�L/Fi,tv..1^.•a:°rRa� li' r 1Y A 4 / �./� ' lfglgs4t•4.1.WY'�'�iJ'X ��T�"r]vP7i<�� - nr• ;. PIf YI I - = f>''„tc �.1; f r� \\`"�,1J h''i d• r:. _[A:l ,<! • sl •/-.: I J 'l J+ J .S-Iu t./ 'Y ( f .] !• I, '1J lJ -_.I•N y l lry:r,'r J .: +! y. J. J.1�`.r. J dNJ•iruQ r /C' 14�/-c}`� j D'4�' L' I t. 7 I •�:::•' D 14 f �_ • ._L -=` PARR .. •w%n�r I t ..—_- _.ILD= `•`', - -J �- - - LAS U S POST. I->� C mp'yrp, SERVICE I={ �C4%' —` > -18 D-13 •il /SIf ! RAIIRA: I._-•-t� I ._'�r `�1/I \ I 4, C. > )r {.jR_ /:% EFFR I ' ' °'4 °--22_- / C 20 7�^1y16�i--I' - Lownorli _ �-.. C -?"j �u �p RlocelIt � 011 1 D.20f Y L � � , r .Ax.p• Doo 1 -_ _ _ IC -8 /—��,'�.'-SUPRE. 5-'Lex,Srv�L ,i iI `C-3 ;�/ //`;.� C-10: 'N RT$' C- 3" 11; 30 tl-29' �I ! \rMLL ` -w Ndr¢5-IISTN�2RP � ;+I�!� �i .7' I� S moo:. I .._aa,� . 1 D-19 _ LD -23 I Li \y=28. II D-2 -5 I i _ - 'f-7-jrY�-=- \ J-12 'A �-S.L\a•=XI/ROSP_' 'iIQ� _ -�ti �l� _-� SC ^z �� 9 C I� J -6J-6 1�= BAA < lYl.-���°��I;ir. •� . ' J'4 --_--J-63 ��J-62 \ } M. AUMLE 1 `/ 211, B_3 �J '='/ �_~(J-6• J -SQA I '','' % E.1 CK pf 13-6 FAQ �r\A-213 � \1 L -4 t. j Ip -31 r;�/A-35 ' c°� o,•� _Y.._tlgFs - (`Y L-7 >Y�) r. Lig-g !1, �.. � 3' ! •� /y-�9 26 I /71 �'4jLL_2' aN ti.lK_:_: .: I J-65 zZ %L -25,j \�D/ . 1y I B-24`.. ---8-23 \`�1../t I/ B\0�' A;,;�„a eia v^" :L�p•'� mai, `s' I, /..,/� r.�.;� ' �•!,� / 1 /w E t r' T= ; L• :- L'13 13 \� A-33.'/IA-34 x9.27 L ��..':-�' i�e-11 �j8121 1"14 L. n., 9 /'SIAge,. L-11 =� .•,% ICE(/= ' ly 'OIL9 23' % :.,.L4x _ "jr•I.e..� 1; L e P / AwJS LL, - )+jr >•A�_ a ' r ^r" /_ -I >,:� 381 L__._r_,..8-31 ',e /B-2! Bs' n_- -`� 1: 2--.�— 2 I ` 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Fifteen VACATION OF PONDING EASEMENT B. Vacation of Ponding Easement - Lot 12, Block 9, Beacon Hill Addition -- The City had received a request from the owner of Lot 12, Block 9, Beacon Hill Addition, requesting that a 1975 quit claim easement document which acquired ponding easement rights over what was then unplatted property be vacated due to the fact that it has subsequently been incorporated within the official platting of the Beacon Hill Addition. This previous easement was discovered through a detailed title search of the property. The revised ponding easement as dedicated with the Beacon Hill final plat satisfactorily incorporates the required ponding easement limits. Staff has not received objections to this proposed original easement vacation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve or deny the vacation of the ponding easement acquired in 1975 from Blackhawk Park, Inc., that presently exists over Lot 12, Block 9, Beacon Hill Addition, with a condition that the existing ponding easement dedicated as a part of the Beacon Hill Addition remain in full force and effect. PARCEL 10-02500-021-25 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING C. Parcel 10-02500-021-25 (Project 241), Final Assessment Hearing (Trudi Johnson) -- On February 26, 1982, Dakota County District Court ordered the City of Eagan to vacate the original assessment of $32,323.61 as levied against Parcel 10-02500-021-25 under the ownership of Trudi Johnson as levied under Project #241. The court order indicated that the benefit conferred upon this property does not exceed $11,300. Therefore, because the City has vacated the original assessment against this parcel in total, a new assessment roll for this property was presented to the Council on August 3 with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 7. Enclosed on page 4 �Z is a copy of the final assessment break- down as revised to concur with the district court order of the maximum amount of assessments against this property. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for parcel 10-02500-021-25 (Trudi Johnson) for Project #241 in the amount of $11,299.86. +I 0 0 7O: ANN GDERS, SPECIAL ASSFSSMFNf CLERIC FROM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: AUGUST 17, 1982 RE: PARCEL No. 10-02500-021-25, REASSESSMENT HEARING (TRUDI JOHNSON), PROJECT 241 In accordance with Dakota County District Court Order dated March 3, 1982, the original assessmend levied at the final assessment hearing held on September 24, 1980 for Project 241 pertaining to the above -referenced parcel in the amount of $32,323.61 was vacated and set aside with a judgment determining that the maxi- mum amount of assessments benefiting this property is $11,300.00. This was based on the determination that the existing 25 acre parcel is undevelopable beyond the existing dwelling unit that presently exists. Subsequently, the following recalculated front footage and area figures should be used in determining the new assessment roll as follows: 1. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area (3.35 acres) at $590/acre = $1,976.50 2. Trunk Water Area (3.35 acres) at $590/acre = 1,976.50 3. Sanitary Sewer Lateral Benefit from trunk (187.43 L.F.) at $10.75 per L.F. = 2,014.87 4. Water main lateral benefit from trunk (187.43 L.F.) at $9.00/ L.F. = 1,686.87 5. Sewer and Water Services (one pair) at $605.01 per pair = 605.01 6. Street Residential EcTuivalent (187.43 L.F.) at $16.22/L.F. = 3,040.11 T13TAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $11,299.86 These assessments should be spread over 20 years at 8% interest for any unpaid balance in accordance with Council direction at the time of the original final assessment hearing for Project 241. Please insure that all notices are published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owner no later than August 20, 1982. Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works cc - E. J. VanOverbeke, Finance Director Paul Hauge, City Attorney No. 10-02500-021-25 4� 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Sixteen PROJECT 307A FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING D. Project #307A, Final Assessment Hearing (St. Francis Woods 2nd Addition - Utilities) -- On August 3, the final assessment roll was presented to the Council providing for the installation of utilities in the St. Francis Woods 2nd Addition. Enclosed on page is a summary tabulation showing the final assessment rates as compared to those quoted in the feasibility report pre- sented at the public hearing of September 16, 1980. Notice of the final assessment hearing has been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners. To date, staff has not received any objections pertaining to these assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #307A (St. Francis Woods 2nd Addition - Utilities) and authorize certification to Dakota County to be spread over 5 years at 12.5% interest. 43 0 0 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 307A SUBDIVISION/AREA: St. Francis Wood 2nd Addition - Uti.litieS FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: . SeptEmber 7, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES Area 316.84/lot 335/lot Laterals 1319.63/lot 1260/lot QX Service 307.33/lot 250/lot O Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM ® Area 670/64/lot 670.64/lot ® Laterals 1274.91/lct 1230 lot NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 19 lots NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 years RATE OF INTEREST: - 12.5% SANITARY J Area J Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Grading/ Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $178,006.97 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-4 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 9-16-80 +t FINAL F. R. RATES RATES 316.84/lot 335/lot 2301.48/lot 3130/lot 307.33/lot 250/lot 610.85/lot 596.05/lot 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Seventeen 0 PROJECT 324A FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING E. Project #324A, Final Assessment Hearing (Safari at Eagan - Utilities) -- On August 3, the final assessment roll for the above referenced project was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 7. Enclosed on page 4. (o is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compared to those quoted in the feasibility report as presented at the public hearing held on March 17, 1981. Notice of the final assessment hearing has been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners.;, To date, staff has not received any objections pertaining to these assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close approve the final assessment roll for Project Eagan - Utilities) and order certification to collection over 10 years at 12.5% interest. 4s the public hearing, #324A (Safari at Dakota County for 0 PROJECT NO: 324A u FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING SUBDIVISION/AREA: Safari at Eagan - Utilities FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: Sept. 7, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report WATER FINAL F.R. FINAL F.R. RATES RATES SANITARY RATES RATES Area(change in . $715/ac NAArea zoning) Laterals $17.241/L.F._ $22.87/L.F. ® Laterals. $12.875/L.F. $22.85/L.] Lj Service // GiaS��ase F1 Service ElRes. Lat. Benefit/Trunk Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area 5.610/SF. 5.61fi/SE ® Laterals $28.934/L.F. 29.38/L.F. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 5 STREETS��nn // GiaS��ase F1 Surfacing ElRes. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 years RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $280,888.40 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-4 PUBLIC HEARING DATE:_ March 17, 1981 m $14.27B/L.F. $10.28/L.F. • Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Eighteen C� PROJECT 328A FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING F. Project 328A, Final Assessment Hearing (Ches Mar East 4th Addi- tion - Utilities) -- The final assessment roll for the above referenced project was presented to the Council on August 3 with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 7, 1982. Enclosed on page 4.4g is a summary tabulation of the final assess- ment rates as compared to the rates quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on April 7, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, staff has not received any ob- jections pertaining to these proposed assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #328A (Ches Mar East 4th Addition - Utilities) and authorize certification to Dakota County for collection over a 5 year period at 12.5% interest. 47 FINAL ASSESSMENT NEARING PROJECT NO: 328A SUBDIVISION/AREA: Ches Mar East 4th Addition - litilities FINAL ASSESSMEENT NEARING: 9-7-82 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. NATER RATES RATES SANITARY ] Area $370.00/lot $370/lot ❑ Area O Laterals $546.31/lot $823/lot EXI Laterals xj Service $398.56/lot $455.50/10 [Z Service ❑ Lat. Benefit/Trunk Fj Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area $379.56/lot $393.00 Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 28 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 RATE OF INTEREST: 1-2•5% STREETS Grad GravvelgB IJase Surfacing, RRes. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $93,270.80 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-4 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 4-7-81 m FINAL F. R. RATES RATES $508.16/lot $729/lot $398.56/lot $455.50/1c $729.95/lot $338.00/lo 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Nineteen 0 PROJECT 329A FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING G. Project 329A, Final Assessment Hearing (Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition - Utilities) -- On August 3, 1982, the final assessment roll for the above referenced project was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing scheduled for September 7, 1982. Enclosed on page 56 is a summary tabulation of the final assess- ment rates as compared to those quoted with the feasibility report as presented at the public hearing held on March 17, 1981. Notice of the final assessment hearing has been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners. As of this date, staff has not received any objections from any of the affected property owners pertaining to these proposed assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project 329A (Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition - utilities) and authorize certification to Dakota County for collection over a 5 year period for laterals and 15 years for trunk storm sewer at a 12.5% rate of interest., M FINAL ASSESSMENT NEARING PROJECT N0: 329A SUBDIVISION/AREA: Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition - Utilities FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: 9-7-82 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES 0 Area Laterals $657.18/1ot $868/lot © Service $397.15/lot $456/l0t Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM ❑X Area Laterals 3.744/sf 3.74�/sf NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: FINAL SANITARY RATES Area F. R. RATE: ® Laterals $731.10/lot $922/lo ® Service $397.15/lot $456/10 E] Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base ❑ Surfacing Res. Equiv. 33 lots, 11.6 acres (ISD#191) $522.84/lot $430/lo NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 years (laterals), 15 years (trunk storm sewer) RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $108,178.86 CONSTRUCTED UNDER TUE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-4 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: WI -9-1 so 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty OLD BUSINESS. CITY HALL EXPANSION UPDATE A. City Hall Expansion Project Update -- Because of the two (2) public hearings that were held on August 31 and September 2, 1982, there is no discussion anticipated by the City Administrator or formal action required by the City Council. However, the item is on the agenda to allow any final discussion by the City Council or public prior to the referendum scheduled for September 14. LAND USE DESIGNATION/EAGLE'S NEST B. Concepts for land Use Changes for the Proposed Handicapped Facility Location in Meadowland Addition (Betty Bassett) -- At the last regular City Council meeting held on August 17, 1982, Betty Bassett appeared asking for City Council consideration to redesignate the land use for her four lots in Meadowland that have to date been approved for a four unit townhouse to be used as a home for the handicapped. There were a number of questions raised by both Betty Bassett and members of the City Council about the original intent of the unisourse planned development for the use of that property and further what more recent approval was regarding the Eagle's Nest home for that location. The City staff was directed to prepare a chronology of the Eagle's Nest Home prior to the September 7 City Council meeting. City Planner Runkle has prepared a memorandum that includes a report prepared by John Voss when Betty Bassett made application for the Eagle's Nest Home dated April 21, 1976. That information is found on pagesS of through 6Z for your reference. Also enclosed are copies off— minutes of the May 5, 1976 City Council meeting, the August 3, 1976 meeting, and September 7, 1976. Those minutes are enclosed on pages 63 through 67 and will hopefully provide additional background in�ormation as tFe City Council reviews this item. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM or a designation for the property Meadowland Addition adjacent to Rahn as a four unit townhouse to be used the Handicapped. SI To approve or deny procedure that is described as lots in Road and currently designated as the Eagle's Nest Home for 0 0 TO: THCMA.S L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 1982 RE: CHRONOLOGY OF THE EAGLES NEST HCME SUBMITTED BY ELIZABETH BASSEiT In reviewing the applications in the Eagles Nest Horne file, the first applica- tion submitted by Elizabeth Bassett was 4-27-76. The City Council on 5-5-76 approved the preliminary sketch plan concept for a 4 -unit townhouse to be used as a home for handicapped in Section 29, Rahn Road. On April 21, 1976, John Voss prepared a memorandum regarding the Eagles Next Herne facility. Two questions he raised in this memorandum are: 1. Is the proposed use suitable for this area, and 2. Will a new hearing be required or is the proposal in keeping with the Unisource Planned Development? Attached is a concept plan of the Unisource Planned Development, or the Mission Hills North Planned Development. In the area of the proposed handicapped facil- ity, the proposed density is single family low density with four dwelling units per acre. Enclosed is a copy of John Voss' memorandum for your review. Also attached is a survey designating the exact area which Elizabeth Bassett proposed to locate her facility in the Mission Hill North Planned Development. Regarding the application submitted by Elizabeth Bassett on July, 1976, the City Council requested that further study be conducted. On August 3, 1976, the City Council reviewed the State law in regard to permitted uses in single family and multiple family areas for physically and mentally disabled persons. Attached are copies of the statute regarding these provisions for your review. The City Council also voted in favor of the preliminary plat for Eagles Nest Home. On September 7, 1976, there was an agreement entered into between Eagles Nest Home and the City of Eagan. This agreement states that any changes in use must be approved by the City of Eagan. If this agreement pertains to a different use than a handicapped facility, a new application should be submitted and processed. At- tached is a copy of the agreement dated September 7, 1976. In the application submitted, the only legal notice prepared and advertised was in regard to preliminary plat approval. Attached is a copy of the certifica- tion of mailing regarding Eagles Nest Hare Notice of Public Hearing. On March 14, 1978, the Advisory Planning Commission held a special meeting of the Advisory Planning Commission to discuss Eagan Hills West Planned De- velopment and Eagan Hills West lst Addition preliminary plat. Mrs. Bassett appeared at that meeting and indicated that plans had been completed for Eagles Nest Hone but that financing has not been completed and that the proponents for Eagles Nest Hone prefer not to change the location as it was located in the Mission Hills North Planned Development. On March 14, the Advisory Planning Commission reconv ended approval of the Eagan Hills West Planned Development and Eagan hills West 1st Addition which is now Meadow- lands with a condition being a satisfactory agreement with Eagles Nest Hare Inc. concerning location of its development on Rahn Road. A separate mo.- tion o-tion on March 14, 1978 stated that Hall moved to reconfirm prior action of the Eagan City Council on August 3, 1976 granting approval to Eagles Nest Hare Inc. for the installation of a development for handicapped persons consisting of four lots numbered 107-110, Block 1, Eagan Hills West 1st S0.- 0 Thames L. Hedges Eagles Nest Home August 26, 1982 Page two 0 Addition. The City Council approved the Advisory Planning Commission's recom- mendation for preliminary plat and planned development approval on April 4, 1978. In reviewing the documentation in the City files, it appears that Mrs. Bassett received approval for the preliminary plat for Eagles Nest Home. However, there had never been a request for rezoning the property other than what was shown in the Mission Hills North Planned Development and then the Eagan Hills West Planned Development in 1978. The entire parcel for the location of the Eagles Nest Home has been in an R-1, Single Family Residential District from the first time the parcel has been zoned. The only change from single family is the area south of Shale Lane which the Advisory Planning Commission and City Council approved for duplex units. In reviewing the chronology and background information, it still appears that the questions that John Voss set forth in April of 1976 are still the ques- tions the City is asking .today in regard to what the underlying zoning of the property is and is anything other than the Eagles Nest Home permitted without a new public hearing. - DCR/jach 6-3 r. -- MEMORANDUM --. TO: City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission FROM: John S. Voss, Planning Consultant DATE: April 21, 1976 SUBJECT: Planning Agenda Items for April 27th Meeting Eagles Nest Homes The petitioners are proposing to construct a 4 -unit townhouse for handicapped persons on the Unisource property on Rahn Road. The property is zoned Planned Development (PD). The use appears suitable for the area, howev.er, the Preliminary Development Plan submitted with the Unisource Planned Development proposed "single family". The proposal was for cluster single family at a density of 4 units per acre. Conventional single fam- ily development is as 2.5 units per acre, therefore, a higher than normal single family density was anticipated (see Exhibit A). A more detailed development (Exhibit B) was also submitted by Unisource with the original Planned Development which shows the sub- ject area as a proposed outlot and not a part of the single family . cluster plat. The petitioner is only requesting preliminary sketch plan and con- cept approvals at the April 27th meeting. Two (2) ba.si.c questions need to be answered at this time: A. Is the proposed use suitable for this area? Planner's Comment: It appears that townhouses as proposed, located etween proposed cluster single family to the north and a proposed park and the NSP easement to the south,would be a compatible use. B. Will a new hearing be required or is the proposal in keepin with the oriqinal Unisource Planned Development? Planner's Comment: The townhouse use was not specifically designated for this area. However, the proposed use is sim- ply attached single dwellings where cluster single family was proposed and the proposed use will not exceed the maximum four (4) dwelling units per acre designation in the Unisource Planned Development. 2. Zoo Area Development Guide A meeting was held with the MetropolitanCouncilstaff on the Zoo Area Development Guide and the Metropolitan Council staff will be preparing a revised report. No action is required by the Planning Commission at this time be- cause the Met Council will not take action until May 13th. 3. Proposed Dakota County Government Service Center For your information, a copy of the Dakota County Planning Depart- ment's evaluation of alternative sites for a proposed Government Service Center is. attached. SS ii u i iii 9 rtlr u �u PD APPLE VALLEY �yD PD of WE aCFNPUO I Z: -�� �' ice./ I ,0 r^MILY ................... . . . 70 PAA hfi 'fl MVIVIUM PCN5171( 191 el, Mai • .. yam«...., ''urvey fori =souHCE conFCHATICH .... Farcel 1 Co"ncing at the Southwest corner orNorthwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township flange 23; thence North along the West line of said Nortel ' t 1/4 a distance of 483.50 feet to the actual point of be-,. ,ginning, hereinafter referred to as point A;.thence continuing North along said Went line a distance ;of 110,00 feet; thence Easterly deflecting'to the right 90 degrees, p distance of 718,00 feet; thence :Southerly deflecting -to the right 90 degrees, a distance of 110,00 feet; thence Westerly deflecting to ithe right 90 degrees, a distance of 218,00 feat to the point of beginning. And reserving the West 133.CO feet for road: -...': - .. Parcel 2 Beginning at point A; thence Southerly.along the West line of Bald Northweet4'l/4 a distance of 100.00 feet; thence Easterly deflecting to the left 90 degreen a distance of.218;00 feet; thence Northerly deflecting to the left 90 degrees a distance of 100.00 feet; thence 'Westerly deflecting to the left 90 degrees a distance of.218.00 feet to the point of beginning. And_reserving the Went 33.00 feet for road.. _ ... Parcel 3 - Cos®eneing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29 Toinnhi 27. Hangs 231 thence North along the West line of said Northwest 1/4 a distance of 151.85 feet to the ectua l' point of be- ginning; thence Easterly deflecting to the right 90 degrees a distance or.180.00 feet; thence Easterly 99.19 feet along a tangential curve concave to the South having a central angle of 17 degrees, 55 ainutes, 47 ascends, and -a radius of 316,98 feet; thence Southeasterly tangent to last described curve a distance of 32,50 feet; thence Northeasterly deflecting to tithe left e0 degrees a distance of 40;00 feet; thence Northerly parallel with said Wast line a dlatanceol feet; thence Northwesterly deflecting to the left 67 degrees a distance of 111,69 Peet to -the Northeast corner of said Parcel 1; thence Southerly parallel with said West line a distance of 230.00. feet to the Southeast corner of said Parcel .2; thence Westerly deflecting to the right.90 degrees a -distance of 218.00 feet to ea id West line; thence Southerly along said West line a distance of 231.65, feet to the point of beginning. And reserving the West 33.00 feet.and the Southerly 40.00 feet for road._• .1 T` �lSaltJSi S SalYey"i - :.� 4'a 7"•`> !tl""'•Y' n. 'i ... :'.l Messy taTm 7/s/76 ..•1..aueaMa tae Preaerty 4lieetbad saeve a 7. .i !sa [We the sasve plat 4 e eeteaet nptuestatten at said survey. 1 �.• •sap v E t - n }: r <+- -• �� r .,�, _Calvin a Badleed Nlae_aR- M ,Ma I ¢' •�"'-'-� I [ )r• l � _ l e. � • a Q eel., !• O 4 O .�nn•n.,a.w- a .. •� . lar.ee - lot. . •. n .ror.r Mn'ie'q•y, "I 'flees I + . 0 Imo' '.�'y''r ••�, ••• . 14t 00 2 "l S 57�1'E'ET tit+; I [ )r• l � _ l 1-4 rer.Kt•-w:• O . •. n 1-4 rer.Kt•-w:• § 462.357 PLANNING, ZONING PLANNING, ZONING be initiated by the Note 1 rt owners as defined Subd. 4. Amendments. An amendment a do Qf affe�atzd P�°may � Yy agency shall be and would be subject to the governing body, the planning agency, or by pe the planning ge Y d the municipalitY• Id. in the zoning ordinance. An amendment Tt there s one, for stlot udyband report and may not be acted ould be requited to advise a referred to the planning agency, a those municipalities which upon by the governing body until it has received the recommendationfromtthepdate of ,sive municipal plan of thea agency on the proposed amendment or until 60 days have elapsed agency. could reference of the amendment without a report by the planning ag .spore of or imOrove the srltod rut the Pta^^i^B^� . ordinance shall pool distriet to oomD1Y w'dt its Suap;ly to cities of the first CltassC1tInn such ciies of ties ams dmentseto avz°nin bee this su tvt- unitY development. pp•Atty. Sion aPP Y be made in conformance with this section but only after there shall have been tiledni of B 1966 office of of city reat estate situate nconsent of 0 within 100 feet of the total con owners of two-thirds guous descriptionsseveral descriptionspurchasing any such contiguous property Public health, real estate held by the same owner or any party within one year preceding the request, and after the affirmative vote in favor thereof by a promoting the P majority of the members of the governing body of any such city. The governing body of late the location, adopt a new zoning dinance h�percentage of lot such city may, by a two-thirds vote of its members. atter hearing. P, 'ae4trea, the density and ordinance without such written consent whenever the whole planning of he c tY or of an of den space r trach industry, board of such city shall have made a survey Mail es of land for trade, not less than ci acres, within which the new ordinance or the amendments or alterations ° od the uses 1 conser- and alterations renders servation, water supply the existing ordinance would take effect when adopted, and shall have considered whether °fir 7lPay to direct sunlight the number of descriptions of real estate affected by such changes sats of the the obtaining of such written consent impractical, and suchi Poi^�hegpropocommission or 1 control or other pure° bibs rt in writing as to whether in its op �,. No regulation may prohibit with planning board shall repo are reasonably related to the overall needs of the community, that comp verning body in any case a public ubdivtston 3, re lations may g° section. The and area. The to existing land use, or to a plan for future land use, and shall have conducted a l numbers, ish shape hearing on such proposed ordinance, changes per of general c)r alterations, irc1 tion at least once each sings, structures or land and toy week shad have been givenbody of the IBM in one distnct may week for three successive weeks poor to such hearing, which notice governing to the time drig these regulations snhaal by place and purpose of such hearing, and shall have reported to the go city territory and recommendations in writin& is and adjustments xt and maps• sty its findings Is to the board of y re ions Lo unin un or town which Subd. 6. Appear and adjustments. upon compliance with any ruts has the conditions I t not in a county our munict- may be taken by any affected Pe appeals and adjustments has the following o or more nonconttgu b the zoning ordinance. The board o[ is suthorized?o controIt he zonti POwers with imposed Y respect to the zoning ordinance: two noncontiguous municiny city 1 To hear adecide appeals where it is alleaedadmin shtrative officer in the ere is an error in any nforce- dzoning regulations. AnY qui he same extent as if such properLY requirement, decision, or determination made by is a ment of the zoning ordinance. county or town board adoP (2) To hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance m ea tan for iaatances where their Strict enforcement ^sedans d ration, ase undue ndt(grhip ant such variances the adoption raft the polis es and stances unique to the individual property with the spirit and intent e of carryonly when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keepingto ning ordinance andthe submit it to the ed for earth sheltered ,n, Subject to' require of of the ordinance. Undue hardship udVariances shall be grantto.inadequate access a zoning ordinance by s direct sunlight for solar energy Ya when in harmony with the and ames� Construction as defined in section 116H.02, subdivision 3, body as the case may appeals and adjustments or the g� r" under the ordinance for the governing be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted r amendmentthereto y hall be adopt, ordinanceThe board of apps �n s land is tThe under rho axone ordinance family Planning agency published in Lha Property in the zone where the affected Pe use he hearing shall be p may permit as a variance the temporarythe case may be may :ahs Prior to the day of the hearing• body as the case may family The board or governing protect adjacent of five acres duelling as a two family dwelling. notaries affecting an oarteahe hetes R ®pose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to p n to lays before the day within 3•rt0 feet of Properties. implement the policy of this state ed wholly or Poatri�ving marled n°Lice, Build. 7. Permitted single family use. In order to trmsopns should not be excluded by the P°cp°aa. determine -War mentally retarded and physically handicappedPe hall any appropria1e records w state the responsible pe Ietmeed group home or foster home serving six �itfewer si single familymresidential lase of e notice and a list of the own a eanicipal zoning ordinances from the benefits of normal residential surroundings, a asted to byted ve mailed notice m . dndicapped Persons shall be considered a pe ,s. The failure to gi tog'_:-koperty for the purposes of zoning. e shall not invalidat t e.P of d 103 subdivision has bee sy § .462.357 PLANNING, ZOMNG I " 9ubd. a. Permitted multi -family use. Unless otherwise provided in any town, munici pal or county zoning regulation as authorized by this subdivision, a state licensed residers-. tial facility serving from 7 through 16 mentally retarded or physically handicapped persons shall be considered a permitted multi -family residential use of property for purposes of ' zoning. A township, municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional use or special use permit in order to assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility, provided that no conditions shall he imposed on the homes which are more restrictive than those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the same zones, unless the additional conditions are necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of the residential facility for the mentally retarded or the physically handicapped, Nothing herein shall be construed to exclude or prohibit residential homes for the mentally retarded or physically handicapped from single family zones if otherwise permitted by a local zoning regulation. laws 1965, a 670, § 7, eff. Jan. 1, 1966. Amended by laws 1969, c. 259. § 1 eff. May 1, 1969; laws 1973, c. 123, art 5, § 7; Laws 1973, c. 379, § 4, eff. July 1, 1973; laws 1973, c. 539, § 1; laws 1973, e 559, §§ 1, 2; laws 1975, e. 60, § 2; Laws 1978, c. 786, §§ 14, 15, eff. April 6, 1978; laws 1979, Ex.Sesa, a 2. §§ 4$ 43. _ Law Review Corommu ries Impact of energy legislation on real estate. Do- syl L Peterson 37 Bench and Bar No. 4, p. 35 (Oct. 1980), Impact of variances David P. Bryden 1977,. 61 Minn. Law Review 769. Land use controls Jerome F. Fitzgerald. 24 Bench and Bar No. Z P. 17 (Feb. 1967). Metropolitan council and land -use planning Robert L Hoffman and Oliver Byrum. Novem- ber—December 1976, 45 Hennepin lawyer 4. Minnesota's Flood Plain Management Act— State guidance of land use controls 1971, 55 Minn. law Review 1163. Subjectivity, expression, and privacy: Problems of aesthetic regulation Stephen F. Williams 1977, 62 Minn Law Review I. Zoning; Minnesota supreme court 197i-1972 1973, 57 Minn. Law Review 940. Library references Municipal Corporations 4601.1. Zoning and Land Planning eee4, 134, 151 ct seq., 351. 354. CJ -S- Municipal COrportions §§ 224. 225. C.J.S. Zoning and land Planning §§ 3, 5 to 7, W, 12 to 14, 16, 65, 67, 71, 97,177, 180 to 184 189. United States Supreme Court Occupancy of one -family dwellings by tradi- tional groups see Village of Belle Tem v, aortas, 1974. 94 S.Cl. 1536, 416 U.S. 1, 39 LEd.2d 797. Zoning, Persons included within single family. see Moore v. City of Fast Cleveland, Ohio. 1977, L 97 S.Ct. 1932, 431 U.S. 494, 52 Ed.1i 531. Index to Notes In general 3 Amendments 4.9 Cmsmuction anti application 1 Extensions 4.6 Hearings 2S Purpose 3.5 104 PLANNING, ZC Note 1 Referendum 4 Review 5 Retionitg 4.7 Validity 'A Validity of ordinen Variants 4.5 th Vaudlty Evidence did not dl. which refused 1 for construction of traffic would have hood and that chum surrounding reside Congregation of Jell 1975, 303 Minn. 79 This section and rezoning by order real estate situated sought to be rezone rational delegation vete persons. O'Br 285 Minn 378, 173 1. Construction ar Enforcement of v is favored where vi lure City of Minn 300 N.W.2d 2. Repeated proses tetras or fines did remedy in enforcing operators a zoning of such store; thus operation of the stc Administration of mental not a propri not be estopped iron ordinance notwidua liance upon prior it ordinance. Frank's Roseville, 1980, 295 Interpretation of tion of law for aria zoning authority, w is not binding on th Statute required adopted before in adopted. and did n nance conform exec that the Plan be ame was amended Su Neighborhoods v. N.W.2d 885. For there to be landowner must de deprived, through a tion of a0 the reasoi v. City of Blaine. N.W.2d 272. The Supreme CO comuue the provisic Ing body may amen, 1969 Amersdment Added the last two sen- tenor to subd. 1 relating to extension of zoning regulations into untneorpooned areas, 1973 Amn'iments, Laws 1973, a 123, art. 5. § 7, was a general authority W ". W Permitting the con - solidation of the terms "vi sages" and `boroughs 'alb the term "Clues" Of the SUbslllatiOn OI the "statutory term cities" for "villages" and/or "hot- OughL" laws 1973, is 379. induded within the purposes for zoning, "conservation of shorelands, as defined in section 105.485,' and added subd. 8 delineating ' the extent of that authority. Laws 1973, a 539, inserted the third sentence of subd. 6(2). Laws 1973, a 559, increased area in which notice must be sent to owner property from 200 ., to 350 feet from the property to which the amend- ment relates in subd. 3, and in subd. 5 substituted "total contiguous descriptions of real estate held by the same Owner Or any Petty Purchasing any - o cntiguous Property within one Year preceding the request" for 'real estate affected" in subd. 5. Laws Amendment. Added subds. 7 and 8. 60, § 3, provides that the act be- came effective the day following final enactment. (Governor's approval April 30, 1975) 1978 Amendtnms- Added "access to direct sun- light for solar energy systems as defined in section 116H.02" within the riot sentence of subd. 1. Added the second sentence to subd. 6(2). 1979 Amendment Added the second sentence to sutld. 1. and the third sentence to subd. 6(2). Laws 1979, EeSess, e 2 did not contain a specific effective date, but did include appropria- tion items. See § 645.02 for method of determin- ing the effective data Cron References Extent of municipal authority relating to shore. i lard devel0 § 105-485. pment beyond state standards, see Zoning and subdivision regulation within Order- l ly annexation areas, sec § 414.068. Law Review Corommu ries Impact of energy legislation on real estate. Do- syl L Peterson 37 Bench and Bar No. 4, p. 35 (Oct. 1980), Impact of variances David P. Bryden 1977,. 61 Minn. Law Review 769. Land use controls Jerome F. Fitzgerald. 24 Bench and Bar No. Z P. 17 (Feb. 1967). Metropolitan council and land -use planning Robert L Hoffman and Oliver Byrum. Novem- ber—December 1976, 45 Hennepin lawyer 4. Minnesota's Flood Plain Management Act— State guidance of land use controls 1971, 55 Minn. law Review 1163. Subjectivity, expression, and privacy: Problems of aesthetic regulation Stephen F. Williams 1977, 62 Minn Law Review I. Zoning; Minnesota supreme court 197i-1972 1973, 57 Minn. Law Review 940. Library references Municipal Corporations 4601.1. Zoning and Land Planning eee4, 134, 151 ct seq., 351. 354. CJ -S- Municipal COrportions §§ 224. 225. C.J.S. Zoning and land Planning §§ 3, 5 to 7, W, 12 to 14, 16, 65, 67, 71, 97,177, 180 to 184 189. United States Supreme Court Occupancy of one -family dwellings by tradi- tional groups see Village of Belle Tem v, aortas, 1974. 94 S.Cl. 1536, 416 U.S. 1, 39 LEd.2d 797. Zoning, Persons included within single family. see Moore v. City of Fast Cleveland, Ohio. 1977, L 97 S.Ct. 1932, 431 U.S. 494, 52 Ed.1i 531. Index to Notes In general 3 Amendments 4.9 Cmsmuction anti application 1 Extensions 4.6 Hearings 2S Purpose 3.5 104 PLANNING, ZC Note 1 Referendum 4 Review 5 Retionitg 4.7 Validity 'A Validity of ordinen Variants 4.5 th Vaudlty Evidence did not dl. which refused 1 for construction of traffic would have hood and that chum surrounding reside Congregation of Jell 1975, 303 Minn. 79 This section and rezoning by order real estate situated sought to be rezone rational delegation vete persons. O'Br 285 Minn 378, 173 1. Construction ar Enforcement of v is favored where vi lure City of Minn 300 N.W.2d 2. Repeated proses tetras or fines did remedy in enforcing operators a zoning of such store; thus operation of the stc Administration of mental not a propri not be estopped iron ordinance notwidua liance upon prior it ordinance. Frank's Roseville, 1980, 295 Interpretation of tion of law for aria zoning authority, w is not binding on th Statute required adopted before in adopted. and did n nance conform exec that the Plan be ame was amended Su Neighborhoods v. N.W.2d 885. For there to be landowner must de deprived, through a tion of a0 the reasoi v. City of Blaine. N.W.2d 272. The Supreme CO comuue the provisic Ing body may amen, 6rRr FItF T .. MIS ACRF,E?t!:N1', daicd ci is _ri day of .:.r 1976, by and be the. CI'T'Y OF H'AGAN and EAMES NL.-, HU:'i.S, IM'. a Hinre.vota nen-profit corporation; HTT:;ESS::Th OilEREAS, Eja,Jcs P:;:st ?;cwrs, Inc., as bu ter, aim' Unisource Curpora- Lion, 'a:: seLLur, o;'. a two acr,: parcel of 1c.nd in the. Suutl,vcst Quarter (SWIA) a[ Lhe. NLtrLirrest Quarter (;`7.d1;'.) of S,!etiva 29, Tow'nshi.n 27, nanve 29, ivinU adja- C curt to and Gnat of Rahn, Ro.M, i,rve jointl.v aphllcd to the City of Eagan for wac- essary allpru•:al.:, ineloaliaS cwnc�•pt :11'41 f^_aliMirsry plat appro+ ill, for the con- structiun of a gn:cp hum, for arpruxieately Lhircv physically disabled persuna; ..-and 6712k£AS all nccesSncy licensos f.rum th!! Stateof Miunc,:cta and giber authuri- tics havu bean acquired by Iia,gIes `ioat Ilum.—j Ilse„ or wi11 be acqui_ted prlur Lo grant of the building permit arl1 ccnstruction of the group hurze; ani 6iliEliE,:S, the Ci.Ly of Ea.;an has ;;ranted con^ -:pt appr.rval am! prelimin.lry plat approval for the devnlop^ent of LLe grccp h•:ze at the lucatioa n2ncfured above 'and ih` parcies de.-Jre to entar inLa an Aoreemant regardiaS any change in use or lic_nsic, of the group hu-nc; ti1/:4 '1'HE'R L'Ui!e, for aro! in consid,:ratiun of Lhc,gran [ of can:cpt and pre Llmi- -.a:c ;,l;c a,protal by t:hc Ci Ly n; EaK.n, the parties agrc0 aS follrrJs: That Lagle.^. 1;ext lArz,es, Inc. aErres that in Che evert that there is any chm,l;a in ase- of tliu group hunie or in tho event that any einnbt! iu Eha license require- rnonis by ehc Statc•. of 111rnv:.,!ta ur by .ny oth!!r Licennin•; autlwrity fur the opern- tion of the grur.p l:or.d takt•s plc:e, th_!t in any enc of those e-enta, 1%tg ,,a i,'(,st Ilomen, Inc. shall appl.) i th; !-..i-,,an City Council for rr_vicw and approval of ally char.: in use and sb,tll ioep tip City, :f F.cl;an nctlfied of any such changes.at all i 7 � ' , CEJ I an.l __�_�_•�— J _ . CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) I., ALYCE HOLKE, the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, state that on the ?,,i day of .T„iy , 19_7L9 I served a copy of a Notice of Hearing, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part .hereof, covering the application of the preliminary plat of Eagles Nest Homes ' personally upon each of those persons whose names and addresses are reflected on the records of the County Auditor for Dakota County, Minnesota, as owners of property proposed to be assessed for said improvements, by depositing a true and correct copy of said Notice in the U.S. Mails at Eagan, Minnesota properly addressed to each of said persons. WITNESS my hand officially as said City Clerk and the seal of the City this 2nd day of July x'1916, (S E A L) City CleIrk City of Eagan Dakota County, Minnesota U 5-5-76 2. Jean Parranto Application. Jean Parranto appeared on behalf of his application for variance from setback provisions for building permits on parts of Lots 7 & 8, Block 1 and parts of Lots 10 & 11, Block 1, Cedarvale Office Park. The APC recommended approval. Upon motion by Rahn, seconded Smith, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED to recommend the variances for approval. REGLUR COUNCIL 11EPETING. LAWRENCE WENZEL APPLICATION. Larry Wenzel again appeared on behalf of his .application for an 30' x 200' addition to the present building at 3600 Kennebec -%Drive, Lot 2, Block 3, Cedar Industrial Park and a variance for front yard parking provisions under Ordinance 052. The APC recommended approval. Upon motion by Polzin, seconded Wachter, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED that the application for building permit and for variance be approved according to the APC recommendations. JEAN PARP-41-ITO APPLICATION. Jean Parranto appeared again on behalf of his application for variance from set -back provisions and building permit for office building on Lot 7 & 8, Block 1 and variance on Lots 10 & 11, Block 1 Cedarvale Office Park. The APC recommended approval. Upon motion by Rahn, seconded Rydrych all members voting yes, it was RESOLVED to approve the variances for•both lots as recommended by the Board of Appeals and the building permit for parts of Lots 7 8 S Block 1 was recommended by the APC. EAGLE NEST HONES. Mrs. Betty Bassett appeared on behalf of the application of Eagle Nest Homes for approval of preliminary sketch plan concept for a 4 unit townhouse to be used as a home for the handicapped in Section 29 on Rahn Road across.. from Shale Lane on the Unisource property. The APC recommended parking in the rear and the applicants agreed to move the parking. The building would consist of trio double bungalows on a 2 acre parcel. Polzin moved and Rahn seconded the motion to approve the concept plan subject to the grant by the owners of a 50 foot half ri-.ht of way on Rahn Road and further that the owners in the future provide for a temporary 63 -3- • 5-5-76 _ easement for construction of a storm sewer adjacent to Rahn Road; further subject to recommendations of the APC and further subject to the building plans being resub- mitted by the APC for approval. BOND ISSUE ELECTION CAMVAS. Upon motion by Smith, seconded Wachter, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED that the resolution included in the extract of minutes covering the special election for the Civic Center bond issue be and it hereby is adopted and approved. VOTING PRECINCT CHANGES. The Clerk resubmitted a proposal for setting up 7 precincts and realigning them within the City. Upon motion by Rahn, seconded Smith, all members voting yea, it was RESOLVED to approve the precinct redesignation. SYSTEMS TECHMOLOGY. Mr. Tony Kohnen appeared on behalf of the request of Systech Technology for a lease for the former Cedar Grove Utilities Plant on Cedar Avenue owned by the City. There were questions from the Councilmen as to whether the plant would comply with all applicable regulations. Mr. Kohnen indicated fast they would. There were also questions about potential odor problems, possible need for screening in the area. The recommendation was that the rental for the first 5 years be $500 and the second 5 years be $750 with renegotiation after the initial 10 year lease. The City Atty, will redraft the lease and send it to'Systech. ORDNANCE #52 - AMENDMENTS. The Council discussed the recommendation of the APC that there be no change in the provision regarding beauty and barber shops in residential areas so that in order for an applicant to establish a beauty or barber shop in a residential area, a request for variance would be required. The Council determined that a procedure followed by the City Clerk that all variance requests be forwarded to the APC before the adjustments and appeals be continued in the future. The PPC also recommended that an Estate zone be setup to provide for e.g, minimum of 20,000 to 25,000 sq. foot lots within a subdivision. It was L suggested that this could create greater problems for the APC and Council in the future in the event that owners within the estate zone subdivision may try to sub - 61 -4- 9-3-75 C•".P.T: 11T.,1119 - VA;T•L''?CI•Tile Council next considered t0aPplicati.on of Carl Heine for variance under Ordinence $52 from tLe public street rcgcircm::nt for single family dwelling on a five acre perc_l cn County Road 41 0. Tire AFC racow_ mended approval with conditions. Uprn moti:n by Wachter, seconded Smith, all membera voting yes, it was P.ES0LVED that the a;:)lcnrl.^n bp approved subject to the recgm"eviations node by the APC. 1:Ai17 I111AS 111C. - VCGT.' S LIQUOR LI=Rler. P.r. P.i-.hard l orsch, attc '!c„ appnsr^ on behalf of the c.pplication Ci: liolly Inns, Inc. for traosfe: of VOP,i's l.i;t:or license to holly Irns, Inc., a Ulnneacta corporati.cz. Several representatives itoo Holly Inas, including Na. PappRs, President., were present. Smith moved to racomme^a approval of the transfer subject to approval of an agreem3nt concernin;, a resident manager anal compliance %rith all appllcable ordinances, Rydrych reconc.rd the potion and all members voting in favor. Mr. Korsch submitted a proposed apvli;a+I:.: fir review covering the subjects. CUAALI*S LIBWERG , INC. - ON SAL" IIOUCR LICENSE. The application of (._izr.' Lindberg , Inc. for ca-vale liquor license at 840 Yankee Doodla Scctien 14 was next conaidered. M:. Lindberg indicated that the parcel would he 3.6 acres inclnd.'_*g nq 73rk ng spaces seating about 200 people. It would be at the sate location ec the pzeviens application for on-sale liquor license approved for Jerome Hagerisister. Mr. Lindberg was present and reviewed the plans including concrete blank building and that the opening would be in April or May o.� 1977. Upon moti.on by V...chter, seccndad Rahn, all members voted in favor, it o:.1s P::SOi Vl°til to approve thr_ application. it was noted that Mr. Lindberg o: :lc. k1i.l.:r.i Hinkley willi:c., the mauger. EAC.T.Iff VEST HOMES - Pl_ TS'?TNARY PLAT. The Mayor indicated ti•e F}.`Lir.se:.ea Of Eagles Nest Homes, Inc. and Uninource Corporation for prcl si�sry 91 r Eagles Nest lien=s in the South-emot One-gr.arter (STA) of the Mortharest Ona-qu-iter (111%) of Section 29 on Rahn Road would be discussed next. The APC recormcn3ed -3- bs • • 8-3-76 approval of the appli^.ation. Mr. John V..lein appeared for the applicant as did Urs. Pose Grengs and Mrs. Betty Bassett. It was noted there crocld be two buildirga Cwith two units each on a two acre parcel. Mrs. Bassett reviewed letters frcm ct'.:c:r communities stating their views regarding grcl+i homes. Mrs. Betty Hubbard from the St. Paul Schools was present. A laren nun' -3r of neighboring recider.ti.al esmero were presnnt some of whom objected to the application. A review of the state law regardinE permitted u3e in dingle family and multi -family areas for physic -ally rnd mentally disabled was discussed and the preliminary plat indicating three sepa-at'� lots was reviewed. After very extended discussion, upon motion by Rydrych, second<.- Rahn, all members voting in favor, it war RESOLVED that the Council be on rscord approving the prelininary plat for Eagles Nest IIcmes. Mrs. Bassett ir..3icnted that the nor. -profit corporation would agree with the city in writing that in the event there is a change in use or state licensing of the group home that r -t approval uould be required. GLEM +?RESTOU - PLATTING T?ATIMU APPLICATION. Ren Mitchell, attorney aP :_.;• ._ on behalf of the application of Glenn and Betty Preston for waiver rf platting under Crd_nanca 410 and 02 for division of a single family lot into three lots covering Lot 5, nighview Acres in Section 4. Mr. Preston requested that the easement ti:a was recommended by the APC over the East 30 feet not be required because there were 60 ' private right-of-way easements on the property to the Bast. Upon motion by Rydrych, seconded Wachter, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED that the application be approved with oanditions #2 ani 0 fron t1;= ArC and that the 30 foot easement not be required. ESTAT`, ".74TIM OED11TAMCP PTO. 52. The review of this ordinance amsndsani. sac continuedi until. the next v..-t:ne. IUTP. PROJECT #104 - Lr.i.ZTIGTIN AVENTIE. The City Eno. a^.d Cir.y t.rt,-. Cif. c^_r.ocd negotiations with the Greet American Insvrance Co., tha bonding corp= -j for Crim -y Construction Co. regarding repair work on Lexington Avenue. The Eng. was rcqueste.: to continue negotiations. -4- 66 9-7-76 contractor on the 197Ragan Park Construction ProjectAlequesting that one additional year warranty period on the Oak Chase tennis court be granted commencing one year from the date of final inspection because of,the sinkage problem on the tennis court. Upon motion by Wachter, seconded Rahn, all members voting yes, it was RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Park Committee be approved and the letter be forwarded to B -Tu -Mix. CARLSON LAKE TRAIL. The City Atty. indicated that an error had been dis- covered in the description on trail easements on the South side of Carlson Lake and presented Quit Claim Deeds running to the owners with a request from the owners for trail easements with the corrected legal description. Upon motion by Polzin, seconded Rahn, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED that the Quit Claim Deeds presented be approved and authorized for signature. PROJECT #168-A - SIBLEY TERMINAL PARK STORM SEWER PROJECT. A contract with Parrott Construction Co. covering Project 11168-A consisting of storm sewer Iimprovements to the Sibley Terminal Industrial Park area was presented. Upon motion by Smith, seconded Rahn, all members voting yes, it was RESOLVED that the contract be approved and ordered executed. EAGLES NEST HOMES AGREEMENT. Upon motion by Smith, seconded Wachter, it was RESOLVED that the agreement between the City of Eagan and Eagles Nest Homes be approved and authorized for signing. All members voted in favor. SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING. The Council determined that a special meeting will be held to discuss the 1977 Budget and the proposed police facility at 7 P.M. on Wednesday, September 15th at the City Hall. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting adjourned 11:30 P.M. DATED: 7- -76 7G -11- 67 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -One NEW BUSINESS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS A. Special Assessment Committee Recommendations -- The Special Assessment Committee met on August 30, 1982 to review requests by 12 citizens pertaining to special assessments. Enclosed on page 6 q is a copy of the agenda listing those individuals who requeste consideration pertaining to their assessments. Items B-1, 2, 4, and 6 were previously discussed under the public hearing portion of the September 7 Council agenda as being continued from the July 20 Council meeting. Enclosed on pages 70 _ through 7;, is a copy of the Special Assessment Committee minutes per- taining to their recommendations to the City Council. Therefore, there are eight items to be considered for action by the Council after review by the Special Assessment Committee. These will be addressed as follows: 1. A-1,2,3,and 4. Anderson, Maesaka, Berg and Kyllo (John Croft Acres) Enclosed on pages 7 3 through _60. its a copy of the background information pertain ni g to this special assessment credit request pertaining to area reductions as presented to the Special Assess- ment Committee. Staff recommended that the assessments be ad- justed in accordance with the prepared table and the Special Assessment Committee recommended concurrence with this recom- mendation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To reduce the trunk area storm sewer assessment for Anderson (10-18600-072-00), Maesaka (10-18600-062-00), Berg (10-18600-050-00), and Kyllo (10-18600- 011,020,030,040-00), all in accordance with the table enclosed on page 20. go 0 AGENDA EAGAN SPECIAL ASSESSMENT C(7&141= EAGAN MINNESOTA CITY HAIL MONDAY, AUGUST 30, 1982 4:30 P.M. 11 I. 4:30 - Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance II. 4:35 - Adopt Agenda III. 4:40 - New business A. Project 297, Blackhawk Lake Outlet - Area Reduction 1. Don Anderson (10-1860.0-072-00) 2. Clifford Maesaka (10-18600-062-00) 3. Inga Berg (10-18600-050-00) 4. Rose Kyllo (10-18600-011,020,030,040-00) B. Project 297, Blackhawk Lake Outlet - AssessmentObjection 1� Barry & Pearl Lemieux (10-01600-010-05) Q David.Ashfeld (10-02100-010-02) 3. Floyd and Victoria Bryant (10-02100-010-04) Q Henry Englert (10-01600-010-50) 5. William Bri stle (10-01600-030-79) ® James Horne (10-02100-010-01 & King's Wood Addition) C. Project 297, Blackhawk Lake Outlet - Deferment Request I. Leo Murphy (10-02100-012-28) D. Project 259, Vienna Woods Street and Utilities - Defermenl 1. Carol Lindo (Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods) IV. Other Business V. Adjourn Q = CONTINUED PUBLIC BEARING FROM 7-20-82 M • n IIs. •r o -:y I v I:r y r• g, is •• 1 Id' a' r• u � I:q� v ICI. 1 A meeting of the Eagan Assessment Committee was held on Mondav, August 30, 1982 at 4:30 P.M. at the City Hall. Those present were Mayor Bea Blomquist who chaired the meeting,'Member Dale Vogt, Councilman Tom Egan and Planning Commission Member David Bohne. Members Don Knight and Art Rahn were absent. Also present were Public Works Director Colbert, City Engineer Rosene, Hefti, and City Attorney Hauge. The Agenda was approved with the exception that Henry Englert had indi- cated that he was withdrawing his objections to the assessments, due to the fact that his land is under Green Acres and he also qualifies for Senior Citizens exemption. In addition, Carol Lindo had called and indicated she would not be present but asked that the Committee consider her request for deferment of assessments. Tom Colbert explained to the interested persons present the process that the Special Assessment Committee goes through regarding requests for revisions to assessments, including the review of assessment appeals brought before the City. ;1 P.'* "i; %'• 1 I a •'• • v Ebur property owners in the area of Kyllo Lane had submitted requests for reduction in the storm sewer .assessed area under Project #297 consisting of storm sewer outlet to Blackhawk Lake and Highway #13. Their letter indicated that a portion of their lots was within Blackhawk Lake, below the controlled water elevation of 792.30. It was noted that Policy #82-3 was approved re- cently which provides for the elimination of land below the controlled water elevation from area calculation and the staff recommended that the appropriate credit be applied to the assessments and approved at the final assessment hearing held on July 20, 1982 based upon eliminating the assessments below the controlled water elevations. Don Anderson and Dr. Clifford Maesaka were present and agreed with the staff recommendations and asked that they be adopted. Egan moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend to the Citv Council the revision as proposed by the staff. All voted in favor.. I:n •rt � II 9� Y L IIP11 ;1 M'1'1� I' • '1: I 1 � ;,�-` IP Mr. Colbert reviewed with the committee the objections that were filed by Mr. and Mrs. Harry Lemieux regarding the assessments against their property for the Blackhawk Lake Storm Sewer Outlet. It was noted that approximately 50% of their property drains into the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin and about 508 into the drainage to the north, into the Coachman Road drainage basin. Normally, the City has assessed an entire parcel, even though it is within two drainage basins when assessments are being levied. Noting that 5.08 acres is in the Blackhawk Lake drainage area, the assessment would be revised if the Council were to adopt a split assessment basis. Attorneys Howard Knutson and Mr. Dinger appeared on behalf of the Lemieuxs and discussed the proposed 70 r� Assessment Committee August 30, 1982 0 assessments, noting that a 5 acre parcel, or less, under Eagan Policy, would receive the large lot assessment arra the assessment would be levied on 16,500 square feet. There was discussion concerning the proposal to defer the assessment on the balance of the Coachman Road drainage basin parcel. Mr. Knutson indicated that the owners would drop the assessment appeal on the portion where the Lemieuxs have their hone, within the Blackhawk Lake drainage portion of the property, if the City would defer the other half. It was noted, however, that this deferment would be based upon assessment in the future at rates then in existence. After discussion, Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council to accept the staff recommendations, subject to an agreement to be entered into between the pro- perty owner and the City whereby the property owners would dismiss their appeal with the understanding that the Blackhawk Lake drainage area would be assessed at the present time at the current rates, and the Coachman Road area would be deferred until such time as the assessment for that area is levied for storm sewer trunk purposes with asssesments being levied at the rates then in existence. All voted in favor. 1• 11 '1: 1"'s 1 •.• :1 r'I:h I' '1: k IY.W Tom Colbert then presented to the Committee the written objection on behalf of David Ashfeld covering a 13 acre parcel of property on Pilot Knob Road. It was noted that the property owner had not been noticed of the original public hearing in May of 1980. Mr. Ashfeld was present and stated that he felt that there was insufficient benefit to the property at the present time and that he had no intention of developing the property at the present time. Mr.. Colbert explained the nature of the trunk storm sewer assessments. After discussion, Egan moved, Bohne seconded the motion to accept staff recommendations and forward the recommendations to the City Council to determine whether to hold a new hearing on the preliminary report or whether to proceed with the hearing before the Council as to the benefit received by the property for the storm sewer improvements. All voted yes. ' / 'U :1'1'/• •1 r :1 r 1:1• I 1: • 1 Y :•1 Mr. James Sheldon, Attorney, and Flovd Bryant appeared regarding the notice of assessment appeal brought by Mr. and Mrs. Flovd Brvant regarding the Blackhawk Lake Outlet. It was noted that the Bryants had not been noticed of the hearing on the preliminary report and Mr. Sheldon indicated that it did not appear that there was sufficient benefit to the property to warrant the assessments. He indicated that he would not at the present time decide whether to waive any objection to procedural defects and no action was taken by the Committee. 1 •:r• •a 1 Y" a••1 :.. Y MTNr1a r 'c •1 �7 rro I} A letter had been received from Mc. and Mrs. William Bruestle objecting to the Blackhawk Lake Storm Sewer Trunk assessments. Charlotte Bruestle was present and indicated that they were unable to be at the assessment hearing and had questions concerning the assessments. It was noted that the area water assessments had been levied at an earlier time, but trunk storm sewer area assessments have not been levied. After resolving the questions that 2 71 9 0 Assessment Committee August 30, 1982 Mrs. Bruestle raised, Bohne moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that the assessments remain as levied. All voted in favor. c., ' u • r c, : r•. r Mr. and Mrs. James Horne appeared regarding their objections filed at the assessment hearing concerning storm sewer assessments on the 38 acre parcel owned by them on Pilot Knob Road. Mr. Colbert explained that notice, accord- ing to City records, had not been sent to the Hornes regarding the hearing on the preliminary report and also, discussed the benefit issue. Mr. Horne stated that his land could contain its present and future water drainage and therefore, there is no benefit to the property for the improvements. Mr. Horne covered the history of storm drainage regarding his land and stated that he felt the City intends to use some of his property for storm ponding. He stated that 290 acres will be included in the Blackhawk Lake storm drainage arid that an additional 3,375 are draining through the Blackhawk storm drainage area. Mr. Horne stated that he would not waive objections to the storm sewer hearing procedure and the City Attorney recommended that the council start the hearing process from the beginning. Vogt moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that it restart the hearing process covering the Horne property with a hearing on the preliminary report. All voted yes. Mr. Murphy was present and requested that the City Council defer the assessment on his 40 acre parcel owned by him on Deerwood Drive. It was noted that the property currently qualifies for Green Acres and Mr. Murphy was unsure whether he would request deferment of the assessments with no levy at the present time, or levy at the present time with Green Acre deferment. Egan moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend that Mr. Murphy work together with the staff prior to the next Council meeting to determine which proposal he would recommend that the City Council adopt covering these assessments. All voted in favor. CAROL IBM - PKO XV #259 A letter from Carol Lindo who lives in the Vienna Woods Addition request- ing deferment regarding deferred assessments for street and utility improve- ments based on hardship was next discussed. She was unable to attend the Assessment Committee meeting and it was noted that she had appeared before the City Council on several occasions regarding her claim of hardship. No spe- cific criteria has been established by the Council regarding hardships that Bio not qualify under the age 65 provisions, and therefore, no action was taken by the Assessment Committee. It was forwarded to the City Council for action. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. All voted yes. PHH 7 ,� Secretary • • SPC 8/30/82 1. Don Anderson (Parcel No. 10-18600-072-00) 2. Clifford Maesaka (Parcel No. 10-18600-062-00) 3. Inga Berg (Parcel No. 10-18600-050-00) 4. Rose Kyllo (Parce7sNo. 10-18600-011,020,030,040-00) These four individuals are being grouped together for discussion purposes because of their collective objection to eir trunk area storm sewer ssessment as describ- ed in the letter enclosed on Page. Attached on Pages � through � are location maps of the respective parcels for each of the individuals and the amount of their land that lies beneath the controlled water elevation of Blackhawk Lake as established at 792.30. The Lake configuration as shown on these location maps is not accurate and is for conceptual configuration only as verified by the Dakota County Auditor's Office. The staff overlaid the lot configuration over a topograph- ic map to determine the actual limits of the controlled water elevation at 792.30. This topographic overlay is available on Page IN . The collective objection by these property owners relates to the area below the con- trolled water elevation being included in their net assessable acreage. Recently, Policy 82-3 was approved which provides for the elimination of land below a control- led water elevation from area calculations. After recalculating the lotand providing the necessary credit for the land below the water area, on page, a table was prepared delineating the respective credits as requested by the objecting Property owners. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because Policy 82-3 was being processed simultaneously with the preparation of this assessment roll, it was not properly applied to these parcels in question. There- fore, the staff concurs with the property owners' objections and recommends that the appropriate credit be applied to the assessments that were approved at the final assessment hearing held on July 20, 1982 in accordance with the table on Page ,t- 73 Z' • AD Kyllo Lane Eagan, Minn 55122 21 July 1982 Thomas A Colbert Public Works Director City of Eagan Ref: Project # 297 (Storm sewer outlet to Blackhawk Lake and Highway U13) Dear Mr. Colbert: This letter is to appeal our assessment.for the storm sewer improvement on Blackhawk Lake. We, the undersigned are all property owners in Jon Croft Acres (on Blackhawk Lake). We feel the algorithm for determining the amount of assessment ( 3.4 cents per square foot on the first 16p500 sq ft of each acre in a given parcel) was applied unfairly to the property in Jon Croft Acres. As a result of conversations with Mr Colbert today, it appears that'the area for assessment in Jon Croft Acres included area within the lake (under water), whereas other lakeshore property was not assessed for lake area. The lake area is up to nearly 50% of the assessed area on some property (see attached plot map). We contend that our assessment is: 1) Not equitable (we only ask to be treated like other property owners). 2) Unreasonable. (How can area under water benefit from a storm sewer project). Accordingly, we ask that our respective areas to be assessed be recalculated to exclude that area which is under water. Respectfully submitted, /760 170 ��.�,2c�' 4�Le Ae /0 -I i'Gou -06.1 000 I% Yo � dy,.,,�C G�^'w� /a - / 8 G 60 -cc}" J' o d ' /ti-/Br000- 17_00 'ej -a (.00-090-06 Ed •• /�- •6o -030-9. is - /o -co -o Y0-!! e Pomo F/o ff Sc ,fYl '� �� ca z7o / o � lNpo `ro ggY Ttil / a Pruben b Donna Z z M_ v \� i ' % Iu "c Luther M• 8 a Oil w � is Tr q z o40 -7f i L z s Ubl osd o4o 030 J- P 9SO-7.0- f L J ., i P 1 ,SI SYa//aid i.,k� Ij1 pSIT Ac ... 11 s r 9 f 9 w 01, ra w 'o B / W i O i �I I�B C ` V'1 IT' ,� - "' • 070-75 r\ `^' — • a 1 1 ` • le. a.a a.�r OI:•Z. \ Pic hard 6 ThP/ma 11 eVN720LLtp �` v '• ,euPya.- oqc.-?r q.. WArim- i 71 Ac. ` ELEV 7923 LOT I BLK,21 . � v o � 4 yr:l r 41 Allce 'Y/. eai. s P o 1 /3 93 Ac. 1 N r orA� afo'ZJ / I/ vrrrr..ojj .. \ I ,rl rx r a .bri a ILO asoma o p4z, mv bnr 10 /f(+ \ \ . -�-- `e /t/]ap essay a"/ o \"\ L \ Ql "n h� o y H V'A Wra. 7 W 14y +ir„ w s �•: rte„ U 3 / . ` r~ '^�14!•'':. Air,-w d pf -7J roz. i • ,r- .ast .® /�. ap 0 fd o� �C MI /477 e � .. nest r, Jnr r✓ Q N C . ew.r `..mr rx. Brei_ \( I0Z E b S 9 np 6 I r. Q r d c_ 1 A M1 ka w ' W + w A.1 1,76 ms OO �— �A a N r I n ct ` c• d1 Z1. '~ ° t 5" \� �o Ob do `e r 5 7 65 4 3 2' PJ /YJ vJ r oc o� r DON . v Gcinnar J• 6� ANOSot/arria>' S. p E2�f Lar/son M CLI�rI 4-CSA:KA ril m z \ a �i`• / J C- y IIN a r - �� a" INyA'•-'ayc}3�na+Yaiea*�-� W �- `�/ ?��`;�. R., wvo' f3E2-riE'aS-'c nl .. .. �l.a Rost De L/S/ / A4, Ro sC-- e 031e r 0 20 sr 021� O c iJ9 ° • 7f 5.r He-MO � // p 203E KYalo , I V V V 4 o _ N a a m 0 2 Q 0 D,oGunnar J. 6� 1 Co "A 10MS0%r i Narr/aJ S. ca rZ50/7 I M R'CSAMA C IN 07A o.. f3eR.y /,' •ctK RoStr— De 1.15 ,. ` ,nsrxw.a;�r�/ra��w�'• ��i' icv_L�o�. - oYI ..•✓ _-... .. .� -�t ICY LLO � 07/ '• I 0 N W 2vsra<`;; 02 Rd.�•.r i.iln6A•.H' Ii°u+MA f /JC. p ILOSF - - CLj kYioe l N 1. L51 —I �� \ �l � 1� •^ • �\' �,' �j ,Z. kyM+dNtk_7dTd �-Z, ,='�. �iH. 7i 1; :- 1; max:: •1 : •r.J4 ;,•:``:!', :y �i fl';!�/�%. r � / /C ../ ` / y: / n`` / i r. �•a X41 `,_� ✓�/r�/I % I:l\% /� �'E1 ,s•` r35:ti ��g^Q '��. �`.\. ����\ \t t�' ,\\yt \`\ .l ` ;� � �_.. /' ! �k:J�. �"e7t�•*w^.[.t+—",�'�"x•i�,\.�"`'!`g.t`\.' _ao � � LY L r t'S `rte . - \ � \\ 1 111 1 � . �ii ^' � /+ / `s�ry h� � i� � la,r F.l � :r•. ~� .: �� � , I 1 � i / � � � N \i'''�4r .''a�'dih'�#y`w�er!'fr� . iti>J 1 y� �.�; `` �I �1 r•\ � �.� � ; J � rcg p..f M,��.' �\� �„�tic2't� �.a^ , .. - '' i .'sF' x}w ° _ t\t• ,t �. - 'k DZ l -e l�� 'T ), type t a \'. 1 ya w,P"!Ty!"° oLM"^'�' !�.}fi✓a�?r�}�"+S - +�����,yc�i` n. ,t �� ��'�;M` �1 A+iih, ti�i,�tD �-Yr[�"✓"'I•r6` 1 ,.i� :1 I itJI'� ,'.,''.•' r��``� . ,rlM• � ,r:ci�,3r"J�� 1 r'1 � � � i �' ��� I.1 .1 � 1 ' ,id...' �'../'t�, �.�h1'Ty�r.�/y�`a�)•a�lt riY t. ". t. '- � I a I' r. ?' Y ,t tJAY ,T�:�VIOj� ..'�+".4Ji.1�'T ".r'W�'ry:sa\ � J[ _ !r'r•• J' / � r �- � 1 �" A /�� � ���R}•sc '+r '- "`!.44.z v}cs� m .µ,., Y, rv' t A� ��,�t�y�.;: r: ' 1 A.d.:_t�{'.c 4•. ,� tel_ .�''-.-j•� '-�y�. i l ..� i r•,� .e-. .�..[x .'fid -1ivano 1 � I 1 111 [•. 11 ,11 `r.:;(�1\ `�[� I+OS21�GNt/ �•/ - t ..� ,, /.// �r�. TABLE - A. PROJECT 297 BLACIQIAWK LAKE OUTLET - AREA REDUCTION AREA BELOW NET ASSMT 7-20-82 PREVIOUS PROPOSED RE- PARCEC. TOTAL AREA 792.3 ASSESSABLE ACRES RATE ASSESSMENT TOTAL VISED ASSMT DEDUCTION CREDIT 10-18600-072-00 136,608 SF 17,865 SF 118,743 SF $561/ac $1,759.00 $1,531.53 $227.47 (Anderson) (3.14 ac) (0.41 ac) (2.73 ac) 10-18600-062-00 102,685 SF 35,750 SF 66,935 SF $561/ac 1,322.00 863.94 458.06 (Maesaka) (2.36 ac) (0.82 ac) (1.54 ac) 10-18600-050-00 93,350 SF 30,500 SF 62,850 SF $561/ac 1,202.00 807.84 394.16 (Berg) (2.14 ac) (0.70 ac) (1.44 ac) 10-18600-011-00 206,327 SF 24,500 SF 181,827 SF $561/ac 2,657.00 2,339.37 317.63 (Kyllo) (4.74 ac) (0.56 ac) (4.17 ac) 10-18600-020-00 133,310 SF 14,600 SF 118,710 SF $561/ac 1,717.00 1,525.92 191.08 (Kyllo) (3.06 ac) (0.34 ac) (2.72 ac) 10-18600-030-00 78,350 SF 3,600 SF 74,750 SF $561/ac 1,009.00 964.92 44.08 (Kyllo) (1.80 ac) (0.08 ac) (1.72 ac) 10-18600-040-00 71,350 SF 24,235 SF 47,115 SF $561/ac 919.00 605.88 313.12 (Kyllo) (1.64 ac) (0.56 ac) (1.08 ac) 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Two 0 2.,B-3. Floyd & Victoria Bryant (Parcel 10-02100-010-04) Enclosed on pages Yl through $ S is the background informa- tion pertaining to e formal appeal that the City received subsequent to the July 20 final assessment hearing for Project 297. Although a written objection was not received at the time of the final assessment hearing on July 20, this parcel was inadvertantly omitted from the individual public hearing noti- fication mailing list for May 20, 1980. It is the recommendation of the City Attorney that, based upon the formal appeal being submitted combined with the technical defect in the public hearing notification process, this special assessment for Project 297 be cancelled and that a future project be designated to conduct the proper public hearing process as it pertains to benefit received from this property by the trunk storm sewer improvements within the district. It is also recommended that a property appraisal be performed in conjunction with this future public hearing for trunk area storm sewer. The special assess- ment committee concurred with this recommendation for Council consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To vacate the approved final trunk area storm sewer assessmentas approved on July 20, 1982 for Project 297 to Parcel 10-02100-010-04 (Floyd & Victoria Bryant) and order a new public hearing process to be initiated to incorporate a property appraisal process. a 0 0 SAC 8/30/82 B. PROTECT 297, BL%3M WK LAKE al= - ASSESSMENT OBJECTION 3. Floyd and Victoria Bryant (Parcel No. 10-02100-010-04) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Enclosed on Pages >& and �rk is a copy of the formal notice of appeal listing their reasons for objection to the assessments levied under the above -referenced project. Enclosed on Page ;; 3& is an area location map referencing this parcel in respect to the overall assessment area for Project 297. The gross acreage of this parcel is 9.05 acres. After applying a 20% credit for potential future easement and right-of-way dedication, the net assessable area was 7.42 acres (315,500 square feet) which was assessed at the agricultural rate of 3.40 per square foot resulting in a net assessment of $10,727.00 against this parcel for Project 297. STAFF RECOMMENDATION This parcel lies within the drainage basins benefited by the storm sewer'project for the Blackhawk Lake Outlet. All assessments were determined in accordance with City policies and the feasibility report for this project. Therefore, staff feels that the assess ent as levied is in accordance with existing policy and equitable and the property benefits accordingly. Therefore, the staff recommends that the assessment remain as levied at the final assessment hearing of July 20, 1982. sa C� • Rete,+J6 lq.E w STATE OF MINNESOTA I ' '(p•+�' DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF DAKOTA /FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT --------------------------------------- ../ 'C C. Floyd Bryant and Victoria Bryant, 3981- R1 Appellants, Vs. NOTICE OF APPEAL OF STORM City of Eagan, Dakota County, SEVER IMPROVEMENT 7971 Minnesota, (Improvement Project No. Respondent. TO: THE RESPONDENT ABOVE-NAMED and to NICK VUYOVICH, CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the appellants above-named hereby appeal to the District Court from the proposed assessment mcre parti- cularly described in Exhibit A hereto attached and incorporated herein by reference. Said assessment relates to the land of the above-named appel- lants more particularly described in said Exhibit A which Exhibit also shows the amount of said assessment. Said appeal is taken upon the following grounds and upon such further and additional grounds as may appear from the record of hearing on said appeal: 1. That respondent herein lacks jurisdiction to levy said' assessment. . 2. That the proposed assessment is arbitrary, capricious, confiscatory and unreasonable. 7. That the levying of said assessment constitutes an uncon- stitutional taking of the appellants' property. 4. That the proposed assessment does not result In any benefit, special or otherwise, to the subject property, or if there Is any bene- fic to appellants.' property, said benefit is less than the amount of the proposed assessment. S. Appellants' property has not and will not increase in mar- ket value as a result of the improvements of respondent. _ 13 - - 0 WHEREFORE, appellants respectfully pray that said assessment be set aside and cancelled pursuant to law, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable. ��� / DATED: F" b McMENOMY, SHELDON, DUSICH & HANSEN Jay A—,ALL Bernie M. Dusich Attorneys for Appellants Dakota Central Offices 14450 South Robert Trail Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 .Phone: (612) 423-1155 •3uapuodsaa jo sauawanoadwl aqa to ilnsaa a se anleA Ia51 —aew ul asv"Oul IOU film pue lou seq Aaaadoad ,s3uelladdv S •3u3wssBsse pasodoad aq3 jo 3unowe aql uegl ssal sl 11jouaq pies 'A3aadoad ;sluelladde of >�3 / .•-` ///�.`//�_, J/ �fY4F�7 -I ��A PK. GB.. .AAE a ' PROJECT 297 —ASSGSSNIINT AREA A - • A «: _ LI �B NB .�� FP L, •y ` '� \ A' I er) .""ti`I `l E� 'Wnbjis CSI IAL :AR A �• �• .asc Y/ CG GB' I • • L11 vu _ aye i' P ,yrs � LTTo+ �/ !H x4FWit PF SC PF••. LI .Len -��•t.r-. . R•1e �. •: �•'+`` s .rEieeuu IC"'.+tE]t— � E R-li // // u PF P . A ����'•.... .'RTS p NILLAx LE I ( • A it I \VRC:.'. l'' :' 02:`•• !' . ( - r— GB =aAA A L�Ev..Ti I EEx R-q A_4 i R-3 •'i t 1 PF..li Pte. . A r RB g ° PF �✓� PF NB_ R /• NB R•7 B-Z R•q ".' 's •] o -E �Q 3C _.zr• _ .b? .,� }iQl�j-�jy '' ` .l Vii[ PK I',. �R� '•. L%i,,�' —E- R-4 TxOM45 I / tr.i� :r••t t�„ : �" "(''' (' l I' A i Yzu.a.- A =f -. a [GBAr jwgR_70" - "El °Aj A_ �linf i �j R•q R•q �l /A��\�) i ?-4�R•4 I r ( ' .. Ywi.MS - ,fix �, CSC— ,r r par E �t �%•�YI`7 ���1;q^� uslLA y I ? 'ry:rl.. l .. .. awA �\ A00, •: i4SIJt '`: �••LtL. tJ' CSC ��. 'I lc�e;w\'=�-i� -?1.t R-I --� •\ `•'�.n✓` .. .t � -fLtrr I ; PK •, . I 1 N IA °°� � �(�. '. � ' ..+r rte. \ �. .�• L ` �J.o��„t r:: Rs111 SAFARI W11 .:..d-Y,•i/.'sA• ';� A `.\ ^-•'' I E6AT Gin/i R••IK �\ �_ LA2 RNCw RB A A A A A ,ti- —� \ •+•-+h' R•I -�R 3 (n r-f \ IPF!, resr I[''�' fes) �• Z /D LB •-'i -cxrtR r I R.Z ,:It- �� R_t; •;��.. /�.. "\ F `` m 'I \� • Rl A l ___._•i' Iii.F(�:.r.`.`L� • , j N�� •R-I --WLER.°A[V$0. __ __ _ xA T R•J RI "A7 }�!;-Q -11 �}t-11_ ��•w 1Y:7 R•I I�':� 4 iy;:p.n: !'I :... •i{I ..."•li' i':;' 'n <�l$;•I _A-,1 J \ G=J PK PK.�f' Iii: __.. �; •' w rxoe ln, A A sfQJ•Otp! 4•IN1Y•"'>)F r _+ ���.1 "'• r • '71 !_ , fS^xw 1. ur Y) ,, 1J ��� I,"-.\",N�.j-/ rt1 y, r H, `� `'- ...SPK F ��—,-, mm • at. �'. ” I .-' `\ 'I}::`� s' ';+��". ! E�•il�� 1:fiT' "� �• J,/' y iT 4.•+ ti � d' 1 .Ati C l P R•IA qq li S l I - I _C I� Z rx� a 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Three 3. B-5. William Bruestle (10-01600-030-79) Enclosed on pages Q 7 through �Q are copies of the back- ground information pertaining to this written request by Mr. and Mrs. William Bruestle pertaining to their assessment. After explanation of the trunk area storm sewer assessment, it was the special assessment committee's recommendation that the storm sewer assessment as levied on July 20, 1982 for this parcel be approved which was also concurred with by the property owner. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept the special assessment committee's recommendation to reaffirm the final assessment for Project 297 as levied on July 20, 1982 to Parcel 10-01600-030-79. $(� 0 0 SAC 8/30/82 5. William Bruestle (Parcel No. 10-01600-030-79) Enclosed on Pages O?q and X is a copy of the letter of objection that the City has received pertaining to this referenced parcel resulting from Project 297. on Page �K is an area location map showing the relationship of this property to the overall assessment area for Project 297. The gross area of this parcel is 50,200 square feet. As such, it qualifies for the City's "large lot" stone sewer policy which provides that only the first 16,500 square feet of each acre of a homestead- ed parcel less than 5 acres be assessed. Using the single family/agricultural assessment rate of 3.4C per square foot, the assessment as approved by the Council on July 20, 1982 final assessment hearing amounts to $645.00. in the letter of objection from Mr. & Mrs. Bruestle, they state that they are being assessed for "this water area" on their 1981 property tax statement. The assessments associated with Project 297 are for trunk stonn sewer area assessments and that the "water area" that is referred to in their letter is resulting from the trunk area water assessment levied under Project 24 in 1976 for a 10 -year period. v • a�� i is � • � Because this assessment was in acoordance with all existing City policy pertaining to trunk area storm sewer assessments and because this property is entirely locat- ed within the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin, the staff feels that the assessment as levied is accurate and proper. ?herefore, the staff rec=nends that the assessment as levied at the public hearing of July 20, 1982 reT in as is. -97 40 , •� /76P/ �� 6-7 -- - _ _ .. � iS9 �PK PROPRQ7LCP 297 X S*F A AREA -,4 f u f Wo R Cs' c kl L 11 INDUS IAL PAR. A IN T ,dsc A SML PF LI -csc SiF R -i LI t A "!fit A 17' :i lJ 111J 11 GB R-4 RB .NO" PF! R-4 N I N 3C PLC R 4 A ELIA "A NJ T R A PF RB A rr5r z LB 1 ENTER : j! R-2 A A x J, Z) A .1 A 4r 14, PK A ` j;, i � R•IA R m A I Za A cm R-1 I PF r NB \R-3 PF 114--: R-4 csc 4 �R ELIA "A NJ T R A PF RB A rr5r z LB 1 ENTER : j! R-2 A A x J, Z) A .1 A 4r 14, PK A ` j;, i � R•IA R m A I Za A cm R-1 I PF r NB \R-3 PF 114--: Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Four 4. C-1. Leo Murphy (10-02100-012-28) Enclosed on pages 191 through C/4- is background information pertaining to the request presente by Mr. Murphy pertaining to deferment of the trunk area storm sewer assessment until future development. While it was noted that the property is presently under green acres, Mr. Murphy was going to determine whether he would wish to continue the deferment under green acres or pursue his request for deferment by special agreement with the understanding of future assessment in accordance with rates in effect at the time of development. If the assessment is deferred in accordance with green acres, it would be deferred at the interest rate levied with this project (12.5%). Whereas, if the assessment is deferred to some future date and rate, the historical increases in the trunk area storm sewer have been averaging approximately 7.2% over the past 12 years. The special assessment committee recommended that the City Council accept whichever method of deferment is requested by Mr. Murphy, which request should be made available by the September 7 Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the deferment of trunk area storm sewer assessments by special agree- ment as requested by Mr. Murphy for Parcel 10-02100-012-28. 91 SAC 8/30/82 C. PRO= YKr• • •Ea• = FSQUEST I. Leo Murphy (Parcel No. 10-02100-012-28) C • Y '• P I • •il!4 1! � � Enclosed on Page );�_is a copy of the memo that the City received from Mr. Leo Murphy requesting deferment for the trunk area storm sewer assessments as levied under this project. Also enclosed on Page '--*4 is a location map shoeing this parcel in reference to the overall assessment area for this project. Mr. Murphy's property in question is presently in Green Acres. The total acreage is 38.97 acres. After applying a 208 credit for potential future right-of-way and easement dedica- tion, there was a net assessable area of 31.18 acres. Using the agricultural as- sessment rate of 3.4t per acre, the resulting assessment totaled $46,177.00. The reference to the "George Ohman sr. farm" pertains to the trunk area sanitary sewer and water assessments that were proposed to be levied against that property locat- ed in the southeast corner of Cliff Road and Pilot Knob Road under Project 235. Those trunk area assessments were deferred with the understanding that they would be re -levied in accordance with rates in effect at the time of subdivision or de- velopment occurred. Mr. Murphy is requesting the same deferment consideration for his property. Because this property is presently in Green Acres, all assessments levied against this property are automatically deferred until such time the property loses its Green Acres status through development and/or subdivision. The staff feels that this Green Acres deferment would be more financially advantageous to the property owner than a deferment which would allow the City to assess at future higher unit rates for trunk area storm sewer. Under either proposal, the City would not be able to derive any revenue from this assessment. Therefore, staff would not have any objection to either letting the assessment stand as is with deferment through Green Acres or to have this special assessment deferred by special agreement as entered into and executed by Mr. Murphy which would allow the City to levy the trunk area storm sewer assessment when the property develops at rates in effect at that time. 921- . To: Mayor and City co.unciL -7 -J - From: Lea MurphQF Re: Blackhawk Lake Storm Sewer Assesment 7 Cs-�-ew W". I was.a member of the Cauncil the assesements-against the George Ohmam Sr.. farm. came before uz� for deferment,. In. discussion. between council and staff there waa.,a concensusstbat it would be to the city' admantage financially to, postpone the assesmentsun, tIM the development plat came in for the property„ because of the inflation factor.. Because of the unbeli:eable amount of the assesment I have no; aT• ternatIve but to ask. for a-, deferment until the property is: developed. Your consideration. in tbis_.matter will be apprciated.. Because of a meeting conflict..I will not be able to attend ment hearing and am. taking this_meanstoconvey my request. WE the asse s - ASS- PK PRaJECP 297 A. .o RSR de;, •; 48 - 0CE � r • � NLlin�•i 14 •lam F P ` \ s3 I PsFc DICSC IMOUS IAL Pp PLOT 'ice • _ _ - 18 _ %�'�<...` j�l` ..�. _ _ _ ..Est GB .08` pp a S S Rc I 1 r Rt u. ' LI caN rEr ICE rE - 't ••• LI U.L ' _ .. I '.I �• L ag / Q]ll 'W toS \ • I l✓ ✓� Lt� .'�. R4 i1 ar+k r 'rr PF LI R-I .00 LI LSM. ^-, caatgovcIR, R•I F _/ s' L I l' . ^tom'.R-I // I / m PF L ,: . ' .R.., `+'P x.FElBaUeL1CT.+ia L R•1; J/ s A GB--•nt�'E.�� 1 EEN A` / I y A - s R•} !IPF.. R-4 RB y�/J� P�f pF Y.✓_ �I PF R /•• Al 1NB R•3 —�N ._ N..... �7 NB :.tic'N iT PF h r R 1 AL1y./A\ p ( PF g. 3"2 sworn i III Re. / l •R 311 -\9 !' '3, O .� -' -iAvmi C1f •s) A R•a /•' q s PF�`.� : �L•...., ��%.i t� C N R-a 3C RPK It ttl - I'/ IY•I.raO / A ; REI .: .,.s .:CtAR• ywr1_7o-J!"... j A k7'ra.:• -�dl. N _+�'w _ . PK .` PK :.o -sc T . - TRa ..... _ jEk. `F c PF •_. Y � ; .saR1 rL �rc C R.a,. 'R•q Ij 1pL�rvq: R a `4 3-4 I �� ccrr CSC sNv .t j 11 t rq•_g7 unC'[a s : tt-4 r app :.tLSAry1 '1( KK. s ij CSC ��t<7y�YIr' ��"7�.�./ R•I `_�` t'^1K C •S+A'rm+• too.. •�]`, 1 1 ` •� .mo i / ri / C^O ::.:: T 9.A" h I, A L[ I .CJ. RJ.'S.: I/' EAX/Ii< .R-I R-I AMER -- RB A'`. A A'A .n..a-..s++-'s R.I- •. vRc} 2 �\1 II� A PF • rtst• A j Ij� tJJ\ t R•I 11 __ _ - LS R-1 A /� _•_a �.:/RR:{L. AI 1 IFrtr7t R I _ .c I •or. aR.LtR'+•cvsoR �, . _ r . A./- so�n4y R 3 R•�1 �q�� p .t ",1_'• :rr:.. •. �.'� ;•) i\; .' Ileus_ i�-•r.LP R ssn+, y. :� ✓�. J s1 PK r, . I 4 A AQ R i �R�" "! I `rJ l -, 'A _ I � ,L'/. � A � s Y r �,UsptCf C•.JMY'�gF ' t t".wal)n 77. _ r �� � [][. ]✓,iJ t"ta 7•/',fes J rr \tr �� )"�Y]J�'Mi"".J'riiri� � Il •I1• ./..:I • � Jtry �Y'- � ^{w. 9 �' a'� � . r yJ t s•r..J 4I .. '�.. a.. r ar_-1.9'-�.+ aas:?.L'.Ya�+'d "i a...•� I PK Ff i 1jR•IA 94 I II •, P i c1,, ;r— A ) An. L �iAt I Fv A _ 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Five 5. D-1. Carol Lindo (Lots 10 & 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods) Enclosed on pages cl�o through `f is background information pertaining to MrsZfndo's request for deferment of interest and penalties that are being levied due to non-payment of assess- ments for Lots 10 and 11 in Block 2 of Vienna Woods Addition. Mrs. Lindo was unable to attend the special assessment committee meeting of August 30 and the special assessment committee for- warded this request onto the Council with no action due to the fact that this request is based on financial hardship considera- tion for which the City does not have any specific present policy for consideration by the special assessment committee. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the deferment of interest and penalty for special assessments levied against Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods, as requested by Carol Lindo. ys SAC 8/30/82 D. PRW= 259, VIENNA MODS STREET AND UTILITIES'- DEFER4agT REQUEST 1. Carol Lindo (Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods Addition) Enclosed on Page L br is a copy of a letter that staff received fran Mrs. Lindo re- questing deferment of interest and penalties resulting from nonpayment of annual assessment installments for streets and utilities over Lots 10 and 11 within Block 2 of Vienna Woods Addition. Enclosed on Page 4mis a location map showing these two lots and also Lot 32, the present residence of Mrs. Lindo. Mrs. Lindo is re- questing a financial hardship deferment consideration based on the fact that she cannot meet the existing principal annual installments, much less than the interest and penalties that are incurred through non-payment. The assessments for streets have previously been eliminated from consideration for Lots,10 and 11. The assess- ment spread for the remaining ; utility improvements together with their annual in- stallment requirements are defined on Page %. YC y C 40 1111D n a. Because this request for deferment is based on financial hardship considerations, staff has no formal reasmendation to make. 0 /,or 3.;', 3u< ;Z, Vev, ,O� aJ, 77tef"a— it 4t teL Jlf� Ck �b�n.t,c�+u- �.�-..�.tr( �G�a.�..QG���.2 �.�d.B�v,,�. '„C�.r.�,t wsiq.,, C►`.! 62700 o 00 0 d,,- q,; .4d _A&ka-,e- 67 CIUV� cu� a-n!rt.ucs.Q to- U.L"fi, I 3-t b4.,� , OLtvAo,,,f I at 7 � U/� /rLzve,- pleL�jt�� aa, 4 JAI& t -kA- &rU- -f4l-a %971 4tv.+ CIL44 d -I .2 -.t4t, 'n ff;q��A L-Vtl "4-X alJ b I a Dlta • R'_un woo wm wm woo ua wffsT I's nee m�rr naa aa�. .a n`I uec •aec nw I a... • s 6 a �L_° `S ■1_L�.a 10 aao w vwt a i.l tirG.�.T!-� i• _•il -15. £i 16 n, o° am , wm um vm wm uoo • rr ' ray' Y- 1] f I •)•aa-�1 ro t.- assn Da - 8 _ _ o•ly - q _JJa. ru C . .T ii �r °').",;a�! 1 1 ' ,t.IY I ,..•.+ ea. P11 T N Y ,air OAK I •- a9 , n1 n •asp .• rn a! ,a. >p �•__ i 17 `*DDRIVEIN -n,w-- - I Ji �,,,, 12 . c r : • 1• 13 . S I • Iasi VIBURNUM res Do Y —- d• DL .= ']i RIL a... .100 ,DC \• ' t 5 OW 1p t _ ] B • - _ ] g:« a ,.e a p�4 ■ •$: , v:,, .. -, r _. I � ° e - • ! f,n ,. , •n • Ien sin e,t ' � .,. a� ] i C' Ye , ,o°�f ':'� I YI Y seem •im ane um nm n°e �a. S � •° ,� � h i a o) �.r d ' 1 �. / \�nD. �y fid. I • . un 10 O 1.8 _ ,e m ,p•/ �•'a4' _ FDS^ 7^ a !,n { a.,t O .a I '1 Y eo Y- n .`y 1a n 4;y 1e Ya oy •'!,,,m' y+ "a • i,'='•t QOM= ] Is _ _ _ _ _ _ ,•, - - 7-_a of>!r gee ao .nip rRi„ a.. 14 11 a: . Jaerr "`L: d•+'..] �/y�/ • B Y Y .- Ri .r r • o •'I'°yy' 6 - 0Dco,. W0 -w I C e LQ ,D Do_e•» --WIP c�,.''vir• 9, 1 1.,• V I E so I. N \ 1 n:n R ,o so y.hi i'Nq g/d b `e 17 7 li • e e•n� -Y w•' m , °° A/p • rips acne II- i .7 ■ I: • 6 '• Dvgs..,rb .>, •ems a3_ •wnrt ., •e opo.os .. s, B!✓Co":_i_ rf 1 •:, I e. w 2 a ` v'°q'.__.... Y °' LANE -- ' ly y�'y a 15 1! «/ °'J •a ea+�lr 1 Y. vim• �eDm room • �I..----''v'--I_-- °L '.\10:.;��•C .•w'aw. x g] .r'. o, , .o.I mc'•• . ow.n 7 Y6 f.t�&r.-,• • w" 17a�rw+s Z 1 .ux n,:. ''2 , •sI� _'+ 8��: is y i7 zE $ ] z rto 21C U r a ` . C 1 +- i ] i. IC i ass'° f r. ,I^ F•opo-�—a,r _h •■I •••yiii«<'. p•n 9 !O ! qn nn 10f,e p!r_ np�Ll 3] leb W e.•n . u• .y . •nm nm n m o an J 17 A`, y `E 4 II B u w1n D•e.n Ia • ] z• iZ Imo 70 8 t■ s tot1 to n z�,`? I � .i ,ct �Y �� b+ E. Ya ..6 o•o-•r C •-`,r '- ^ atl•ti 8r ] W 4 - F� KINGS ROAD ^r, - ��� _—__'!i'I..YL �:L'L�� _—am a ;!.'' .vr.Ynf. :c. -!�• fwf uuul I• :no' r.yof er •D aY.D' • d_r • I� t a ,r1 L un iem' em -epo' un "-Hee un :ew rnr i.a. yu,. �3 :1° ieoo roam fe oo aaq f jB •,,arVa/c A01 20 ' I =af 117 n '� 16 i . 1] elf Y Y• �I1 .mm - nm om uoc weo noo a• 8 ] S v •asp .• rn a! ,a. >p �•__ i 17 `*DDRIVEIN -n,w-- - I Ji �,,,, 12 . c r : • 1• 13 . S I • Iasi VIBURNUM res Do Y —- d• DL .= ']i RIL a... .100 ,DC \• ' t 5 OW 1p t _ ] B • - _ ] g:« a ,.e a p�4 ■ •$: , v:,, .. -, r _. I � ° e - • ! f,n ,. , •n • Ien sin e,t ' � .,. a� ] i C' Ye , ,o°�f ':'� I YI Y seem •im ane um nm n°e �a. S � •° ,� � h i a o) �.r d ' 1 �. / \�nD. �y fid. I • . un 10 O 1.8 _ ,e m ,p•/ �•'a4' _ FDS^ 7^ a !,n { a.,t O .a I '1 Y eo Y- n .`y 1a n 4;y 1e Ya oy •'!,,,m' y+ "a • i,'='•t QOM= ] Is _ _ _ _ _ _ ,•, - - 7-_a of>!r gee ao .nip rRi„ a.. 14 11 a: . Jaerr "`L: d•+'..] �/y�/ • B Y Y .- Ri .r r • o •'I'°yy' 6 - 0Dco,. W0 -w I C e LQ ,D Do_e•» --WIP c�,.''vir• 9, 1 1.,• V I E so I. N \ 1 n:n R ,o so y.hi i'Nq g/d b `e 17 7 li • e e•n� -Y w•' m , °° A/p • rips acne II- i .7 ■ I: • 6 '• Dvgs..,rb .>, •ems a3_ •wnrt ., •e opo.os .. s, B!✓Co":_i_ rf 1 •:, I e. w 2 a ` v'°q'.__.... Y °' LANE -- ' ly y�'y a 15 1! «/ °'J •a ea+�lr 1 Y. vim• �eDm room • �I..----''v'--I_-- °L '.\10:.;��•C .•w'aw. x g] .r'. o, , .o.I mc'•• . ow.n 7 Y6 f.t�&r.-,• • w" 17a�rw+s Z 1 .ux n,:. ''2 , •sI� _'+ 8��: is y i7 zE $ ] z rto 21C U r a ` . C 1 +- i ] i. IC i ass'° f r. ,I^ F•opo-�—a,r _h •■I •••yiii«<'. p•n 9 !O ! qn nn 10f,e p!r_ np�Ll 3] leb W e.•n . u• .y . •nm nm n m o an J 17 A`, y `E 4 II B u w1n D•e.n Ia • ] z• iZ Imo 70 8 t■ s tot1 to n z�,`? I � .i ,ct �Y �� b+ E. Ya ..6 o•o-•r C •-`,r '- ^ atl•ti 8r ] W 4 - F� KINGS ROAD ^r, - ��� _—__'!i'I..YL �:L'L�� _—am a ;!.'' .vr.Ynf. :c. -!�• fwf uuul I• :no' r.yof er •D aY.D' • • I� a el un iem' em -epo' un "-Hee un :ew rnr i.a. yu,. �3 :1° ieoo roam fe oo aaq f jB •,,arVa/c A01 20 ' I . nIs 117 n '� 16 i . 1] elf Y Y• �I1 .mm r.r nm om uoc weo noo a• •asp .• rn a! ,a. >p �•__ i 17 `*DDRIVEIN -n,w-- - I Ji �,,,, 12 . c r : • 1• 13 . S I • Iasi VIBURNUM res Do Y —- d• DL .= ']i RIL a... .100 ,DC \• ' t 5 OW 1p t _ ] B • - _ ] g:« a ,.e a p�4 ■ •$: , v:,, .. -, r _. I � ° e - • ! f,n ,. , •n • Ien sin e,t ' � .,. a� ] i C' Ye , ,o°�f ':'� I YI Y seem •im ane um nm n°e �a. S � •° ,� � h i a o) �.r d ' 1 �. / \�nD. �y fid. I • . un 10 O 1.8 _ ,e m ,p•/ �•'a4' _ FDS^ 7^ a !,n { a.,t O .a I '1 Y eo Y- n .`y 1a n 4;y 1e Ya oy •'!,,,m' y+ "a • i,'='•t QOM= ] Is _ _ _ _ _ _ ,•, - - 7-_a of>!r gee ao .nip rRi„ a.. 14 11 a: . Jaerr "`L: d•+'..] �/y�/ • B Y Y .- Ri .r r • o •'I'°yy' 6 - 0Dco,. W0 -w I C e LQ ,D Do_e•» --WIP c�,.''vir• 9, 1 1.,• V I E so I. N \ 1 n:n R ,o so y.hi i'Nq g/d b `e 17 7 li • e e•n� -Y w•' m , °° A/p • rips acne II- i .7 ■ I: • 6 '• Dvgs..,rb .>, •ems a3_ •wnrt ., •e opo.os .. s, B!✓Co":_i_ rf 1 •:, I e. w 2 a ` v'°q'.__.... Y °' LANE -- ' ly y�'y a 15 1! «/ °'J •a ea+�lr 1 Y. vim• �eDm room • �I..----''v'--I_-- °L '.\10:.;��•C .•w'aw. x g] .r'. o, , .o.I mc'•• . ow.n 7 Y6 f.t�&r.-,• • w" 17a�rw+s Z 1 .ux n,:. ''2 , •sI� _'+ 8��: is y i7 zE $ ] z rto 21C U r a ` . C 1 +- i ] i. IC i ass'° f r. ,I^ F•opo-�—a,r _h •■I •••yiii«<'. p•n 9 !O ! qn nn 10f,e p!r_ np�Ll 3] leb W e.•n . u• .y . •nm nm n m o an J 17 A`, y `E 4 II B u w1n D•e.n Ia • ] z• iZ Imo 70 8 t■ s tot1 to n z�,`? I � .i ,ct �Y �� b+ E. Ya ..6 o•o-•r C •-`,r '- ^ atl•ti 8r ] W 4 - F� KINGS ROAD ^r, - ��� _—__'!i'I..YL �:L'L�� _—am a ;!.'' .vr.Ynf. :c. -!�• fwf uuul I• I I I I ASSESSMENTCUUE TOTAL ASSESSMENT Iot 10, Block 2, Vienna, Moods S/W L SIMT 448 4P232134 DECREMENTS IN PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST INSTALLMENTS TO UE INCLUDED WITH TIIE ;:ENERAL TAXES FOR TIIE YEAR BALANCE DUE INSTALLMENT INTEREST I YEAR ASSESSMENTS CODE AMT. INC. INTERLST 41232.34 423.23 556.67 1980 S/W L STMT 448 9d1 I 190 3.609.11 423.23 304.73 1981 S/W L SIMT 446 727196 31385.88 413.23 270.87 19aZ S/W L STMT 448 694110 21962.65 423.23 237.01 1963 S/W L SIMT 448 66u124 2539.42 42!.23 203.15 1984 S/W L SIMT. 448 626138 2.116.19 423.23 169.29 1985 S/W L SIMT' 448 592152 19692.96 423.23 135.43 1906 S/11 L SIMT 448 55616o 1.265.73 413.23 101.57 1987 S/N L STMT 448 524180 846.50 423.23 67.73 1988 S/W L SIMT 448 490196 423.27 423.27 33.87 1989 S/W L STMT 448 457!14 • NOTES: 1. These figures are identical for Lot 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods. 2. These figures represent the assessments levied for utilities under Project 259, Contract�5. 3. The year referenced is the year the assessments were incurred and are due the following 4. For each lot, the penalty for 1980 due in 81 is $98.19 and the interest for 1980 due in 81 is $39.64. 5. For each lot, the penalty for 1981 due in 1982 will not be levied until January of 1982. Interest and penalty are based on a formula of Dakota County. 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Six 0 6. Other - George Dougherty (Parcel 10-02100-030-03) Enclosed on pages 161 through /OZ. are copies of correspon- dence as submittedbyy Dakota County or eorge and Neoma Dougher- ty requesting senior citizen deferment for the assessments levied under Project 297. This information was inadvertantly omitted from consideration by the special assessment committee and is subsequently being submitted directly to the City Council for their review. While Mr. Dougherty does not meet the age criteria for a senior citizen, his wife, who is presently in a nursing home, qualifies for the age requirement. Therefore, staff would like direction from the Counil pertaining to spouse qualifica- tions for age requirement for senior citizen deferments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the senior citizen deferment requested by Dakota County for Mr. and Mrs. Dougherty for Parcel 10-02100-030-03. /00 r D.a K OT a COUNTY BY. PAUL EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER M.13. • A x 1RY`o. July 14, 1982 Mr. Eugene J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 RE: PROJECT NO. 297 PARCEL 10-02100-030-03 CITY OF EAGAN, ORDINANCE NO. 66 RELATING TO SENIOR CITIZEN HARDSHIP Dear Mr. VanOverbeke: VETERAN'S SERVICES WILLIAM A. MEYER. JR. DIRE-TOII OFFICE 357 - 9TH AVENUE NORTH SOUTH ST PAUL. M N 5507° PHO'IE7 512-457-0501 Per our phone conversation with Paul Hauge, Eagan City Attorney, and with you this morning, we are requesting Senior Citizen Hardship Special Assessment Deferral for George and Neoma Dougherty. The following is a slight resume as we know it from our office file: George S. Doughert Date of Birth: 9/6/21 U. S. Army: 9/12/42 to 12/14/46 Rated 408 disabled by V.A.; increase to 1008 pending. Rated totally disabled by Teamsters Union; and in receipt of disability pension. Neoma G. Doughert Date of Birth: 10/21/05 _ Health: Confined to wheelchair, and in David Herman In -Care Center, Nursing Home, Minneapolis, Mn. Social Security Pension: Goes to nursing home; balance of monthly cost is provided by Dakota County Welfare; see statement signed by Diane Reller, dated 7/14/82. It is hoped that this information will be of some assistance in qualifying George and Neoma for Senior Citizen Hardship Special Assessment Deferral. If you should need any further information, please do not hesitate to call upon us. Very truly your, WAM:sv /0 1 William A. Meyer, r., Director CC: Mr. George S. Dougherty TO: FROM: DAKOTA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE DIVISION 357 9th Avenue North South St. Paul, Minnesota 55075 (612) 457-0611 SUBJECT: ----- - DAT E: ............... - - - --- ------ - IOZ SIGNED: 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Seven CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PATRICIA LEAHY B. Patricia Leahy for a Conditional Use Permit for Carry Out Food in a Neighborhood Business District -- A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting on August 24, 1982 to consider an application submitted by Patricia Leahy requesting a conditional use permit for carry out food, or delicatessen, in conjunction with a bakery located at Lot 1, Block 1, Bay #1, Silver Bell Shopping Center. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of the conditional use permit to the City Council. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's report found on pages10 3 through /0(, for your reference. For additional informatione action that was taken by the APC, refer to a copy of the minutes found on page 107 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the recom- mendation of the APC to approve the conditional use permit as stated. /03 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CARRY OUT FOOD APPLICANT: PATRICIA LEAHY LOCATION: LOT 1, BLOCK 1, BAY #1, SILVER BELL CENM ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: NB (NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 24, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: AUGUST 18, 1982 REPORTED BY: DATE C. 1qjNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a conditional use permit for carry out food, or delicatessen, in conjunction with the bakery located in Lot 1, Block 1, Bay #1, Silver Bell Center Addition, Section 17. ,aowW71N For the past few years, the Silver Bell Center has been constructed and neighbor- hood businesses have been occupying the Silver Bell Center. In Bay #1 of the Center is the location of a bakery which is on the end facing Silver Bell Road. The applicant, Patricia Leahy, would like to enter into a joint venture with the bakery and provide a small delicatessen for carry out items or specialty items in conjunction with the bakery operation. It is staff's understanding that be- tween 80% and 908 of the business will be carry out food. In reviewing Ordinance 52, Zoning, for the Neighborhood Business District, the permitted uses are very specific and under permitted uses only allows the provi- sions for sit-down restaurants. With 80% of the business being carry out food, staff has suggested that the applicant make the application for a conditional use permit in order for the applicant to comply with Ordinance 52. Therefore, the application for conditional use has been submitted. The parking for this operation has been reviewed and is adequate for this addi- tion of a delicatessen. Please find attached a copy of a letter by Patricia Leahy indicating her propos- ed objectives and proposed site plan for the delicatessen located in the bakery in Silver Bell Center. If the conditional use permit is approved, it should be subject to the following conditions: 1. All other ordinance requirements shall be met. DCR/jach /03 0 0 City of Eagan RE: Conditional.Use Permit Gentlemen: I propose to take over the front end retail of the existing Silver Bell Bakery in the Silver Bell Shopping Center. Expansion will include the addition of a chicken and rib cooker with venting, steam table, additional refrigeration and an exterior sign. The Hours being contemplated are 6 A.M. to 11 P.M. This varies from the present hours which are 5:30 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Sincerely, Qae-z � Patricia Leahy v 1755 Kyllo Lane Eagan, MPI 55122 454-7770 16 4 \4c"-�c Ilk C".4� Re T.AaV. C—%Sc IV to, 0 • • SUBJECT TO APPROVAL MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA AUGUST 249 1982 A regular meeting of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 24, 1982 at the Eagan City Hall commencing at 7:00 p.m. Those present at the meeting were Chairman Hall, Members Mulrooney, Turnham, Wilkins, Krob and McCrea. Absent were Members Bohne and Wold. Also present were Public Works Director Colbert, City Planner Runkle, Assistant City Engineer Hefti and City Attorney Hauge. Chairman Hall chaired the meeting. AGENDA Upon motion by Krob, seconded Wilkins, it was resolved that the Agenda as distributed, be approved with the understanding that the Planning Commission will not act on the adoption of the Subdivision Ordinance during the current meeting. All voted yes. Upon motion by Hall, seconded McCrea, it was resolved that the Minutes of the regular meeting of July 27, 1982 be approved with the exception on page 6, relating to the William Dolan application, that homes "could" be 45 feet in width in Brittany 4th Addition. All voted in favor. PATRICIA LEAHY - SILVER BELL CENTER DELICATESSEN The public hearing regarding the application of Patricia Leahy for condi- tional use permit for carry -out food for delicatessen in conjunction with bakery located in Lot 1, Block 1, Bay pl, Silver Bell Center Addition, was then convened by Chairman Hall. Patricia Leahy was present and explained her proposal to the Planning Commission. There were no objections to the applica- tion and she indicated.there would be no sit-down, all take-out, that there would be a sign on the outside and that some remodeling would take place. The bakery hours would be the same as the delicatessen hours, according to Ms. Leahy. Mr. Runkle indicated that carry -out provision requires conditional use permit in a Neighborhood District, under the zoning provisions. Krob moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to approve the application, subject to compliance with applicable City ordinances. All voted in favor. 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Eight ITALIAN PIE SHOPPE/AMUSEMENT DEVICE LICENSE Italian Pie Shoppe for a License for One Amusement Device -- An application for one (1) amusement device license has been filed by the Italian Pie Shoppe. The amusement device application is specifically one pac man amusement device machine. The Italian Pie Shoppe is located at 1438 Yankee Doodle (Yankee Square Shopping Center). The City has previously denied an application at the Mediterranean Cruise, Applebaum's Supermarket and convenience food stores. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the amuse- ment device license application for one machine at the Italian Pie Shoppe. IR FINANCING/ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO. D. Road Machinery & Supplies Company for Extension of Industrial Revenue Financing Bond Preliminary Approval -- Recently, approval was given to amend the industrial revenue bond financing procedural manual to allow for an industrial revenue bond under a public of- fering conditional upon a properly secured letter of credit. The City Administrator sent a letter to all pending applicants of indus- trial development revenue bonds to provide a reminder as to when their applications expire and advise them how to request and exten- sion and to provide an awareness of the City Council's change in policy regarding the letter of credit to secure a public offering. Enclosed on page loll is a copy of the letter sent by the City Administrator to aTI appficants whose industrial development revenue bond preliminary resolution have temporarily expired and who have not requested any extensions to date. Mike Sill of Road'Machinery and Supplies Company did make a request for an extension, a copy of his letter is enclosed on page 1!0 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To aprove or deny the exten- sion for the preliminary resolution for industrial development revenue bonds for Road Machinery & Supplies Company. /dg BEA BLOMOUIST MAYOR THOMASEGAN JAMES A. SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER COUNCIL MEMBERS 0 CITY OF EAGAN :',9795 PILOT KNOB ROAD P.O. BOK 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOTA' 55112 PHONE 454.8100 0 THOMASHEDGES CITY ADMINISTRATOR EUGENE VAN OVERSEKE CITY CLERK August 10, 1982 -: ` Dear all applicants whose industrial development revenue bond preliminary resolutions have expired: The City of Eagan has a policy Yr�tlereby approval for industrial develop- ment revenue bond applications are regarded as active and pending applica- tions for a period of fifteen (15) months after preliminary resolution appro- val. If final resolution approval is not requested or granted within the fifteen month period of time, the application is no longer valid. Several applicants who have not placed industrial development bond issues within the fifteen months have requested six month or one year extensions, which in most cases are granted by the City Council. If your plans were to request an extension and you now recognize an over- sight, please make a formal request for a time extension by August 31, 1982 and your request will be considered at the September 7, 1982 City Council meeting. If no request is made by that time, the City of Eagan will determine that your application is inactive and no longer a valid con- sideration for industrial development revenue financing. The City Council recently did take action amending the industrial revenue bond financing options to include an industrial revenue bond under a public offering condi- tional upon a properly secured letter of credit. A letter outlining the City Council action was sent out to all applicants who have active preli- minary resolution approval by the City Council. A copy of that letter is attached for your information. If you would like additional information or have questions on the City's guidelines, please feel free to contact Mr. Gene VanOverbeke,•the Director of Finance/City Clerk or me at any time. Sincerely, r�a Qj Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator TLH/hnd Enclosure 10 9 THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. Michael R. Sill Chairmen arw Chia Executive Officer August 16, 1982 City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road P. 0. Box 21199 Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Attention: Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator Dear Tom: Thanks for your letter informing me that 15 months has transpired since we received approval for our industrial development revenue bonds. -,':., „_:;a•::::= Needless to say, with the economic conditions what they are, we have not actively pursued the construction of our new corporate headquarters in Eagan. It is still our inten- tion to build on our site when economic times return to some form of normalcy. I would like to request an extension for the maximum allowable time, and I will keep you posted as to our progress. If it is important that a representative of our company be at the council meeting on September 7, please give me a call. MRS/sld since ely, Flo I 4901 West 80th Street a Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437 a Phone: (612) 8353535 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Nine JPK PARK CO/IR FINANCING EXTENSION E. J.P.K. Park Company for Extension of Industrial Revenue Financing Bond Preliminary Approval -- The same letter was sent to J.P.K. Park Company as referenced in the previous item. J.P.K. Park Company, in a letter found on page 112 , is also requesting a time extension. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny an exten- sion of time for the preliminary resolution approved to J.P.K. Park Company for industrial development revenue bond financing. 0 0 J.E. Wranto ssociates inc. Commercial and Industrial Realtors Appraisals Real Estate Development August 23, 1982 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road PO Box 21199 Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Dear Mr. Hedges: The J. P. K. Park Company application for industrial development revenue bonds in connection with the proposed shopping center at Diffley Road and Nicols Road will expire shortly. It is requested that the Eagan City Council consider extending this application for an additional year in view of the relatively high in- terest rates. during the past two years and the amendment including public offerings upon a properly secured letter of credit. JEP/sah 3908 3908 Sibley Memorial Highway 0 Eagan, Minnesota • 55122 0 (812) 454.1800 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty SIGN ORDINANCE VARIANCE/COCA COLA F. Coca Cola Corporation for a Variance to the Sign Ordinance An application was submitted requesting a variance from Ordinance #16, the sign ordinance, to allow the Coca Cola logo and name to be painted on the east wall of the Coca Cola building located on Lots 4 through 13, Block 7, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #1. The City Planner has prepared a report that describes the applica- tion in detail and also provides background on the provisions of the sign ordinance. To review the report, a drawing of the sign and location maps, refer to pages /14 through 1j A color drawing of the sign is enclosed in your packets without a page number. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the re- quest of the Coca Cola Corporation as presented in the variance application. 113 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE - COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY NIIMEST APPLICANT: com-COLA BOTPLING caTANY miDWFST LOCATION: LOTS 4-13, BLOCK 7, EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK #1 EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: SEPTEMBER 7, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 REPORTED BY: nAI C. RUNKLE, CSiy PLANNER An application has been submitted requesting a variance from Ordinance #16, Sign Ordinance, to allow the Coca-Cola logo and name to be painted on the east wall of the Coca-Cola building located on Lots 4-13, Block 7, Eagandale,Center Indus- trial Park #1. Presently, Coca-Cola has expanded their facility and is the largest bottling facility in the country. Presently the facility contains approximately 350,000 square feet. The identification they presently have is a small pylon sign which is visible on Eagandale Blvd. They also have small raised lettering on the front of the building. The applicant has requested to be able to get identifica- tion from T.H. 55. The building side orientated to T.H. 55 contains 243 lineal feet which is very large wall for any building in the metropolitan area. Coca- Cola Bottling has requested to get identification and would like to 'paint their logo and name on this side of the building. In reviewing alternatives, staff had suggested that they look at raised lettering which would be in conformance with Ordinance #16. However, the applicant has stated that raised lettering of this size is very costly and Coca-Cola feels they can achieve the same effects and maintain as high of an image by painting their logo and name as compared to pro- viding the raised lettering. It is staff's understanding that the identification on the east side of the build- ing would primarily be used during the daytime hours when the transport trucks are out of the parking lot. In the evenings, the Coca-Cola trucks will be park- ed in the parking lot and identification for the building will be seen on the trucks in the parking lot vs. the identification painted on the building. Ordi- nance #16, Subdivision 6, states no signs are allowed which are painted directly on the building but Coca-Cola wishes a variance frau this provision because of the size and magnitude of the wall of the building and feels they can do as good a job by pathting the graphic on the side of the building as compared to using raised lettering. Coca-Cola has also indicated that this would be maintained on an annual basis in order to keep an attractive image in the industrial park. P+ 9 0 .I • •• :• 1 ••; I• • • IS. 0MS SI' S I' 71 1' •C • In reviewing the application, staff has had two concerns regarding the request for identification to be painted on sides of buildings vs. conformance with ordinance #16. The first concern is in regard to the upkeep and the attractiveness the paint would have over raised letters. Coca-Cola has assured staff that they would be willing to agree to an annual maintenance of the graphic in order to keep the attractiveness of their building. The second concern is in regard to a precedent regarding painting on the sides of buildings. In reviewing this aspect, staff does not feel a precedent would be set in regard to the size of the facility. As stated above, the wall where identification would be painted is 243 lineal feet. The size and magnitude of the wall is worthy of having special consideration vs. buildings that would typically have walls of 50-75 feet in length where raised letters could be provided quite economically to identify buildings. Therefore, consideration may be given on the size of this facility and because of the magni- tude, special consideration could be given for Coca-Cola Bottling Midwest. If approved, the variance should be subject to the following conditions: 1. An annual maintenance program be agreed to by Coca-Cola which is set forth by the City Council. 2. If the identification becomes unattractive, Coca-Cola will agree to remove the sign or come in conformance with ordinance #16 regarding raised letter- ing. DCR/jack. )i5 •s8T E1E,g7 4 AT DKWF-•T+lFJ COW • �I FJpen Fec®ly /�/e.../ne Bou k, mw...t K $2tlC( Leach& Lhdstrm kc I (1ICtitC(� and Ertg�eers III�Ju :ws Q �� soca oca Co8a Bottling, Midwest, Mc. Eagan, Minnesota tA EXISTF40 VENDFIG FACLff Y 72' HIGH COCA COLA U.S.A. BUILDING TOWER' Em V— vlf NEW CONCENTRATE MIXNG FACLrrY NEW SALES/ j 45' HIGH ROOF AREA EXISTM WAREHOUSE/ Dismmrim I CAN?4140 FACLrFY FACILITY I Ji JEW REBE FACLrFVli :JW Cif .IE IT EagaffWale BoLdevwd — — --- --- ----- SCALE I' SW -0' PRELIMINARY SITE INFORMATION - - - - --- salt ki'm tv 4 1 1 -1 1 &K K.4 h 4 S14; u h�PE�;EDO A \ I = MM -808-2 . Tt T• •Y• \ `` y/` �^� � :V .til J.'• '•'$ .�V.i ::. • r• i \ /;/ �,,:r.r: •iii'/r4:'/.f/ ,•...• ...... ET�� Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -One SPECIAL PERMIT/NAEGLE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING CO. G. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company for a Special Permit for an Advertising Sign to be Located in Cedar Ridge Second Addition -- An application was submitted to the City requesting a special permit for an outdoor advertising sign located on the southwest portion of Lot 2, Cedar Ridge Second Addition. For a report and additional information on the special permit request of Naegele for the sign, refer to the City Planner's report found on pages 12,() through 12.4- ACTION 2,4. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the ad- vertising sign as applied for by Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company for Cedar Ridge Second Addition. III 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN ' SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN OUTDOOR APPLICANT: NAE= OUTDOOR ADVERTISING COMPANY SIGN LOCATION: LOP 2, CEDAR RIDGE 2ND ADDITION - SEC'T'ION 30 EXISTING ZONING: LB (Lra= BUSINESS DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF REPORT REPORTED BY APPLICATION SUBMITTED: ,ped y r. w• : . ROW -4-14-0 4r W1 0 ML•IT'a An application has been subndtted requesting a special permit for an outdoor ad- vertising sign located on the southwest portion of Lot 2, Cedar Ridge 2nd Addi- tion located in the SA of Section 30. As directed by the City Council, outdoor advertising signs must receive a special permit granted by the City Council. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co. has submitted an application for a special permit to construct an outdoor advertising sign. Ordinance #16, the Sign Ordinance, references criteria for outdoor advertising signs. These criteria are as follows: 1. Advertising signs are permitted on property zoned business or industrial 2. No sign shall be located nearer than 20' from any street or highway rights- of-way 3. No advertising sign shall be located nearer to any other advertising sign than 1,000 lineal feet on the same side of the street or within 300' lineal feet of any other advertising sign on the opposite side of the street. 4. No advertising sign shall be located on a platted lot which contains a busi- ness sign or within 300' of any business free-standing ground sign or pylon sign measured on the same side of the street. 5. No advertising sign shall be located within 200' of any residential zone whether on the same or the opposite side of the street. 6. No advertising sign shall exceed 250 square feet in area except when adjacent to limited access highway, in which case the City Council shall determine the maximum size after reviewing applicable conditions including terrain, safety factors, etc. 12.0 Special Permit for Naegele outdoor Advertising Co. September 7, 1982 Page two 7. No advertising sign shall exceed 40' measured at lot level or roadway level. whether lot level or roadway level is used is based on visibility factor on the adjacent roadway. In reviewing the application submitted by Naegele outdoor Advertising Co., it appears that they have met all the criteria for an outdoor advertising sign. The applicant is requesting that the sign be 10' 6" by 36' for a area of 378 square feet, or have the option to go to 450 square feet of signage or less if deemed appropriate by the City Council. It is the City's understanding that there will only be one side of the sign which would have advertising placed on it. In re- viewing the proposed location, it appears that Naegele does meet the criteria set up in Ordinance #16. Enclosed are exhibits of the proposed sign and the lo- cation as to where the sign will be located. If approved, the special permit should be subject to the following conditions: 1. When construction occurs on Lot 2, Cedar Ridge 2nd Addition, the advertising sign will have to be removed. 2. The sign shall not exceed 450 square feet of signage or whatever is designated by the City Council. 3. The sign shall not be higher than 40' at this particular location. 4. The sign shall be required to meet all setback requirements of Ordinance #16. 5. The sign shall meet all other applicable ordinances. DCR/jach ia( 'h4 /p ill--------- ---25258-- --- T S89°5355 -W -- 5.G AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT e. O \ O. 0 D 19 �. 16' .rm 5.0-1 j 262.56 S890 5355"W SOUTH LINE OF T/ -C NW/14 OF SEC 30, TWP. 27, RGE23 IZZ �71bS i, � � i rt..,. �: f �.. .: / LI to w,nJ¢ll A sc G 1 _ � 7• 1 J A LI I B1/'( Lir R•I .�Jt Js• opR LI _I `CEr wEl •I l t l Ijj �1 �T Al //�"�_�'//I R • IC I � . K.FELUAUN A',��ii1J1J}1I ' I R.'41 I� � fNLLANwLE �F( r �" "tycEN AN it rl s PR 4(' l H A ,w I vGB m5'".11 R-4 A /i rRB e s A N . n FF y�B � 1 Sil JP? veB_2 se.00L A s �R7C _ 1 �, J`": cL.nR .I I •/ }77 x A rwc. A NEIeIiK sl�� r 98999.:e el AR ERw J A r F.}J_ 1 A M�� y ROD, vi.+s yc fv`Ci R.4 r R 4 MARI Yrs L`. R'4J , R-IC _ N k 4 7: \ 'S. '410' L CSC 3� A•I.. R• I a P' I ' `•r . P ..atm ;0h. PK ,c , -FB• , R .. r \�' I, L .,.SAFARI A ' 1' A LE �0 .. b� EAT F 6GGN//x I❑DI RIVER RB I •,aA A . A A A / .. R•I TEST r c Z"5rA ENTER R•2 Ix A A R7 �A m WINKLER/J�SON,: Gj' -.T�Jj /� A \V AOOITION A QSL({T ti'i - I J'i� It J V l t'i+:l L yJr /0 at,rY V z. "so'I.Ly A/ ti14 v Y R tll s'' 4 fav A PK o qJ+ A A Jlr''9.Mb�.pitftiElN�7'9l�Ua' . J45�J yAJy, J.JI J }J yyUTv Fv, J J \ if 1 }I1 L, yJ J J 1j r• R-IC �� p P R-IA I A ` i APPLE VALLEY / AI / 111:181 Zoning maw of Eagl GOOD �•�.. ve YL Olt PREPARED E.. rZo rt RON,��, 7/tP,I-• ESIKOO, ROSENE . ANOERLIK a ASSOC.. INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS , \►.'l�` �al1r>', ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA ro••.•v Ivu nx.xv nu r �� Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Two TEMP. ADVERTISING SIGN/THORNWOOD TOWNHOUSES H. Temporary Advertising Sign for Thornwood Townhouses -- An appli- cation was submitted by Lexington Development for a temporary sign described as 4' x 8' or 32 sq. ft. in size to be located at the southwest intersection of Duckwood Drive and Lexington Avenue. The proposed sign is for advertising townhouses that have concept approval in St. Francis Wood 3rd Addition. Enclosed on pages 1;ththrough 117 is a copy of maps that illustrate the location o e sign as prepared by Chief Building Inspector Peterson. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a tem- porary advertising sign for the proposed Thornwood Townhome develop- ment. lX5 3665 Widgeon Way, Eagan, MN 55123 • 454-5921 / 224.5790 ij U7-otj d A -J C • .Sv . SVNofooD PoME'S a78 A-i2/002T biz. 2)own/—'7w,j A2POQ.•T �i TNUL MA/. Ts/07 C-4 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Three TEMPORARY. 3.2 BEER LICENSE/MICHAEL DUBOIS I. Michael DuBois for,, a." Temporary 3.2 Beer License for September 11, 1982 -- The City has"received an application for a 3.2 temporary beer license from Michael DuBois who resides at 3155 Hwy. 13. Mr. DuBois is a free lance musician and is requesting application for the license to be used in conjunction with a party he has scheduled for September 11, 1982 at that location. The City has not processed any 3.2 temporary licenses to individuals for the purpose of a party. Most applications have been for either charita- ble, non-profit or softball organizations. The City Administrator did ask for a letter stating how the profits were intended to be used by Mr. DuBois and it was his statement in a letter attached on page JArl that if there is a profit the money will be used as a pria_e_To_r a ping pong tournament. The ordinance, Ordinance #43, Section 43.15, Temporary On -Sale License, reads as follows in subdivision 1: "A temporary on -sale license may be issued upon application to the Council to any charitable or non-profit organiza- tion for a fee prescribed by. the Council on a one day basis not to exceed two consecutive days. The Council shall prescribe such conditions to the permit as it deems advisable and necessary under the circumstances." Since this license appears to differ from other 3.2 temporary beer license applications, it was placed on the regular agenda for discussion and consideration by the City Council. Mr. DuBois is planning to be in attendance at the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a tem- porary 3.2 beer license to Mr. Michael DuBois. i ;LS 0 0 - _..-m-��`+---r—• 1. :.'LTn•.r�.•+a--r. `--'.,Tai: �.r'�'"SLI? �,..--r-r-�.,-• �r„�'�j'a^�Fa>r _ _..-mrda' V%'_:. ' I• I' 11. �t I•: IfI, lIV. j.tl I I t I,} i�F';1 117 , .! 0 "S lf[ jlt 1 ys,!l If �51F �! !•I'1 't I Ix IV i,uJl la IL n al �h 6 t, N , ,.,,wTiYf°:,S•<"+a-.rtii::.. t 1 I L 7� 1 .I 1 V i,i / I i ! `�� LI iJI 1 i ` 1 P `'IirV 1 I`. i�1 l I Il cj r rl F 1' YXI • 11 -' :I .C� 1 V � � x JILLL F i I L:i�I 1 n. ', .. 1 J l�' 11 I-:1 i t.. a •(;I'{ I al f,'I I1 I "t\, f �I ) ••5,; 1 - II II. •I � 'I \I'yS •111 ' ! Ia , :' �, � i I : i itI•a 1' a s ya' so If I i' 1L ' I ' I :, '''Ir '.� .r..n.' •AL1 1, .•, ..J 1. , 41 �'4 I" 'I ..I ,•;.1. L1. 04 �L, : ..i' .. •.1 ::!.L: 'I -''•'i' •. �n.j�� a x'.•i. a{i(�. 11. J•a�. lif'.L ��'.'•I��� /I/^L'' tu 111 I I !•, IJ, II 1 ,-- 1 , ' 1 I: r 1 ` - .. ,. .. -1c 1 ,- - ,• .. .. E Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Four STOP SIGN PETITION - JADE LANE J. Stop Sign Petition - Jade Lane at Pumice Lane -- Enclosed on pages Iills I through _ 3 are copies of a petition and location maps of existing stop signs and petitioners who are requesting the installation of a stop sign on Jade Lane at the intersection with Pumice Lane. It appears that this request is in response to stop signs that were installed at the intersection of Carnelian Lane and Pumice Lane by Council action on September 16, 1980 which the residents say forces the Carnelian traffic onto Jade Lane to avoid this four way stop intersection. Based on the configuration of the intersection of Pumice Lane with Jade Lane, the staff does not recommend approval of the petition request for stop signs on Jade Lane at the intersection with Pumice Lane. However, if stop signs are to be installed at this location, it is requested that a three way installation be provided to control Pumice Lane entering onto Jade Lane. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the request for installation of stop signs at the intersection of Jade Lane and Pumice Lane in response to a submitted petition. 136 • I • PETITION REQ STOP SIGN I/we, the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of the City of Eagan to install stop signs on 3r _ /e L at the intersection with A.M;r-C I/we, request this installation for the following reasons: 1. 5A74c; y t o-4" a-„ .L../c& a---? Wa c�w 2. 3,2� CL 4 c k' ado e42Qo r�oaG CGrO on A10 h 3. nL�,t of Giw. -u9 ow rri•�' ��'�'ycc� do `t' %l ��e.c�f'•' • A -."d �l:a o 4 • %o 4C I/we request that the City Council take this petition request under consideration at its earliest opportunity and that we be informed as to when it is scheduled so that we may appear in person if we so choose. NAME (Please print and initial) ADDRESS C£c{AR GAQyE~7 1. I. DELI t1 1"E�asoAj G4^a �� 1./)RNFr,7AA� Li 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. S. 9. 10. 11. 12. -"Lot6 fts Zo}S N*S- o� 44 ALk 5 F3 [3LkS ro kky _I. NkS lrBSD �mO, �h • Lot 7 A/kS Yo 93 / Hj nN/•/ P Lam -L 1a+6 B&Y 131 0 0 PROPERTY OF PETITIONER • REQUESTED LOCATION FOR STOP SIGN __.--- 0 _ r� o ¢ro uu «w uw nn nu no •eu ,o aoe S Yz • If 0. f . („ eky •S I 10 . 11 , I. 12 i 13 «' is ]] - -K q14 , d,.o I• ! ����,r ,mrirx, 4;i! a"= �9.wra.� 1 •• "10 ,dwr,!` • �s'r TACONITE TRA:` ! 3' :a"` tIl ,00a nw . . «, •,m •,+� e• s� 0.0«- i I I I ,-.$1c ' i 1° S • - o• f •I• r. Y��\ 1• I 1• I I ZJ ' • 5 + n , - _ !W ia ' -,p�nw_�uw YN`e,'NZ I° •r �� ••z• nw I ww », If L'z' -.,.; ••e .- and .w« *f mi ] �,c. F+1 Iy , a 32 S �.. •• 1 v! • ,! _ ]t !1 30 5 �q zs > '0 'to ,a, •V�'v ro ,ae 1- y tT i f •e wt� o 31a ,,Y i r••�'fi ii !• _ �=•-=in F+�»4i.3.� e:� �� �d• l`y; �' r � • i+ `. to - , -PUM POINT'[..• •.Y tl • •! tl 'e-� ma wa •,c �iJ• J 2p�•J ,•o . 1 i 30 • _ - Y ellb• ;� 8i + • a 4 3 wt m,r OYrf �I- H ✓;.• at i tt '.ryf�� t]. tr: w to 9 c t Us '�• ` • I • - s �• 15 rYti :• it zt if iq S a „ l° r . e ital. _ e Je.- win l F- -e. nnas,cl ,.I„aTa. �ilaa�TAe ( •,•Y,lr•• y\�/i+n.n }o r. yat •A .,•n y3 e:Jn Jain -ria �Tef'Se �«• •/�t'i.-f. o try •.' - _° ; .Kyr• 'L H,o w �J•!'y p F' • uI'fr'N. �e e, , «zz J6 !E I�.`,• 'CARNELIAN;m- 9 11 _ t. pa 1 qoe I r cN4x •/O GeU• •'.r•- �. .. -LTJ T "uT•w N r.% • �yc nu.. ^ d ^IT roe - f • e zo moo .ma «, ue '•;•i ,1'r;�!!,-.� :{r O�� '•:'F..iy:••;:; • . 4 3 SO Is 20 ._ y • ep 1 p Wrr:ijj'•::•::�;y+.wo- VoM��.l_F :'J :J.l�.�1y'4h���) .. 3,1' 1 - �esa' •e e+ ' •'!T,Y' L s p : d rii•i' i'.: _:; �r , �.r..z•i , _f' rti� 'r.. bf • 4 ZV;?.Q�}v a• • 95:}.i}'::.: 3 11 ;i N Ai Qr :Y 1° ..+y.:.. 'fJyr byg� _,zl� L. _.e. -teras«•. _ z �j� .+,.•+ :✓ar. :LANE • .�: + I, y ...,,. •S 1• �^ " iii ..•. ......... :.,:;,�..: Jf : BLUEBILL �1 �'v =J� CA HAW. • 011R. eJ�1�; !�;� r 0• 4T, � _J �r l 4 9i-- r` SILVER BELL Qcr - ---- ✓ L V �7� R m w L ( ;, f i z p p > . BL ACKHAWK �L+ a s L 'RE K PALfS .' rlq c = CIR Willillum,vE`.(/pP(A�]Rk J m m R 2 c CW C HR E WJOOHAVEN c 0 CT JO`-' w a 0, G TRAIL rn JPQ D. rIR a N nn PaQ�� ^.. T Q� o� VEN RT DAVENPORT AVE y Oa. Jy Q� 'g CIN A ~ IR.a NTIC / o. �vP iF1. �v T. ABBRO gaRTELL "AVE /moi v _I_ DEERWOPO N FLI,, �z .F J Z A NIT TR rg N'TUMt r011l�E LA 1 PL J UESTON - DR CARNE*L14N i CARNELIAN cc000`(PARK ,., MEADOWLARK JADE LA. ", J d A. i - ... J 'c .' EADOW RK Ro _ ATHRYN 3ccrI 4G ¢. r/ r• as / A ,f RCON LA CO Rd Nr� 15. J CT II 1 IDIFFLEY ,ROAD �Q1/ II � 1No. Q. L ¢ I! / / �/ .cl I j¢ TIMHER 11 /� i I I I 0. �AON§EIRS C Oq 4yf / 1 y /' I `i �ljP W G' m // CAN S Ar,K }...,> 2 y aw - A ESTL; NG CLEMSON / / w RA LIR. � 0 _ Z_a DR D o w - ..... - -- sGC4so L 44 r F v V .'yr: � _ / �, WAI.NU c• :. J MA, ._AF JJ• +' q / > i 3 DR z HI L BEE. HER c.n_ 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Five WIND ENERGY/COMMI'NICATION TOWERS ORDINANCE K. Consideration of a Wind Energy Systems & Radio/TV Towers Ordi- nance -- The Advisory Planning Commission has reviewed the wind energy systems and radio/TV towers ordinance and is recommending approval of the ordinance to the City Council. This action was taken at the APC meeting held on August 24, 1982. For a copy of the ordinance, refer to pages 1'35' through /4f2 Upon approval of the ordinance, the same wirT-5e—sent on to—'Rit e—municipal ordi- nance codifier and incorporated into the codification proceedings. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the wind energy systems & radio/TV towers ordinance as presented. ) 3 `t 8-30-82 0 0 WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEM AND RADIO OR TV TOWER HEIGHT LIMITATIONS SECTION 4._ PLACEMENT, ERECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS AND RADIO OR TV TOWERS. Subd. 1. Purpose, Construction and Definitions. A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section shall be to regulate the placement, erection and maintenance of wind energy conversion systems and TV or radio towers in the City so as to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the City. B. Construction. All terms and words used in this Section shall be given their common sense meaning considered in context, except as hereinafter specifically defined. C. Definitions. 1. "Wind Energy Conversion System" -- A device such as a windcharger, windmill, or windturbine which converts wind energy to another form of usable energy such as electricity or heat. 2. "Radio or TV Antenna" -- Any radio or TV antenna in excess of the height limitation imposed by the Eagan Zoning Ordinance No. 3. "Tower" -- Any structure used to elevate a wind energy conversion system or a radio/TV antenna in excess of the height limitation imposed by the Eagan Zoning Ordinance No. Subd. 2. Conditional Use. A. No wind energy conversion system or TV/radio antenna as described in subdivision 2 shall be erected anywhere within the City without first submitting an application for and obtaining from the City a conditional use permit and compliance with the procedures provided in the Zoning Chapter: i 13S B. Application for said permit shall be made to the City in the same manner as a building permit pursuant to City of Eagan ordinance code. A building permit formula should be used to calculate a fee which shall be payable at the time that the application is made. C. Prior to the issuance of a permit, the applicant shall provide to the City documentation or other evidence from the dealer or manufacturer that the wind energy conversion system has been successfully operated in atmospheric conditions and is warranted against any system failures under reasonably expected severe weather operation conditions as established by the building official. The application shall also provide to the City documentation that the tower structure for the system has received a professional engineer's certification. Subd. 3. Requirements and Specifications. All energy conversion systems and radio/TV towers (where applicable) erected anywhere within the City shall comply with the following requirements: A. Applicable provisions of the Eagan Ordinance Code including the applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code (standards) therein adopted shall be complied with in addition to those requirements set out in this ordinance. B. Wind energy conversion system tower foundations shall be designed to resist two times the wind uplift calculated pursuant to the Uniform Building Code as adopted by the City of Eagan and shall have a professional engineer's certification. C. No part of any wind energy conversion system or TV radio tower or any equipment or lines used in connection therewith or connected thereto including any tower foundation areas, shall be constructed or main - 2 1 36 0 0 tained at any time permanently or temporarily, in or upon any drainage or utility easement. D. No wind energy conversion system tower or TV/radio antenna tower shall be constructed within 20 feet laterally of any overhead electrical Power line (excluding secondary electrical service lines or "service stubs".) Setback from said electric distribution lines shall be at least five feet. E. No wind energy conversion system or TV/radio antenna supporting tower shall exceed a height of 100 feet, or the distance from the tower to the nearest property line, whichever is less, measured from the base of the tower to the highest point of the tower, without a variance. F. Wind energy conversion systems utilizing propellers shall not have rotor diameters greater than 35 feet. G. All wind energy conversion systems shall be equipped with automatic speed control devices as part of their design. H. Blade arcs created by a wind energy conversion system shall be a minimum of 30 feet above the ground. I. Wind energy conversion systems and towers shall be adequately grounded for protection against direct strike by lighting and shall comply, as to electrical wiring and connections, with applicable federal regulations, Minnesota State Statutes and regulations, as well as City of Eagan codes. J. All lines and wires extending substantially horizontal above the ground from a tower or extended to a building, tower or structure, shall be at least eight feet above the ground at all points. K. Wind Energy Conversion Systems and commercial radio/TV towers shall be guarded against unauthorized climbing. The first 12 feet of the tower shall be unclimbable by design or enclosed by a 6 -foot high, nonclimbable fence with a lockable gate. 3 137 Subd. 4. Insurance. All personal radio and TV towers shall be adequately insured for injury and property damage caused by collapse of the towers. All other applicants must provide liability insurance in the amount of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $50,000 for property damage for any liability that may arise as the result of collapse, falling debris, electrical discharge or any other occurrence causing damage or injury to persons or property resulting from the wind energy system or radio/TV tower. Subd. 5. Towers. Only one tower exceeding the limitations of the zoning ordinance shall be permitted in a residential lot. Subd. 6. Abandoned Towers -- Removal. Any wind energy system which is not used for twelve (12) successive months commencing the effective date of this ordinance, shall be deemed abandoned and shall be removed as abandoned property. Subd. 7. Variances. Variances from the strict provisions of this Ordinance may be granted pursuant to the variance provisions of the Eagan Zoning Ordinance. Subd. 8. Existing Systems. Wind Energy Conversion Systems and radio/TV antennae in existence at the time of adoption of this ordinance shall be granted conditional use permits. However, safety measures which are requirements of this ordinance shall be complied with if not involving major structural change to the tower or substantial expense to the owner. Subd. 9. Violations. Any person violating the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day such violation continues shall constitute a 5 139 • E L. Personal TV and radio towers shall be unclimbable by design for the first 8 feet or completely surrounded. by a fence in excess of 3 feet in height. M. Except for illumination devices required by FAA regulations and residential lighting in compliance with City codes, no wind energy conver- sion System or tower shall have affixed or attached to it in any way any lights, reflectors, flashers or other illumination devices. N. No wind energy conversion system shall have attached to it in any way any signs (does not include equipment labels), banners, or placards of any kind, except for one sign, not to exceed two square feet, which dis- plays suitable warning of danger to unadvised persons, the systems manu- facturer, and energy shutdown procedures. 0. All wind energy conversion systems and TV/radio antennas shall comply with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Noise Pollution Section (NPC 1 and NPC 2) as amended. P. All wind energy conversion systems and TV/radio antennas shall comply with all applicable Federal Communications Commission regulations as amended. Q. All such structures shall comply with all applicable Federal Aviation Administration regulations as amended. B. The interface of the wind energy conversion system with the consumer's electric service shall be performed pursuant to all applicable federal and Minnesota regulations. The owner shall notify their local elec- tric utility company in advance of such interface. The company shall review and comment upon any applications affecting their service. Both parties shall regulate their activities in a cooperative manner including the purchase of excess electricity by the utility company if required by state law. 4 131 0 separate offense and be punished accordingly. Subd. 10. Effect. L This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after the passage and publication as required by law. BY: BEATTA BLOMQUIST, MAYOR This ordinance adopted: CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN ATTEST: E. J. VANOVERBEKEp CITY CLERK This ordinance published in the Eagan Chronicle: i+o 6 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Six CONTRACTOR LICENSING ORDINANCE L. Consideration of a Contractor Licensing Ordinance -- The con- tractor licensing ordinance has been reviewed by City Councilmember Wachter and revised by the City staff and City Attorney's office. A copy of the contractor licensing ordinance is enclosed on pages 14 a through J+T for your review. Upon approval of the ordinance, the same will—incorporated into the ordinance codification docu- ment. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the con- tractor licensing ordianance. /4! E CITY OF EAGAN ORDINANCE NO. n AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE LICENSING OF CERTAIN BUSINESS AND OCCUPATIONS AND PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION THEREOF. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN ORDAINS: SECTION 1. LICENSES REQUIRED. Before any person, firm or corporation shall engage in the business of doing or performing any of the various types of work hereinafter listed in this section within the City of Eagan, the applicant shall first obtain a license to do so as hereinafter provided: A. Concrete work, concrete block work, concrete block laying or brick work, including fireplaces. B. General construction including erection, wrecking, alteration or repair of buildings and completing of all work included in the general contract. (See Section 9). C. Heating, ventilation, air-conditioning, refrigeration equipment and gas piping. "Air-conditioning equipment" as used hereunder shall not be deemed to include the installation of window air-conditioning units. D. Roofing. E. Installation of above and below grade swimming pools. F. Siding contracting including the installation or removal of wood, aluminum, steel or composition siding. Nothing herein shall be construed as preventing a property owner from performing his own work providing all provisions of applicable City Code or Ordinances are adhered to. SECTION 2. APPLICATION. Applications for such license shall be filed with the City Clerk on forms furnished by the City and shall be approved by the City Council. SECTION 3. FEES. The fee for each license shall be $25.00 annually. 1 i42 SECTION 4. ISSUANCE OF LICENSE. All licenses shall be issued by the City Clerk after approval by the City Council. SECTION 5. EXPIRATION. All licenses shall expire on December 31 following the date of issuance unless sooner revoked or forfeited. If a license granted hereunder is not renewed previous to its expiration, then all rights granted by such license shall cease, and any work performed after the expiration of such license shall be in violation of this ordinance. SECTION 6. DISPLAY OF LICENSE. Each licensee shall make certain that the license is prominently displayed or readily available for the City Protective Inspection Department personnel review. SECTION 7. RENEWAL OF LICENSE. Persons renewing their licenses after the expiration date shall be charged the full annual fee. No prorated license fee shall be allowed for renewals. SECTION 8. VARIANCE. The City Council may issue a variance hereto, waiving the requirements of this Ordinance or any portions thereof in the event of a declared emergency or clear hardship and for such period, of time as deemed by the Council to be necessary. SECTION 9. A. GENERAL CONTRACTORS. A license granted to a general contractor shall include the right to perform all of the work included in his general contract. Such licenses shall include any or all of the persons performing the work which is classified and listed in Section 1 above, pro- viding that each sub -contractor or person performing such work is supervised by or in the regular employ of the general contractor and qualified under state law and the provisions of this Ordinance to perform such work. In these cases the general contractor shall be responsible for all of the work so performed. B. EXCEPTIONS. Electrical, plumbing, water well and HVAC contractors shall not be covered under the general contractor's license. They shall have State or City Licenses, Bonds and Insurance on file with the City. SECTION 10. QUALIFICATIONS. Each applicant for a license shall satisfy the Council after recommendation by the City Protective Inspection Department that the applicant is competent by reason of education, special training, experience, and that the applicant is equipped to perform the work for which a license is requested, in accordance with all State of Minnesota Laws. Where a State of Minnesota license is required, no license shall be required hereunder, however, evidence of said State license must be submitted prior to issuance of any permits therefor. 2 /1+3 SECTION 11. REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION. The Council may suspend or revoke the license of any person licensed under this Ordinance, whose work is found to be improper or defective or so unsafe as to jeopardize life or property. The person holding such license shall be given twenty (20) days notice and granted the opportunity to be heard before such action is taken. If and when such notice is sent to the legal address of the licensee and he fails to or refuses to appear at the said hearing, his license will be automatically suspended or revoked 5 days after the date of the hearing. SECTION 12. PERIOD OF SUSPENSION. When a license is suspended, the Period of suspension shall be not less than thirty (30) days nor more than one (1) year, such period being determined by the Council. SECTION 13. REVOCATION UPON VIOLATIONS. When any person holding a license has been convicted for the second time by a court of competent jurisdiction for violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance, the Council shall revoke the license of the person so convicted. Such person may not make application for a new license for a period of one (1) year. SECTION 14. SURETY BONDS. No license granted under the terms stated herein shall become effective until the licensee shall have filed with the Clerk a surety bond in the penal sum of Five Thousand and no/100 ($5,000.00) Dollars, operating in favor of the City and conditioned that the City will be saved harmless from any loss or damage by reason of improper or inadequate work performed by the holder of said license under the provisions of this Ordinance. Such bonds shall be subject to approval as to form, execution and surety by the City. SECTION 15. LIABILITY INSURANCE. Each person holding a license hereunder shall file with the City Clerk a policy of public liability and property damage insurance which shall remain and be in force and effect during the entire term of said license and which shall contain a provision that it will not be cancelled without at least thirty (30) days' written notice to the City. Public liability insurance shall not be less than $100,000 for the injuries, including accidental death to any one person, and, subject to the same limit for each person, in an amount of not less than $200,000 on account of any one accident, and property damage insurance in the amount of not less than $50,000 for each accident or mishap. Said policy of insurance shall further provide for indemnity and security to the City of Eagan against any liability and/or responsibility for the acts, actions, or omissions of the license of any of the agents or servants of such licensee subject, however, to the limitations as to amount herein stated. No work shall be done under any license hereunder until said insurance policies shall have been filed and approved by the City Clerk. Provided, however, that in the case of plumbers who have obtained a license to perform such work from the State of Minnesota, there shall be no liability insurance required under the provisions of this Ordinance. 3 144 • 0 SECTION 16. PENALTIES. Any person, firm or corporation convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance shall be punished by a fine of not more than Five Hundred and no/100 ($500.00) Dollars, or by imprisonment for a period of not more than ninety (90) days, or both, but in either case, the cost of prosecution may be added. Each day's violation of the provisions of this Ordinance shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 17. SEVERANCE. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable and if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall for any reason be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, sentences, clauses and phrases of this ordinance but they shall remain in effect, it being the legislative intent that this Ordinance shall stand notwithstanding the invalidity of any part. SECTION 18. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and publication. Adopted by the City Council this day of ATTEST: Its Clerk CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN By: Its Mayor /45- 4 , 1982. 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Seven CABLE COMMISSION UPDATE E A. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commission Update -- The last regular meeting of the Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commission was held on August 25 in the City of Burnsville. Eagan City Council representative Jim Smith will comment on the action that was taken at that meeting. The next regular meeting of the Cable Commission is scheduled in the City of Eagan on Thursday, September 9, 1982. There is no action required. CONTRACT 82-10 B. Contract 82-10, Receive Bids, Award Contract (Tower View Road - Streets) -- At 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, September 1, 1982, formal bids were received for the above referenced contract. Enclosed on page 14'7 is a tabulation of the bids received with the low bid compareUto the engineer's estimate and the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 3, 1982. The alter- nate bid provides for the replacement of the existing 12 inch cast iron pipe (C.I.P.) with a 12 inch ductile iron pipe (D.I.P) for that section of watermain that must be removed and relocated to a lower elevation due to the proposed grade of the new Tower View Road profile. Because C.I.P. is more susceptible to cracks, leaks and breakage and due to the fact that this is a trunk line providing providing service to the City's elevated 0.5 M.G. water reservoir on Univac's property, staff strongly recommends that the alternate bid be accepted which would provide for a replacement of the section of pipe with D.I.P. All costs associated with this work will be assessed due to the fact that this lowering is necessitated by the construction of Tower View Road to provide access to the adja- cent properties. In addition, the bids received 8.32% below those quoted at the public haaring. The staff has received a right of entry from l.'nivac's property while a formal easement document is being processed through their organization. While it was anti- cipated that the Lone Oak Heights plat that was approved by Council on August 17 would have been recorded by September 7, the developer has not yet fully complied with the final plat conditions placed by Council at the August 17 meeting. Subsequently, the staff has prepared a separate street and utility easement document for execu- tion by the developer and that document has been executed. These two developers would provide all the necessary easements and rights- of-way for this contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids for contract 82-10 and award the contract to the low bidder, Buesing Brothers in the amount of the alternate bid for $101,750.85. /4� 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 0 CONTRACTORS Buesing Bros. Hardrives Inc. 0 Our File No. 49255 TOWERVIEW ROAD STREET & STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS CITY CONTACT NO. 82-10 CITY PROJECT NO. 360 EAGAN, MINNESOTA Alexander Construction Co Bituminous Roadways Inc. DLR Construction Co. Enron Utilities Richard Knutson Inc. McNamara Contracting Valley Paving Inc. R -So Contracting H.S.H. Construction Co. BID TIME: 10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T BID DATE: Weds., Sept. 1, 1982 TOTAL BASE BID ALTERNATE BID $ 98,810.85 $101,750.85 99,108.60 102,272.60 99,395.25 102,675.25 104,546.00 106,730.00 NO BID NO BID I NO BID _ NO BID NO BID NO BID NO SID I I ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE------------ $106,000 Feasibility Report (Alternate Bid) $110,980.00 Engineer's Estimate 106,000.00 Low Bid 101,750.85 8 over (+) or under (-) F. R. -8.328 /4-7 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Eight CONTRACT 82-11 C. Contract 82-11, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Hilltop Plaza - Utilities) -- At 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, September 2, 1982, formal bids were opened for the above referenced contract at City Hall. Enclosed on page /+9 is a copy of the bid tabulation with the low bid comparison -7 -o -7 -Fe engineer's estimate and the price quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 3, 1982. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids for Contract 82-12 and award the contract to the low bidder, Encon Utilities, in the amount of $26,904.50. 148 0 • Our File No. 49258 HILLTOP PLAZA SANITARY SEWER, WA'1'F:HMAIN 6 STORM SEWER CITY CONTRACT NO. 82-11 PROJECT NO. 363 EAGAN, MINNESOTA CONTRACTORS 1. Encon Utilities Inc. 2. F. F. Jedlidd 3. T & S Excavating Co 4. Ridiard Knutson, Inc. 5. Widmer Bros., Inc. 6. Austin P. Keller Construction 1505b BID TIME: 9:30 A.M., C.D.S.T. BID DATE: Thurs. September 2, 1982 TOTAL BASE BID $26,904.50 27,575.00 28,519.99 31,099.15 31,217.50 34,655.00 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE .................. $31,400 Feasibility Report $33,420.00 Engineer's Estimate 31,400.00 Low Bid 26,904.50 8 over W or under (.-) F.R. -19.5% J4q Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Nine CONTRACT 82-12 0 D. Contract 82-12, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Galaxie Avenue - Surfacing) -- At 10:45 a.m. on Wednesday, September 1, 1982, the formal bid opening was held at City Hall for the above referenced contract. Enclosed on page ,/5) is a copy of the bids as received with a comparison to the engineer's estimate and the amount quoted in the feasibility report for Project 316. After checking the extension and addition of unit prices, the low bid amount should be corrected to $171,388.50. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids for Contract 82-12 and award the contract to the low bidder, McNamara Vivant, in the amount of $171,388.50. 1S 0 L GAIAXIE AVENUE STREET SURFACING M.S,A,P. NO, 195-103-03 CITY CONTRACT 82-12 EAGAN, MINNESOTA CONTRACTORS 1. McNamara Vivant 2. Alexander Construction 3. Bituminous Roadways, Inc. 4. Hardrives Inc. 5. Valley Paving Inc. 6. Buesing Bros. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE ------------ 0 Our File No. 49260 BID TIME: 10:45 C.D,S,T BID DATE: WEDNESDAYj, SEPT, 1, 1982 TOTAL BID BASE $171,304.12 185,501.75 191,942.50 192,849.00 NO BID NO BID $197,000.00 Feasibility Report $186,900.00 Engineer's Estimate 197,000.00 Law Bid 171,304.12 8 over (+) or under (-) F.R. -8.34% iyl 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Forty 1983 BUDGET HEARING 0 E. Establish a 1983 Budget Hearing for 9-21-82 City Council Meeting It is recommended that a public hearing be set for the September 212 1982 City Council meeting to allow public input into the budget process. The City Administrator will have a summary of the proposed departmental budgets available for that meeting that will illustrate the results and intentions of the City Council from the September 16, 1982 meeting. It is expected that the mill rate will be set by the City Council at the October 5, 1982 City Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve a budget hearing for the September 21, 1982 City Council meeting. s/Thomas L. Hedges ity Administrator IZ-1:L- MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 1982 SUBJECT: INFORMATIVE Update of Aeronautics Rules Enclosed on page 16+ is a copy of a letter from MnDOT Commissioner Dick Braun regar id g an upcoming procedure for updating the aero- nautics rules that could impact the airport zoning ordinance that will be considered by the joint airport zoning board and ultimately the City of Eagan. Protective Inspections Monthly Report Enclosed on page 15r is a copy of a protective inspections monthly report for the mon-t of August. Municipal Bond Newsletter/Ehlers & Associates Enclosed is a copy of the most recent newsletter from Ehlers & Associates financial specialists. (Pages /5(. through lS- 7 ) s/Thomas L. Hedges ity ministrator /S3 .0 t!`�NNE�r4 e Minnesota n Department of Transportation Transportation Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 OF �r 5 TFP� office of Commissioner (612) 296-3000 August 20, 1982 Eagan City Council c/o Tom Hedges, City Administrator 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Dear Madame Mayor and Members of the Eagan City Council: It has come to our attention that the Eagan City Council has denied Amcon, Inc.'s application for rezoning for its Ravine Plaza project. Our staff has been working with the Eagan Planning Commission and Council on this matter for some time now primarily on the potential impacts of proposed airport zoning at Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. Since you are familiar with the legislative mandate for airport owners to adopt an airport zoning ordinance, I felt that you should also be made aware that the rules guiding this zoning are now open for comment by in- terested or affected parties. This update of the Minnesota Code of Agency Rules pertaining to Aeronautics could take until next spring or summer providing time for comment, draft, review, hearing, comment, redraft, ap- provals, publication and implementation. This update of Aeronautics Rules could, but will not necessarily involve zoning. I intend to make all currently operating joint zoning boards aware of this update procedure although most interested parties have no doubt read it in the August 9, 1982, State Register. If we can be of further assistance in this matter, do not hesitate to con- tact our Aeronautics staff. Sincerely, Richard P. Braun Commissioner 1s4 An Equal Opportunity Employer _4D -0m LI DISPEMON/OFIZCF POURS PROTFCTIVP I21SPFr.riorS �. MNP Y REPORT AUGUST, 1982 NATW.. OF BUILDING PER= ISSUED Amber This Month Year -To -Date Building 141.0 929.0 Pl�ing 111.5 802.0 19 46.0 372.5 Adninistrative/Office 101.0 1067.0 Fire Marshal 25.5 270.0 Miscellaneous 16.0 186.0 General Office 165.5 1163.0 PermLt Processing 100.0 754.5 City Council Meetings. 0.0 1.5 10SM OF PFR`IITS ISS 0 0 0 This Month Year -To -Date R Alding 58 415 Plying .. 38 307 HVAC 47 334 Electric 58 429 Water Softener 5 36 V%11, CeSSn001, Septic Tank 3 7 Signs 6 40 NATW.. OF BUILDING PER= ISSUED Amber a Units Valuation Permit Fee Plan Check Fee T y 19 Single Facnil 19 $1,189,000.00 56,053.50 S3,026.75 $32,849.25 4 A3DleX 4 S 216,000.00 $1,171.00 S 585.50 $ 6,844.50 8 Multi-Fm.ulv 8 S 372,000.00 $2,09o.no $1,045.00 $13,281.00 0 Cormerical 0 0 0 0 0 0 Iruiustrial o 0 0 0 0 0 Institutional 0 0 0 0 0 3 Res. Carage 3 $ 16,200.00 $ 163.50$ 0 $ 172.00 3 Swim. P001 3 S 25,000.00 $ 211.50 5 49.25 $ 273.25 21 MiscellaneoUSI 21 1 S 204,450.00. 51,521.00 S 481.75 $ 2,111.75 _ 58 TOD S 58 i S2,027,650.00 S11,210.50 S5,18R.25 $55,531.75 Total Fees Include: P.uilrlinr, PezrLt Fee, Sts-(1.1arge, Plan (heel_ Fee, SAC 14v.t Fee, T•Tater Cormection Fee, 4hter Iter Fee and Road L'nit Fee. /SS ft.. .. .. EHLI•.06 AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS FIRST NATIONAL-SOO LINE CONCOURSE 507 MARQUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 339-8291 (AREA CODE 6121 File: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates, Inc. Please distribute to governing body members September 1, 1982 Newsletter The tax-exempt bond market continues to be very volatile, with interest rates dropping as the Fed reduced the discount rate and allowed the money supply to increase - as it has previously done when the federal government required large amounts of new money. - Massive federal borrowing would normally be expected to cause a sharp increase in interest rates but the exact opposite seemed to occur, at least for a time, perhaps because of the Federal Reserve Bank's accommodation of the federal government in its financing. The prospect of federal borrowing may be a financing window to look for. Also, a well-read financial commentator, who was previously very bearish on interest rates, reversed his position. + + + + + + + + + + Construction Programs Now? Everybody "knows" that times are depressed, and conventional thinking says t at a government s ou not embark on new projects or incur high interest rate debt. It is hard to think of building when the local economy is down, but contrary thinking says that now is really the best time to buy capital improvements. Contractors are short of work, willing to work for less profit, can pick the best, most productive workers, and project costs are 20% to 30% lower. So, even if interest rates are high, if the principal amount is less the overall cost will be lower. For example, suppose one anticipates contracting a future $1 million project at, let us assume, 9% interest over 20 years. If, instead, one undertakes the project now for $700,000 (30% less) at 11% interest, the annual debt service would be $21,600 less or, over 20 years, $432,000 less. The saving would be even greater if the $700,000 were amortized over a shorter period within the annual debt service required by the $1 million loan. In addition, the community will have had use of the facility and an important source of local employ- ment at a critical time. If you think that the economy will recover, that the community's ability to pay will improve, this now may be the best time to buy a capital project. + + + + + + + + + + Those expecting to issue tax or aid anticipation certificates should be doing their monthly cash flow analyses now for early borrowing. + + + + + + + + + + A Couple of Company Notes: Seegar Swanson, Jr. VP, has moved his residence to Brookfield to be closer to our Aisconsin clients. His phone number is (414) 785-1520. Marilyn Gulke and Steve Apfelbacher continue to serve Wisconsin from the Minneapolis office. + + + + + + + + + + In response to Minnesota city officials' comments on our cash flow seminar, we have scheduled a repeat with two sessions to be held prior to the levy of taxes for 1983. Some wished that these seminars could cover some subjects in more depth. Therefore, by eliminating some topics, we will spend more time on items essential to the budgetary and tax levy process. The repeat program (with some changes) will consist of two separate sessions on Wednesday, September 15 from 9:00 A.M. to 4:30 P.M. and again from 7:30 P.M. to 9:30 P.M., at a location to be announced in the metro area. The first session will be more detailed, going into technical aspects which will be of interest to elected and, especially, administrative people. The evening session will be capsulized and designed especially for policymakers (mayors and council members) but those attending the day session will be welcome on a "space available" basis. Hoping that you had an enjoyable summer, we are Very trul ours, EHL E AN SS I S IN i t L. le4s iS6 �� SUMMARY OF AREA 8016, SALES Net Don Municipality net. Type of Bonds Amount Nates Rete Janes Rating MINNESOTA Marshall 6/7/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 15011 1984-91 10.43% 13.0111 MR Princeton 6/10/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 79SM 1981-95 12.03% 13.01% NIL Princeton 6/10/62 G.O. Improvement Bonds 79M 1984-96 12.47% 13.01% IMI Princeton 6/10/82 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 470M 1983-98 12.471 13.01% M Maplewood 6/14/82 G.O. Temporary Improvement Bonds 3,05011 1985 9.852 13.211 A Inver Grove Heights 6/14/02 G.O. Improvement Bonds 1.5501 1985-99 11.151 13.21% A Sartell 6/14/82 G.O. Bridge Building Bonds 55DM 1985-93 11.73% 13.21% Bea -1 SO llwat[r 6/15/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 400M 1984-93 10.582 13.21% A Wayzata ISO No. 204 6/21/82 G.O. School Building Bonds 4,5901 1985-94 11.331 13.46% A Virginia 5/22/82 G.O. Tax increment Bonds 950M 1985-2002 12.66% 13.46% A Woodbury 6/23/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 1,760" 1984-91 11.15% 13.46% Baa -1 Isantl 6/15/82 Improvement Bonds 82 GO 1984-91 12.00% 13.21% NR lsanti 6/15/82 Bond Anticipation Notes 360M 19W 11.201 13.21% NR Red Wing n 6/28/82 G.O. Water Revenue Bonds 82 72011 1985-88 11.67% 13.41% Aa ' L County 6/29/82 Drainage System Bonds 82 15511 1985-99 12.11% 13.411 A d 6/29/82 Municipal State Aid - Road Bonds of 82 1,0001 1984-2001 12.41% 13.41% A-1 St -.,Cloud 6/29/82 G.O. Tar increment ':011,ia Redevelopment Bonds 2,SOOM 1985-2001 12.37% 13.411 A -I Spring Green 6/20/82 Grant Anticipation Bonds 625M 1984 10.27% 13.41% We ::Pine County 7/6/82 G.O. County Jail Bonds 1,300M 1984-93 11.66% 13.36% Bae -1 'Eveleth 7/6/82 G.O. Grant Anticipation 2,25011 1984.97 12.66% 13.36% Baa -I IOWA Bonds 825M 1984 10.16% 13.36% A 'Golden Valley 7/6/82 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 36011 1985-97 11.65% 13.36% Aa 1' Hastings 7/6/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 10011 1984-93 11.29% 13.36% HR Willmar 7/7/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 1,10014 1983-94 11.15% 13.01% 1 A N State University of Iona (Ione City) 6/17/82 of 82, Ser. B 2,09OW 1985-99 11.63% 13.36% A Willmar 7/7/02 G.O. Revenue Waste 12.970M 1985-2002 10.80% 13.21% A -I lone State University 6/21/82 Treatment Plant Bonds 1,29011 1984-99 11.82% 13.36% A Cottage Grove 7/7/82 G.O. Certificates of 12,97014 1985.2002 10.15% 13.21% A-1 Science, Ames Indebtedness 15511 1984-87 10.20% 13.35% A Ramsey 7/12/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 82 56511 1984-92 11.54% 13.21% Baa -1 Worthington 7/12/82 G.O. Municipal Building 1,000M 1984.93 10.39% 13.411 A-1 Semco Confirm nity S/D 6/29/82 Bonds. Ser. 82 62511 1984-98 11.46% 13.21% A-1 No. 703 7/12/82 G.O. School Building Bonds 300M 1984-93 10.92% 13.261 RR ' Mountain Iran 7/15/82 of 82 5,480M 1985-2o DI 12.58% 13.21% A Omlot% 1/14/82 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 8,37514 1984.96 10.47% 13.21% Aa Des Moines 7/26/82 of 82, Ser A 2,SDOM 1983-94 11.30% 13.21% A-1 Mennefin-County 7/15/82 Library Bond Series 82 3,30011 1983-92 9.93% 13.21% Ana Hennepin .County 7/15/82 Capital Notes, Ser. 82 5,00011 1983-86 8.94% 13.21% Aaa Blooal ngtpo 7/19/82 Permanent Improvement 935M 1984-96 10.93% 12.76% A ' 6/3/82 Revolving Fund 2.70011 1984-93 9.67% 13.08% Aa xln6eaDol is 7/20/82 Various Purpose Bonds 22,50011 1985-2002 11.11% 13.08% Aaa Ml nmeapolls 7/20/82 Venous Purpose Bonds 17,31011 1983-92 and 9.98% 13.08% Ana Minot 6/21/82 Temporary Water and Sever 2002 M' c/as 1/20/82 Special Street Improvement Revenue Bonds 2,400H 1983 11.25% 13.46% on Blsmarck Band 5001 1987-2002 11.25% 13.0811 Aaa po115 7/20/82 Redevelopment Bonds 8,500" 1984-97 9.99% 13.08i Aaa Owe Dona 7/20/82 G.O. Improvement 6 Refunding Improvement Redevelemt Bands 1,61811 1981-94 9.981 13.081 A-1 Cannan fells 1/21/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds Temporary Improvement of 1982 ism 1984-98 11.132 13.08% A Lake Benton 7/21/82 G.O. Temporary Improvement School Building Bonds Bonds, Series 82 07511 1983-85 9.3 17.062 IDL Fridley 7/26782 G.O. Bonds o/ 62 2.05011 1983-99 10.36%6% 12.7% Aa -1 Princeton 7/21/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds of 82 705 705" 1984-95 10.86% 12.766% BA`Ma Glencoe 0/2/82 G.O. State -Aid Road Bongs 82 1,10014 1984-90 9.541 I2.7I% Glencoe 8/2/82 G.O. Hospitalb Nursing Xoim G.O. Samar Bonds of 82 21511 1985-92 9.09% 12.71% NR Revenue Bonds a2 1982 6.1[20111 1985-2002 11.33% 11.71% A McLeod County 9/7/83 G.O. Watershed improvement Bonds of 1982 390X 198/-99 10.741 12.7 A Waseca 8/3/82 G.O. Imp rdvement Bends, Ser. 82 ISO" 1981-93 9.652 12.1 A 54 Cloud 8/4/82 Temporary G.O. Improvement Bonds o1 02 2,800" 1985 8.50% 12.71% A-1 Eden Prairie S/D 8/5/82 G.O. Taa Anticipation Certs. of Indeet. o/ 1983 1901 1987 0.002 12.71% 111 Eden Prairie S/0 8/5/82 Aid ebticlpatlpn Certs. of Indeet. 2,2201 1983 8.27% 12.715 MI SUMMARY OF AREA BOND SALES Net Con Municipality Date Type of Bonds Mount Maturity Rate Jones Rating WISCONSIN Ashland 5/5/82 G.O. Special Assess. Bonds, Ser. 8 990M 1983-92 11.50% 12.78% MA Sheboygan Falls 5/211/82 Special Assn't Bonds 3701 1983-92 11.781 12.731 HR Altoona 6/10/82 Special Assm't Bonds Ser. B 950M 1983-92 12.30% 13.011 HR Glendale 6/14/82 Tea Incremental Bond Anticipation Notes Dist. No. 2, Ser. 82 1,40014 1986 10.501 13.212 MIG -1 OconpMnowoc 6/15/82 Promissory Unlimited Tax Notes 1,8901 1983-92 11.01% 13.211 A Wisconsin Health Facilities Authority 6/11/82 Rev. Bonds, Ser. 82 14,6004 1985. 2003 15.63% 13.21% HR (Madison) B 2012 Manitowoc 6/21/82 Promissory Unllmlted Tax Notes 2,SOOM 1903-92 10.70% 13.46% An North Central Vo -tech N Adult Ed. District 6/28182 G.O. Promissory Notes of 82, Ser. A 2,900M 1984 10.13% 13.41% NR Prairie do Chien 6/29/82 Promissory Unlimited Tax Notes 595M 19113-92 11.48% 13.411 A Milwaukee County 6/29/82 Metro Sewerage Bonds Ser, 82 B 38,000" 1983-2002 12.75% 13.4111 A -I Spring Green 6/70/82 Promissory Notes 265M 1984 10.305 13.41% An Osceola S/D 7/6/82 G.O. School Bldg. Bonds of 82 2,25011 1984.97 12.66% 13.36% Baa -I IOWA Marion 5/18/82 G.O. Essential Corporate purpose Bonds 75011 1983-91 9.70% 12.73% A-1 ^ Webster City 6/7/02 Sever Revenue Bonds 1,10014 1983-94 11.15% 13.01% 1 A N State University of Iona (Ione City) 6/17/82 Academic Building Revenue Bands 12.970M 1985-2002 10.80% 13.21% A -I lone State University 6/21/82 Academic Building Revenue of Technology and Series I.S.U. Bonds 12,97014 1985.2002 10.15% 13.21% A-1 Science, Ames West Liberty 5/24/82 Improvement Bonds I,000M 1983-97 I1.S4% 13.461 NR Cedar Falls 6/28/82 Improvement Bonds 1,000M 1984.93 10.39% 13.411 A-1 Semco Confirm nity S/D 6/29/82 School Unlimited Tax Bonds 75011 1984-95 10.90% 13.41% A Sergeant Bluffs 7/6/82 G.O. Vater Bonds 300M 1984-93 10.92% 13.261 RR Waterloo 7/15/82 Corporate Purpose Unlimited Tax Bonds 8,37514 1984.96 10.47% 13.21% Aa Des Moines 7/26/82 Unlimited Tax Bonds 4.00011 1984-98 10.17% 12.76% Ana Des Moines 7/26/82 Unlimited Tax Bonds 11.150H 1985-95 9.03% 1Z.161 Aaa Coralville 7/27/82 Improvement Unlimited To. Bonds 935M 1984-96 10.93% 12.76% A Urbandale 6/3/82 Improvement Unlimited Tax Bonds 2901 1984-91 9.70% 12.71% A-1 NORTH DAKOTA Minot 6/21/82 Temporary Water and Sever Revenue Bonds 2,400H 1983 11.25% 13.46% on Blsmarck 7/13/82 Refunding Improvement Bonds, Series E 3,300M 1983-98 10.62% 13.21% Aa Grand Forts 7/19/82 Refunding Improvement Bonds 935" 1984.98 10.95% 11.08% A. Minot 8/2/82 Temporary Improvement Warrants 2,100M 1903 8.651 12.71% Me West Fargo S/D 8/3/82 School Building Bonds of 1982 2.9001 1964-97 11.091 12.711 A Dickinson 8/3/82 Refunding Improvement Bonds of 1982, Ser. A 4,10011 1985-2001 II.I2i 12.711 A SOUTH DAKOTA Redfield 8/2/82 G.O. Samar Bonds of 82 21511 1985-92 9.09% 12.71% NR AGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 7, 1982 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 — ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:33 — ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. 6:35 — RECOGNITION OF RETIRED FIREFIGHTERS IV. 6:40 — DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS e.\ A. Fire Department a,3 C. Park Department e,\ B. Police Department e,3 D. Public Works Department V. 6:55 — CONSENT ITEMS (One motion approves all items) 3 A. St. John Neumann Church for Combination Gambling License for September 12, 1982 13 B. September Conditional Use Permit Renewals P 114C. Annual Sign Permit Renewals P,,4 D. Resolution for Rahn Park Grant P i7 E. James Moore for 3.2 On—Sale Beer License/Umpires Assn. for 9-18 & 9-19 P ATF. Project #361, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing Wescott Road Sanitary Sewer) e.1 -S G. Project #365, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Northview Meadows First Addition — Trunk Sewer & Water) e.1$ H. Contract 80-21, Final Payment Acceptance (Blackhawk Lake Outlet) III. Contract 81-10, Final Payment/Acceptance (Tomark 1st Addition, el et aL, Streets VI. 7:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS pp ZO A. Project 297, Final Assessment Hearing (Blackhawk Lake Trunk 1 Storm Sewer Outlet) — Continued from the July 20, 1982 City Council Meeting for those Persons Who Submitted Written Objections Q q.1 B. Vacation of a Ponding Easement in the Vicinity of Lot 12, Block 9, Beacon Hill Addition e, Art C. Parcel 10-02500-021-25, Final Assessment Hearing (Trudi Johnson) L{3 D. Project 307A, Final Assessment Hearing (St. Francis Woods 2nd Y Addition Utilities) e.dt5 E. Project 324A, Final Assessment Hearing (Safari at Eagan Utilities) e,¢ 7 F. Project 328A, Final Assessment Hearing (Ches Mar East 4th Addition Utilities) e. q.9 G. Project 329A, Final Assessment Hearing (Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition Utilities) VII. OLD BUSINESS P S' A. City Hall Expansion Project Update p SJ B. Concepts for Land Use Changes to the Proposed Handicapped �1 FaciLity Location in Meadow Land Addition (Betty Bassett) Eagan City Council Agenda September 7, 1982 Page Two VIII. NEW BUSINESS IX. X. i 6i A. Special Assessment Committee Recommendations k03 B. Patricia Leahy for a Conditional Use Permit for Carry Out Food P in a Neighborhood Business District, Silver Bell Center 10% C. Italian Pie Shoppe (James Basta) for License for One Amusement Q Device 106 D. Road Machinery & Supplies Company for Extension of Industrial P' Revenue Financing Bond Preliminary Approval X12 E. J.P.K. Park Company for Extension of Industrial Revenue Financing P Bond Preliminary Approval 1f.05 F. Coca Cola Corporation for a Variance to the Sign Ordinance t%j G. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company for a Special Permit for an P' Advertising Sign to be Located in Cedar Ridge'Second Addition P, j'LS H. Temporary Advertising Sign — Thornwood Townhome I. Michael DuBois for a Temporary 3.2 Beer License for September 11, 1982 at 3155 Hwy. 13 p.130 J. Stop Sign Petition — Jade Lane at Pumice Lane f'13a' K. Consideration of a Wind Energy Systems & Radio/TV Towers Ordinance e.jj.k L. Consideration of a Contractor Licensing Ordinance ADDITIONAL ITEMS 14 6A. Joint Burnsville/Eagan j*I.B. Contract 82-10, Receive e Streets) e.jj-jC. Contract 82-11, Receive Utilities) e.150 D. Contract 82-12, Receive Surfacing) Cable Commission Update Bids/Award Contract (Tower View Road Bids/Award Contract (Hilltop Plaza Bids/Award Contract (Galaxie Avenue E. Establish 1983 Budget Hearing for 9-21-82 City Council Meeting 1 VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) XI. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 1982 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of the August 17, 1982 regular City Council minutes, the special City Council minutes for August 10, August 24, August 30 and August 31, and the September 7, 1982 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration: Recognition is planned for six (6) fire fighters who have retired from the Eagan Volunteer Fire Department in recent months. Those fire fighters are as follows: Dean Jensen (7/1/63 - 12/31/81), James (Bud) Malaske (7/1/63 - 7/2/82), Mervin (Mac) Carll (7/1/63 - 7/2/82), Duane Gaudette (7/24/67 - 8/1/82), Donn Smith (7/1/63 - 7/3/82), and Jay Berthe (7/1/63 - 7/2/82). Certificates will be presented by Mayor Blomquist. FIRE DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department -- There are no items to be considered for the Fire Department at this time. POLICE DEPARTMENT B. Police Department -- The City Administrator and Chief of Police will discuss a proposal to take formal action against the General Motors Corporation for the problems that were experienced by the City of Eagan with the operation of diesel squad cars. Enclosed on page ;L t�eugbis an update provided by the City Attorney's--o-f-flce along w T some suggested action on this issue. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a recom- mendation as set forth by the City Attorney's office to proceed with formal action against the General Motors Corporation in an effort to seek reimbursement incurred with the high maintenance expenses and rapid depreciation. 0 0 HAUGE, SDIITH, TIDE & F ELLER, P. A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW CEDARVILLE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 3508 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY EAGAN (ST. PAUL). MINNESOTA 55122 PAUL H. HAUGE BRADLEY SMITH KEVIN W. EIDE DAVID G. KELLER Mr. Thomas Hedges City Administrator CITY OF EAGAN 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 September 3, 1982 RE: EAGAN POLICE DIESEL SQUAD CARS Dear Tom: AREA CODE 512 TELEPHONE 454.4224 On November 4, 1981, the City Council discussed problems with GM diesel squad cars. The Police Department had at least five and each of them has had several defects. It is my understanding that they have all either been sold or in one case, converted to gaso- line powered. We have sent several letters to the Area Zone Manager for GM with no satisfaction and in addition, the dealers from whom the City bought the cars. Two maintenance supervisors from Grossman Chevrolet have been in- terviewed and have indicated that the engine was not adequate for normal consumer use. A letter has recently been sent to the Zone Fleet Office and no response has been received. The options would be as follows: 1) Do nothing; 2) Continue to press General Motors through letters; 3) Bring an action against General Motors and possibly the dealers claiming defects and damages for costs and losses by the City. The problem with this alternate is that it could be quite expensive with little guarantee of what the outcome may be, but often, of course, results in some type of negotiated settlement during the process of the action. PHH:me z 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Two PARK DEPARTMENT C. Park Department -- There are no items to be considered for the Park Department at this time. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT D. Public Works Department -- Item #1: Gerald Kuhn Letter A letter was received from Mr. and--Rrs. Gerald Kuhn who reside at 1722 Cochrane Avenue. Mr. and Mrs. Kuhn are concerned about the inconvenience and damage caused their property by water that is drained onto their property from the backwash of their neighbor's swimming pool. Mr. and Mrs. Kuhn are recommending the City adopt an ordinance that would require adjoining property owners who install swimming pools to install dry wells or pump water to the storm sewer to reduce any impact water run off on adjoining property. Enclosed on page his a copy of the letter sent to the City Council by Mr. and Mrs. Kuhn. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To tion of the City staff to investigate an amendment that would provide the type of hoods as addressed by Mr. and Mrs. Kuhn. 3 approve or deny authoriza- ordinance or an ordinance protection for neighbor - 0 0 August 24, 1982 Eagan City Council: My family and I reside at 1722 Cochrane Avenue in Eagan. We moved into this residence in March of 1979. For the last 4 summers we have had a problem with sitting water in our back yard. This sitting water comes primarily from the backwash of a swimming pool in the neighbors yard. The backwash hose is positioned so that the water from the pool runs right into our yard as there is no where else for it to drain. We have contacted Dale Peterson, City Inspector; and Tom Colbert, City Engineer; and discussed the problem with them. They have stated that there is no city ordinance that has stipulations about drainage of swimming pools; and said our only recourse was to re -landscape our yard or hire legal representation. Both of these alternatives would be very costly; and we do not feel either would be a fair solution to keeping drainage water out of our yard; or anybody else's yard who may have the same problem. We have checked with Burnsville Cith Inspectors; and were told they protect tax payers adjoining property from water drainage by having swimming pool owners build a dry well or pump water to the storm sewer. The City Inspector advised that our problem could be a health hazard also - (excessive weeds, mosquito breeding; etc.) We, as taxpayers feel there should be an ordinance in the city books as a protection against such problems as these happening. An ordinance of this type would also eliminate the breaking of harmony with neighbors, which should be a concern of the Eagan Council. Thank You Mr. and Mrs. Gerald Kuhn 0 D Agenda Information mo • September 3, 1982 Page Three Item #2: Safari Estates 4.0 M.G. Water Reservoiirr Sieg Property Un—Wednesday, August 2-5, t e ity Attorney, Pu i1'c W—oLrs Mector and Councilman Wachter met with the Sieg family in Lakeville to discuss one last offer pertaining to negotiated acquisition of the 2.09 acre site for the above referenced water reservoir. At this meeting, it was explained to the Siegs that, at this point, the City has only two alternatives: 1. To get a negotiated agreement for acquisition of the site, or 2. To proceed with acquisition through eminent domain pro- ceedings (condemnation). While the Siegs are very hesitant to enter into any kind of verbal and/or written agreement regarding the acquisition of this land, a negotiated price of $8,000 per acre for permanent easement acqui- sition (2.09 acres) and $4,000 per acre nor temporary construction easement (0.63 acres) was agreed upon .as a final figure to be pre- sented to the City Council for consideration and approval. These acquisition prices would result in approximately $19,240 for a negotiated purchase price for our water reservoir site. In addition to this amount, the City would have to assume responsi- bility for all existing assessments upon the 2.09 acres land to be acquired. This would amount to an additional $2,466. These costs are guaranteed by a maximum $50,000 letter of credit as pro- vided by Mr. Watchke in consideration of final plat approval for Safari Estates. In addition to acquisition of the site, the letter of credit guarantees reimbursement for extra costs incurred to relocate the water reservoir and extend the trunk water main to this site rather than the one previously selected within the Safari Estates Addition. At the present time, the following estimated costs have been expended in pursuing a water reservoir site at this location: Legal - $1,400; Engineering - $2,000; Surveying - $1,000; Appraiser - $600. Therefore, at the present time, the acquisition of this site will cost at least $25,000 in addition to extra costs incurred to extend the trunk water main to this site which have not yet been determined. The end result of staff's meeting with the Siegs indicates that if the City Council will authorize the $8,000 per acre acquisition for permanent right-of-way and $4,000 per acre cost for acquisition of temporary easements together with assuming all existing assess- ments on the 2.09 acres of land, the Siegs have indicated that they will more than likely accept this offer from the City. This is approximately twice what was previously authorized by Council action. However, staff feels that this is the best price that can be negotiated with the Siegs and that the additional cost would certainly be expended through eminent domain proceedings through the courts. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To authorize the acquisition of 2.09 acres for a 4.0 M.G. water reservoir site on the Sieg pro- perty for $8,000 per acre permanent easement, $4,000 per acre for temporary easements and the assumption of all existing assessments over the property to be acquired. Ir 9 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Four Item #3: Major Intersection Street Lighting Report-- The engineering division as eva uate the City ot Eagan's major inter- section street lighting needs in addition to reviewing several requested installations by residents of the community. Presently, the City is billed monthly for energizing costs for seventy street lights at major intersections throughout the community. These monthly enengizing costs are the responsibility of the City's gen- eral fund budget. In 1981, the City spent $8,220 providing energy to these existing major intersection street lights. The 1982 budget allocated $7,000 to provide for the installation of new major intersection street lights throughout the community. Rather than respond on a first request/first response basis for the installation of these street lights, the engineering division has reviewed all requests in addition to evaluating the needs of the City pertaining to other major intersections. The results were reviewed, evaluated and prioritized. The criteria for priori- tizing the requests incorporated the following perimeters: 1. Traffic Patterns: This condition includes the average daily traffic vo ume, peak hour volumes, speed and composition of traffic volumes. 2. Road Conditions: This category includes vertical alignment, orizonta a ignment and visibility of the intersection. 3. Intersection of County Road and City Collector Streets. Attached on pages9 through // is a subsequent priority listing of request-e-d-`an3 required street light locations which incorporates the associated installation and monthly energizing costs based on the above stated criteria. Dakota Electric Asso- ciation, which has the major service area for the City of Eagan, has a policy that if the City provides a greater contribution toward the installation of the street lighting, the monthly energizing costs are less. Subsequently, the report tabulated both the instal- lation and the long term monthly energizing costs for both options. A summary of the total installation and monthly energizing costs are as follows: Requested Overhead Street Lights A. Installation Costs (22 lights) 1. Addt'l City Contribution 2. Limited City Contribution Difference in Capital Expend B. Monthly Energy Cost (22 lights) Addt'l City Part. on Installation Limited City Part. on Installation Difference in Annual Energy Costs $24,870.00 5.070.00 $19,800 115.75/mo or $1,389/yr 218.45/mo or $2,625/yr $1,236/yr Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Five The annual energy cost saving that would be incurred by a greater up front capital expenditure for the street light installations would have a "buy back" of sixteen years, after which the City would be incurring related annual energy cost savings from there- after. Enclosed on page I'Z_ is a location map of the City of Eagan showing the existing major overhead street lights that are presently the City's monthly energy responsibilities and the recom- mended location for new installations. The City would be able to install all 22 street lights with the 1982 budget as approved which would result in higher monthly energy rates. However, with the existing $7,000 budget allocation in 1982, we would only be able to install approximately 30% of the requested street lights if the City wanted to provide a greater capital contribution toward their installation to achieve a reduced monthly energy savings. Therefore, the staff would like direction from the Council as to any change in priority listing and the method of financing to be used for the installation of these street lights. If a greater up front capital contribution is determined to be the most feasible for a long time annual energy savings, this program could be instal- led over a four year period with the capital expenditures budgeted with each subsequent year's budget. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To review the proposed major intersection street light proposal and authorize the installation of street lights in accordance with specific Council direction on financial contributions. 0 150 Watt HPS Street Lights APnendix B U171'I'fCNJ 1i7� .'1'tN(. ` -- lackhawk NJUITTC)4 INSI'AI, M",'j Ptf•1191LY RAIIINS'I'N,.C(75'I Y P4JI9"'Y IU"' INS'1'/U, (T),5'IIf1r1171LY I+A'17 INS'1'IU,.0 )S'I' 1 4 171LY I+A'11: and 1• T.P. $120.00 $9.85 $620.00 $5.50 Silver Bell I Road County Rd 2. T.P. 30 and $165.00 $11.35 $665.00 $7.00 ( Easter in McCarthy 3. T.P. Rd and Hwy. 13 R.C. t $250.00 $8.60 9,950.00 $3.25 Oak Pond 4. T.P. Road and Cliff Rd R.C. $225.00. $9.85 $725.00 $5.50 Lakewood 5. T.P. Hills and Cliff Rd R.C. $225.00 $9.85 $725.00 $ 5.50 Slater and 6. T.P. Cliff Rd $1,075.00 $11.35 $1,575.00 $7.00 Pilot Knob 7. T.P. Rd. and 3aster $225.00 $9.65 $725.00 $5.50 -1 J 0 150 WATT BPS STREET ISGBI'S • . % .APPENDIX B I�['A'I'iON Int .'1' rN(, Sibley NlDi1'i(NJ 8. T.P. INS1'AI. CC ;l' "MulY 1+11'17: IN -21'811 -Mil it PQJMIN 811'1'1 INSTAL Ct).S'I`PYJ171LY 811'17 INSTAL,U)5I' 11 17 ICTIT ,Y RA'17: IHDr. I & & Hwy. 13 R.C. $250.00 $8.60 $1,950.00 $3.25 Pilot Knob 9. T.P. and $100.00 $9..85 $600.00 $5.50 Amaryllis Bladchawk 10. T.P. Rd & Cliff $223.00 $11.35 $725.00 $7.00 Lexington 11. (1) Ave & Wescott Rd. - $165:00 . $11.35 $665.00 $7.00 Fhglert Rd 12. T.P. & County R.C. $60.00 $9.85 $560.00 $5.50 Rd. 31 Shale Rd 13. T.P. and Nicols,' $450.00 $8.60 $1,950.00 $3.25 Keefe Rd. 14. T.P. and Loexi We. $60.00 $8.60 $1,950.00 $3.25 7 I APPENDIX B $220.00 I $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 $60.00 I $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 $60.00 I r $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 150 WATT HPS STREET LI($1TS ;x •',I )P )ITT WescottSq IN:>1'AL O((71' P4117ILY IIA99: INS'1'N,.CSI;I P411711,Y I 15, 5100.00d $985$600.00. $5.50 gescott 1d 16. $60.0059.85 $560.00. $5.50 17. Rd & Eagan Ave. , Avalon Ave 18. & Pilot Knob Rd w O ' Eagan Ind. 19. Rd & Pilot Knob Rd. Ltmar in 20. q$I-IJ5$500.00 & Lone oak Rd. $7.00 Neil Arnr 21 strong Elv & Lone Oak Rd. $11.35 $500.00 $7.00 APPENDIX B $220.00 I $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 $60.00 I $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 $60.00 I r $8.60 I $1,950.00 I $3.25 I I CAUON ISlaters Rd 6 Janes St 150 MTP Bps STREET LIGHTS $975.00 1 -.$11.35 $1,475.. 1 $7.00 0 APPENDIX B L.. _ MENDOTA pTS. • _ _ ,a ®=max• •.• �` • Y IF .o c r �� w• 9 � a _ y�. _ // 4.1 • // Rte;! /.. � c•��'q • s. � � - �li r � ..+�- f .,•:G epi — .. - 1 / Q 23 24 Offyf �� l �4K'P 26 211 2 i•I_., L fix.: d n. _ �"ie w G 4 :s....':.. 4.11. ��.�" •f r �; e � v i r.ms��`Y.'§'Y. _O _ ; R`s7�..J � 7"4- NF In 36. [! (� APPLENOSEYDU6Np j iJ ti I vALLEY rJ I • INSTALLEII OVERHEAD.STREET LIGHTS 150 HPS-400MV i E RECOMMENDED OVERHEAD STREET LIGHT REQUESTS 150 HPS RESIDENTIAL'LIGHTING. --" - _ - - P!EA '•SERVICES. AREA WITHIN BORDER&INES _.:. 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Six 0 There are eight items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council. If the City Council desires to discuss any of the items in further detail, those items should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Addi- tional Items unless the discussion required is brief. ST. JOHN NEUMANN CHURCH/COMBINATION GAMBLING LICENSE A. St. John Neumann Church for Combination Gambling License for September 12, 1982 -- An application was received and processed for St. John Neumann Church to consider a combination gambling license to be used at St. John Neumann Church on September 11 and 12 for the annual fun fair. The combination license is in order for consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the combination gambling license application for St. John Neumann Church. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RENEWALS B. September Conditional Use Permit Renewals -- There are four (4) conditional use permit renewals to be processed for the month of September. Those renewals are as follows: 1. Carl Case, 540 Diffley Road, for a repair shop in the garage 2. Michael Neisius, 4855 S. Robert Trl., for a storage and repair for up to ten vehicles. 3. E. L. Murphy Trucking, 3303 Terminal Dr., to allow a trailer for office use. 4. Walter Wosje, 3945 Pilot Knob Road, to permit the raising of ten head of cattle on 3 acres. All conditional use permits are being reviewed by the Building Inspection Department and, unless otherwise noticed by the City Administrator, are found to be in order. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the conditional use permit renewals for the month of September. 13 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Seven SIGN PERMIT RENEWALS C. Annual Sign Permit Renewals -- The Chief Building Inspector has completed a review of all existing signs throughout the City of Eagan. The following sign permits are due for renewal: 1. 115 ground signs 2. 238 building signs 3. 57 business pylon signs 4. 42 advertising signs 5. 15 temporary advertising signs. Chief Building Inspector Peterson is also recommending that due to the depressed market for homes and Eagan's large lot inventory there are no temporary advertising or real estate "for sale" signs that should be denied. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the annual sign permits in the categories as described above. RESOLUTION/RAHN PARK GRANT D. Resolution for Rahn Park Grant -- As previously authorized by the City Council, the resolution "authorizing filing of applica- tion and execution of grant project agreements to develop open space under the state natural resources fund" is now in order for consideration. This resolution authorizes the filing of the appli- cation and is estimating of developing Rahn Park as outlined in the park master plan in the amount of $159,500. The amount of the grant requested from the Department of Energy, Planning & Devel- opment Office of Local Government from the natural resources fund is estimated to be $78,979. Enclosed on pages i S through /& is a copy of the resolution for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the resolution which authorizes the filing of the application and execution of grant project agreements as previously authorized by the City Coun- cil. /4 CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FILING OF APPLICATION AND EXECUTION OF GRANT PROJECT AGREEMENTS TO DEVELOP OPEN SPACE UNDER THE STATE NATURAL RESOURCE FUND. WHEREAS, the State Natural Resources Fund provides for the making of grants to assist local public bodies in the acquisition and development of outdoor recreation projects, and WHEREAS, the City f Eagg desires to develop certain land known as Fahn Park? w is land is to be held and used for permanent open space, and WHEREAS, in order for the proposed project to be eligible for approval, there must be proof that it is part of a comprehensive outdoor recreation plan and 5 -year capital improvement, and WHEREAS, the City of Ean has an original or revised 5 -year action program whicag h includes Rahn Park, and WHEREAS, it is estimated that the cost of developing said interest(s) shall be $159,500.00, and WHEREAS, upon project approval the Cityof Eagan must enter into formal grant project agreements wit t e state for the specific purpose of developing Rahn Park. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA: That an application be made to the State of Minnesota, Department of Energy, Planning and Development, Office of Local Government for a grant from the Natural Resource Fund (Minnesota Laws, 1979, Chapter 333, Section 31, Sub- division 3, paragraphs (c) and (d) for an amount presently estimated by to $78,979.00 and the applicant will pay the balance of the cost from other funds available to it. That the Director of Parks and Recreation and City Administrator are and directed to execute and file A) such application and B) the 5 -year action program with the State of Minnesota, Department of Energy, Planning and Development, Office of Local Government, and to provide additional information and furnish such documents as may be required by said Department, and C) to act as the authorized correspondents of the applicant. I: That the proposed development is in accordance with plans for the allocation of land for open space uses, and that should said grant be made, the applicant will develop and retain said land for use(s) designated in said application and approved by the Office of Local Government and the National Park Service (NPS). 4. That the United States of America and the State of Minnesota be, and they hereby are, assured of full compliance by the applicant with the regulations of the Department of the Interior, effectuating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That the City of Eagan enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Energy, Planning and Development, Office of Local Government to provide such grants as are specified in numbered paragraphs 1 and 2, above, for the year(s) 1983 - 1985. That the Ma or of the Cit of Ea an and the City Administrator are aut orize and directed to execute sucE agreement and any supplemental agreements thereof. On a motion by , seconded by with all members voting in avor. DATED: ,1982 City Council City of Eagan Beatta Blomquist, Favor CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Eagan at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of , 1982 as shown by the minutes o�1U meeting in my possession. Gene Van Over eke City Clerk FT 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Eight 3.2 ON -SALE BEER LICENSE FOR JAMES MOORE E. James Moore for 3.2 On -Sale Beer License/Umpires Association for 9-18 and 9-19 -- An application for a 3.2 on -sale non -intoxi- cating malt liquor license for James Moore representing Etter Umpires Association is in order for consideration. The license will be granted for September 18 and September 19 for a tournament scheduled at Univac Softball Field. The application has been re- viewed by the Police Department and found to be in order for City Council consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the 3.2 on -sale beer license for James Moore representing the Etter Umpires Associa- tion. PROJECT #361 F. Project #361, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Wescott Road Sanitary Sewer) -- In response to a petition received on June 1 and presented to the Council on June 15 by several de- velopers/property owners of the area around the intersection of Wescott Road and Lexington Avenue, the City Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report providing for the extension of the trunk sanitary sewer from Deerwood Drive through the Wind - crest Addition to this intersection. This report has now been completed and is being presented to the City Council for their review. Staff intends to conduct an informal informational hearing with the affected property owners prior to the scheduled public hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project #361 (Wescott Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer) and order the public hearing to be held on October 5, 1982. k7 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Nine PROJECT #365 0 G. Project #365, Present Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Northview Meadows First Addition - Trunk Sewer & Water) -- In response to a petition received on July 15 and presented to the Council on July 20 by the developer/property owner of the proposed Northview Meadows First Addition, the City Council authorized prepa- ration of a feasibility report to provide for the easterly extension of the turnk water main along County Road 30 and the northerly extension of trunk sanitary sewer from Wilderness Run Road to ser- vice this proposed addition. The development of the internal lateral utilities will be performed privately by the developer. However, this development is dependent upon the extension of these referenced trunk utilities. This report has now been completed and is being presented to the Council for their review. It is staff's intention to hold an informal informational meeting with the affected existing property owners along County Road 30 prior to the formal public hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project #365 (Northview Meadows First Addition - Trunk Sewer & Water) and order the public hearing to be held on October 5, 1982. CONTRACT 80-21 H. Contract 80-21, Final Payment/Acceptance (Blackhawk Lake Outlet) -- The City has received a request for final payment by the contrac- tor, Lametti & Sons, Inc., through the consulting engineering firm together with a statement of compliance with all plans and specifi- cations and a recommendation for acceptance for perpetual main- tenance by the City of Eagan. Final inspections have been performed with representatives of the Public Works Department. All items are in order for consideration of final acceptance at this time. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the ninth and final payment to Lametti & Sons, Inc., for Contract 80-21 (Blackhawk Lake Outlet) in the amount of $14,732.41 and accept for perpetual maintenance. /t 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Ten CONTRACT 81-10 I. Contract 81-10, Final Payment/Acceptance (Tomark 1st Addition, et al, Streets) -- The City has received a request for final payment to Pine Bend Paving, Inc., for the completion of Contract 81-10 providing for the installation of streets to the Coachman Land Company 1st Addition (Project #323B), Safari at Eagan (Project #324B), and Tomark 1st Addition (Project #336B) along with a certi- fication of compliance with City plans and specifications by our consulting engineering firm which is also recommending formal acceptance for perpetual maintenance by the City of Eagan. Final inspections have been performed by representatives of the Public Works Department and have been found to be acceptable. It is now appropriate to issue the final payment to this contractor for this contract. ACTION TO BE final payment 1st Addition, for perpetual CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the seventh and to Pine Bend Paving, Inc., for Contract 81-10 (Tomark et al, Streets) in the amount of $7,072.58 and accept maintenance. I 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Eleven PROJECT 297 0 A. Project 297, Final Assessment Hearing (Blackhawk Lake Outlet) - Continued from July 20, 1982 Meeting -- On July 20, 1982, the City Council held the final assessment hearing for trunk area storm sewer assessments associated with installing the outlet from Black - hawk Lake under Project 297. At that meeting, the City received four formal objections from property owners pertaining to their assessments. Subsequently, the final assessment roll was approved, adopted and ordered for certification to the county with the excep- tion that the public hearing was continued until September 7, 1982 for those four individuals who had submitted written objections at the July 20 meeting. Subsequently, each individual will be discussed separately, as follows: 1. Harry & Pearl Lemieux (Parcel #10-01600-010-05) -- Enclosed on pages ZI through a.7 is the background information pertaining to the reviewer—the written objection as pre- sented to the Special Assessment Committee on August 30. The result of discussion before the Special Assessment Com- mittee resulted in the understanding their appeal of the assessment would be dropped if the City of Eagan agreed to assess only that portion of their property that lies within the drainage district of the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin. This dismissal and special assessment area adjustment would be delineated in an agreement to be prepared by the City Attorney's office and executed by the property owner. If the agreement has not been executed by the September 7 Council meeting, staff recommends that the public hearing be continued until September 21 to allow the details to be worked out. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve a special assessment in accordance with the executed agreement and certify for collection; or, con- tinue the public hearing until September 21, 1982. a SAC 8/30/82 B. PRa= 297, BLACKHAWK LAKE OUTLET - ASSESSMEU OBJ=ON 1. Harry and Pearl Lemieux (Parcel No. 10-01600-010-05) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Enclosed on Pages 7t. through are copies of the letter that was submitted by Mr. & Mrs. Lemieux at the final assessment hearing on July 20, 1982 together with a copy of Notice of Appeal to District Court pertaining to their assessments. Mr. & Mrs. Lemieux contend that less than 40% of their property drains into the Blackhawk lake drainage basin and that the proposed assessment of July 20, 1982 provides no benefit to their property. Enclosed on Page -f%W is an area map referencing the lo- cation of this parcel in respect to the overall assessment area for Project 297. Enclosed on Page M is a topographic overlay of the Lemieux's property actually defining the drainage limits of the Blackhawk drainage basin. Mr. and Mrs. Lemieux's parcel is 10 acres. After applying a 208 credit for future dedication of easements and rights-of-way, 8 acres was included in the assessment for this project. If the actual area that drains into the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin is computed, a gross assessable area would be 5.08 acres. After the applica- tion of a similar 20% credit, the net assessable area would then be 4.06 acres. As can be seen, the Lemieux's property is pretty evenly distributed between two ma- jor drainage basins. The northwestern portion of their 10 acres is located within the Coachman Road drainage basin. In the past, the staff has historically includ- ed the area of the entire parcel if any portion of it was within a drainage basin to be assessed. Subsequently, the entire 10 acres was included within Blackhawk Lake outlet assessment project. Enclosed on Page M is a storm sewer drainage map showing the location of the Lemieux property to the affected drainage basins. STAFF -RECO MENIDATICN Due to the fact that the Lemieux's property is equitably split between two drain- -_ age basins, staff would recommend that the 5.08 acres actually contained within the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin only be used for calculation of assessments associated with Project 297. This would result in a revised assessment of $6,013.00 as compared with the original assessment of $11,848.00 as presented at the final assessment hearing on July 20, 1982. This results in a credit of $5,835.00. How- ever, because this portion of the Lemieux's property does lie within the geograph- ical boundaries of the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin, the staff feels that this property should be included in the trunk area stoun sewer assessments accordingly. The remainder of the property would then be included in some future trunk area assessment when and if major trunk storm sewer improvements were performed in the Coachman Road drainage basin. CCMMENTS X 41 • 0/ LX 9-2b July 20, 1982 11'a Eagan City Council c/o Eagan Mayor Eagan City Hall 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota Dear Mayor and Council Members, I wish to appeal the assessment being levied against our our property listed as parcel 10-01600-010-05. At the first meeting we had last year I was advised that our property is on the North boundary and could go to €et*er assessment. Less than 40% of the run off goes to the South and over 60% drains to the North. The South drainage goes to a pond that is at the Southeast corner of our property and is land locked in to a hill. The North drainage goes to a pond on the Northwest corner of our property and is also locked in by hills. I feel this is a very unfair assessment that will in no way benefit my home or property. I therefore wish to have consideration of this assessment being dropped. Respectfully, �Hacr i Pearl Lemieux r� C - 'J°'0 r4� 81 ON. HOWARD A. KNUTSON A'rTDRNEY AT LAW PARKWAY PLACE 101 WEST BURNSVILLE PARKWAY BURNSVILLE, MINNESOTA 55M Aagust 5, 1982 Mr- E.j. Janoverb-eke, City Clerk City of Eagan City Hall 3795 Pilot Knob _Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Assessment; Storra Sewerproject Blackhawk Lake and Highway 13 Project No. 299 Parcel 10-01600-010-05 -Appeal of said assessment to the District Court Dear 11-r. Vanoverbeke: 0 A ' S OK, cc? TELEPNONE��> 16121 894-X" PC RESIDENCE !6121 8901218 Notice is hereby given that the undersigned appeals to the District Court, Dakota County, Minnesota from the decision of the City Council of the City of Eagan, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota, rendered on June 20, 1982 establishing an assessment roll in the City of Eagan for the purposes set forth in the assessment roll and especially from the decision of the City Council on an objec- tion made by this appellant at or prior to the July 20, 1982 meeting, to the assessment of $11,848.00 on the following described property owned by the.appellant The objections of this appellant are as follows: 1. There is no special benefit conferred on this property by reason of the project. 2. :Market value of this property is not increased at all. 3. Tc1e assessment is not uniform upon the same class of property. X� a3 Dakota Cou,:ty Dorict Caurt Clerk. • Page Two August 5, 1982 4. The assessment is not proportionate to benefits received. 5. The assessment procedure was not proper. Harr LemieuxIX Pearl Lemieux j Howard A. Knutson Attorney for Appellants 101`West Burnsville Parkway Suite 212 Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 Telephone: (612) 894-8882 -k4 A. Yid . / � �...� -1 R -t2 -1PK. A GB.. � 297 aE� P ' • - ASSrSS ARI 71JB A :r,r. ip4 :fir, B RB FP Pic •ar y ,I� „' R —RnA{: CSC LI ' �� i ...1 _____- ( N -• OUSC IA PFR A � - •fie• / ` p / u Qp CEFIT IT Ll B\ ., LI \` • suaIn \4 it PF R -I / LI LBP. ��R ..a_, tlpp �.,.` >� S .P61Hpp4 II?i1+O a R•1! �� Ii _. F. `R+47r• . ,F NaaehitaE zhNR A /•, GB • r_O.R ,�. I 'aEEN \`r4 /jl ,-1fI A p� rPi.. ` Pte"4 pR9 g' C/( :I ' .3 PF PF 3'2 se•eaa' II RB 1`• iso c: R i A - ' II{I- _•a.r.:r �. FFw- : jl •. �J/ _ P�K R_4 •:.'R:j-'' -Y�w . I�l �• l A •'yl�itae j A" iii 7t� j - Rte. REl".-j •�, ..,,` .:Ce.rr ynol�o-J!•• na;,�:� ( - Oa v: :.o PF -: - r.RrR.-a R•I�_, —.___ R•4 R•4 �,` A '}. �`-4R'4, I •'.°..et- wZ�Ri CSC`-� Cj• I?t`� :'j: , I�_n ( �'qK �• Ft', r.OE. CGS/JtR-l' _vttc � CSC �L.i^tlrLT "'1r4 ` �-P2°- +"�� I R_I --�K :• /w+E ,? N100 �I � ,Q` L"�>E T: ,•`, PK / � � IA• .4a L ''�f ,_ :+.'r` -r 1. i;,v�. - ' I' •� fl .- PENN, r susRl W �• j I \� !�r aq .'•�,.;' A LE "�C�pyp�. ,T' .•N. _ I EAGaN/i� �,YrE E(.•-i/L. '1.. i•L.t RNLR 2 \ IIS A IPF ENTER : ..R •2 (r /eA �` LB i�- `i��''I. R-li�}il`11 1• �^ s_ "'%' _ - --- - -- .._ NR m ;F�L,: •ar ie, i''d F R•I .R.uRt,•YIIJ soN•t l 'A nO%np9r R•3 R:�t I�-rr -- / R -I j , 11 �rl. eQ j A. , !. L r ,••. i ra , R - .,ejl l,, vJ vltsPK yY� A I ✓i A / f iani ;t 'Sf u(iI�Rrori)n� ltrtrgy rt'.t�:+-r., a � t w � r c�F• '`�Y'if•L :. er • 2J • /' ,! 1 � J w'] �., •-1-w E� i •l�[ �tt.� .�.�.yr; •,`� f, l* ] } t'� � A •/ S� t ly.d,'+ �;.0-. ,: Y. �.: !. ,I .. �":,... }Y:•`(_ ,S .t %ri .�•�' II!`�r M A �� , •yB58 � ;, Ll MAKE _ r ! I ^. in �_ %/- �'� PARK c,Ls /I n Ilr rL`{p\ ,R •H-1/0`�/ IL --F �..;�1���'\� M1 -� Il/ •C �71LZ� p`REF� 4CRE5 II - ;jI i /I� D-2 I -�V FD-6'rDmIO- u �� — j f D=11'—x/ D-15 I Eec / ZEKROFA i, it E- R�/ 'CIA TEADS MA S D-1 771T, 21 C-15 ) r' it \l D.S. POST__ II C_18��+'P>]gu•>` \ SERVICE ��/�r�% ..Q +' D-13 / IJADDIT10% 1-m 7 I t7 -D_ .�!I11 io 21 .I E +�*�/\\.% / \. ��iy Pa` /.'C- / \.• /_C"Y21cL' RIDGE F 1— D40 -1 D 18 ` MoD 1 / C-6ra N( �coA' �� T AllC-3 /, -� .�171C �. \IPaEr47 C-10 - X ` s 29, 1 `. •,��`/( �! Dcll Ir 5T zn / II; D-19 ' c 111 �%D-21;7 Y.� jJ�'/ • cErmc�ir`-` J -I Vf.' 'r /•'. �',/ IiS Ir ".:7 - i J -II 1 /A-ACRESMCI 8-39 arvl. •F A 8 Ar �/. /1'q..JLAr� l \,� ' / / ,�. ~ / U lAKF 9 L--BI\.!(t✓` ,I �;'11`I4- � _ 1� r l ..I ' A IS �•_ sseD:*T�ir I"'�, —. `_'LaeKRA.TK - : [a>rR� ..I J-6� %— �%.I� PARK � L1�6R .?elfl / / `w -J-63. 1\ I NO J-5 \B-3 r J _58�J_5 a N, 8-34 A I' �:y A-21,. �J 1 �I � r. RICK q-61 A-23 ..\\ /♦'- 8'35 / _:` J-�6 Loo "' If, �Y r- 8-37 �-36I`�--_►- -f-Y'� �, �-A-31II ' /A_35 I '%� °� c� .. /- F `r 3 �u y I m nd;, 8.9 ._ I-'. :`.....�rw��� i L-7 k li 8-26 I /B�4 2L J-65 �/ J �� 8-25 /B-8 \o�7i y� \ s r 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twelve 2. Henry Englert (Parcel #10-01600-010-50) -- Enclosed on pages 2.11 through 31 is a copy of the background information pertaining to __M _Englert's written objection and staff recommendation as presented to the Special Assessment Com- mittee on August 30. Prior to the Special Assessment Com- mittee meeting, staff received a telephone call indicating that Mr. Englert wishes to withdraw his objection based on the fact that his assessment will be deferred through Green Acres or a Senior Citizen Deferment. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment as established at the July 20 final assessment hearing and order certification to the county for collection with deferment in accordance with either Green Acres or Senior Citizen qualifications. to 0 0 SAC 8/30/82 / B. PRQ7DCr 297, BLACKHAWK LAKE OUTLET -ASSESSMENT OBJECTION 4. Henry Englert (Parcel No. 10-01600-010-50) BACKGROUND INEURMATION Enclosed on Page A is the written objection submitted by Mr. Englert at the final assessment hearing of July 20, 1982. Also enclosed on Page aV is an area location map referencing this parcel in respect to the total assessment area for Project 297. The gross area of Mr. Englert's parcel is 40 acres. After applying a 20% credit for Potential future right-of-way and easement dedication, the net assessable area was 32 acres (1,393,920 square feet) which was assessed at the agricultural rate of 3.0 per square foot resulting in a total assessment of $47,393.28. Presently, this pro- perty is in Green Acres. Mr. Englert is also requesting senior citizen considera- tion for this assessment. tuy.uszsvowe e, Lin, 0 A c Because this property lies within Blackhawk Lake Drainage Basin and is subsequently benefited by major trunk improvements to this drainage basin, the staff feels that the assessments as determined and levied are fair and equitable. Mr. Eaglert's request for senior citizen consideration would fall under current ordinance #66 which provides for deferment of assessments for senior citizens. However, because the property is presently Green Acres, it is automatically deferred in accordance with the same conditions as our Ordinance #66. Subsequently, staff recommends ends that the assessments as levied at the final assessment hearing of July 20, 1982 remain as is. '�'3 a9 Pie ,v 0 q -2f _ ..--- -- _ ...._..e- .._/i erc �j%r LJ ,'s' � Te —f •�t Q.� O!✓d�c �r •� s e. e— —yam �1 2L 16 PFdL17ICT 297 ASSI;SSt�1r AREA �e -le_LA A ,.. R .11� J ..r.��,, CSC w 1 'AnA ! 11 , Ll :.I '--------- A--- -----A ..- �_, !/ ` • ' 4Vy / I t Ivor r CSC , Y s4 in� FilIl j �c s ♦ FI - LI _ _ rEr ICE TER \ • I \ /` 0 \ PF i !F LI ° i�1 _ ;,•� CSC 4.• 8':0 <)t-rr _ s "t `:". °- ' -1 LSP E w I r� 1��.i L_a d PF L `\/\., i 'Pn[BaWI itrTi' •�' pi.1 xv.'-a_N�IIE r- ' A e G9 �`� '" 1 - EEx R-4 -_{4 f I a R -3.E 1/�1/Il?III PF.. pK.• I'r77 L A;4 q .'iM RB n i ° PF II i1 -T pF . iii R i f;" • PA B h8 �•-ir�1 ` PF / r I b PF rn R-4 1^I•• .p? u• =e 17 C drowns I Ql.� _- Pia. ' P°"��`r' R-4 i� AJ _X`i<oaj A i `T 4RyY",� R '•I '� X4.1- ,° •:Sex Sxd2�D_I n,.. � - t=,u""'="r xE �7t �� .-�tia ' MINI • � �,h iPF ...: - ( � R q _ ` R Imo. p� rK. CSC '' F L L r4Y_ R-4 R•4 1' �y�j! h ' �ri� R•4 -?� ( i�.)raS� I�'I. t. >60, .t6S41 ^•' tic •,J' CSC NIDN �• •,I \ \` ` t�l _ j`PK Ir. 1 -RY . R IArr brr' suaNl .tAaG _ ^.y�+..•e W 111a �� •�- c ` A i .r ar „', A w�;. :'I, EAcnr✓i� .in , R•..: RLE! _�— _�-�� J�� J. dtr ts R_I "_:.�. "_-,._�R_3— N A IP rrsr ill• ^- C A `. LB R•z I , ,,1• !? �}: �' ::.car . R-1 03 NIML,N/Jat130M'\.: er _ r s-Zllr��c- aJ R•) . ,, y '1 % � -' l r -, � y3 tet. I I i� .. 1� 6, ✓.� , y L j r.., J rJr , R L/TLyV�''"�'��y�� 4 i, J' V,.. ��( . ly PK 4' ,x••31 R l "r`?--' II A A , /� ) w4SorFa.4.th(Y•"�_AF - V���I^wwN:)�v� .y.#� '�. • es�- r ,�:''+' ISSs f�Sf �' '�'��%.�,-Y.�'<TY jf'T•)rr.. !S�4, FA �-•. RIA31 A?=L-c5y A A' 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirteen 0 3. David Ashfeld (Parcel #10-02100-010-02) -- Enclosed on pages 3 through 35' is a copy of the background information pertaining to --Mr Ashfeld's written objections submitted at the final assessment hearing on July 20. Mr. Ashfeld questions the benefit received to his property by the trunk storm sewer project and has expressed concerns of his lack of knowledge pertaining to this project. Research by staff has indicated that this particular parcel was inadvertantly omitted from the mailing list for individual notification of the public hearing for Project 297 that was held on May 20, 1980. Based on the written objection received at the night of the final assessment hearing combined with a techni- cal defect in the public hearing notification process, it is staff's recommendation that this parcel be eliminated from the final assessment roll for Project 297 as presented on July 20 and that this project be reassessed in the near future in accordance with all proper notification procedures combined with a property appraisal analysis pertaining to benefit. The Council should consider whether the future assessment should retain the 1980 trunk storm sewer rates or if they should use current trunk area storm sewer rates for the new hearing process. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and cancel the assessment as proposed for Project 297 presented on July 20, 1982 and order this property to be reassessed. 3:Z . k' • E SAC 8/30/82 "• 7 Y� 1 • " I •' 7 • 2. David Ashfeld (Parcel No. 10-02100-010-02) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Enclosed on Page is a copy of the written objection received frau Mr. Ashfeld regarding his trunk area storm sewer assessment from the above -referenced project. Also enclosed on Page i'If is an area location map referencing this parcel to the assessment area for this project. Mr. Ashfeld's gross area for this parcel is 16.95 acres. After applying a credit of 20% for potential future rights-of-way and ease- ments, the net assessable area was 13.27 acres (577,989 square feet) which was as- sessed at the agricultural rate of 3.4fi per square foot equaling his assessment of $19,652.00. a • is •11 •: This parcel lies within the drainage basin benefited by the outlet fxan Blackhawk Iake. All assessments were based in accordance with existing City policies. Therefore, the staff feels that the assessment as levied is fair and equitable and should remain as is. 33 I O 0 AS, HFF- —A A.e — �^ • 'W SJ �z j c)uouc; L , ,I �oYuG32ti J, v P2oTzLi .0 '997 ' o rt l ;I CO+ Lo k. c L �£7 L ArO J 5 �Ae v op ,I -,4-pop-o-& U A L A L Assn---, z. -,T..,- nl (J . v V I c f�'j('j�I � d l • wcE A PRAT T 297 — ASSGSSMUjT ARE71 • e `•• .. - •_ . i . _. .LI ._ I � ,w: � 4 ny°.Jr1 Lr 8 RB.: ,.. , csc ..i-;• •'• MOUS 14L\.Ppq ��� A ' BLOT sc _ FI ..`• LI •-SLI I L 1 • \\ LI .fl ii . �- GE .OEc�..:Er PF LI • • i /l'e. ``I ~CSC \ e._�.r0a,e,� . 3 A I e LI 7° IE rm .• ,... "§, `1 �. 1PEl84Wl I 'F /eILUNGaLE ,y - o I_— -RB �\� I I 'REFY R_4 �. �j J D a R-3 :! Pi.. II Ptt.' I .......... pF - . - R /; J` '/ NB R•3 - ea.. ts ic. PF ,� N9 _tCs•I :9do:EmRB l,; B- aewODL i / '-Iry-Lv PF„ L •.\ 1 ..- ,� A R-4 —t.In:. I— N. _ 3C `PK •:'- I'" .I�j�(r'�!/ ! y� R- ..rj `tel• R`•- yD!=L A 3f MEIWf� -�'1 � iA ify� , E n� PF— I Ry 4 S 1 YE4r 1 CJ✓l C V ~ R R•4 R•4 I SUu TR 4 xganOf J atl. r 1E7 t -• , ! !F i/�'ll ` \gree S. � p. CSC^ ..tI.SApI •� � tsnrc - I CSC C� �•?'Y� �`�.��ti 0 £Pt='L_ � `wl ( R-I � 'lK•` ••+H,mr .. 41p6 tt�;,I \ r •� � - • I -�` pl(' _ 1 IAS . D•• L It j9i' ..+. iT'r �lYlwr"C'-. T 54{•RI � . CQKf '•rRr!1 [x r r,! I LE y �`,I\.L`oa�. it ..� Es4cse✓i� -moult R.bL -" IWE J �- Ir A ` .' "J J .k•1 LA -'ItL : - `\ ;` IB ; !_ TIVE' RB it I A 4 "r A 4 A r. r(%--J .\.1..,7:.-L.. q.lvR:3- 2 /\' 'I A . PF is -u1TLR R-2 rl%-•1 / _ �j`Fa _ R•I 7A _) r1 r� LB i[ ®1 1;�'-r,Rl �'_ 'K)r-•A - R-1 // w�R:EfLr . AI IL. R 1 nw.Lur,•y'VSOw •� , __ / 'A `;..'.: • a R-3 R'S y !�'s.h .rl �1 �:. :- 0:1rrOR J _Tlnr I�•�?w0, i '.rI '. A A K p, � � � vJ.r•t R 1 �I4 is .i' Y rf lY PK .. ` /�• A A n I,, V M 3.-r r^+.0 _ 1' �, Y J . • J x. '��,J J ri „ > PK f II - - . Ea-• J tJY \ ' '� , �f 4�.' 1\`,`J •Yhi'L -r„' X.. v{Y'J.ri II��, • it w ., \...;tIN••, J F.-_W i,�i:_'r ^J '� -JJ�xb. I T�"T'j. �_3 yuy: • f S' �y'.=N Sr = AI • ., r J. _. I JH y..J JJ �. ..4 ) ar .J_'"I 1 _ T'.I.' C �• I /,� R-IA 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Fourteen Pi 4. James Horne (Lot 7, Block 1, Kings Wood Addition) Horne Development Corporation (Lots 1-6, 8-10, Outlots 1- 3, Kings Wood Addition & Parcel 10-02100-010-01) -- Enclosed on pages 3-7 through +6 is background informa- tion pertaining to Mr. Horne's written objection presented at the July 20 final assessment hearing. Mr. Horne objects to the defect in the public hearing notification process and as to the benefit received by his property from this project. In researching the public hearing notification mailing list, it appears that these parcels were also inad- vertantly omitted from individual notification of the May 20, 1980 public hearing for Project 297. Mr. Horne has requested that a formal property appraisal and analysis be performed to determine benefit to his property in rela- tionship to total amount of assessments levied. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and cancel these parcels from the final assessment roll as presented on July 20, 1982 and order these parcels to be assessed under a future project in accordance with required procedures combined with performing a property appraisal analysis. 3G 0 0 SAC 8/30/82 I: •>1 M� P � •8ti7 181 •: �7y,1 ��+ and Arvella Horne (Parcel No. 10-02100-010-01 and King's Flood Addition I:tiT la:J: �� Enclosed on Page 3?k4 is a copy of the written notice of objection that was sub- mitted by Mr. Horne at the final assessment hearing held on July 20, 1982. En- closed on Page iyAcis a referenced location map showing the relationship of these Parcels to the overall assessment area for Project 297. Mr. Horne's first cbjeo- tion pertains to a procedural requirement pertaining ni ng to notification of public hearing for the project which was held on May 20, 1980. This contention is correct in that these parcels were inadvertently omitted from the official individual par- cel notification for that public hearing. However, formal notices were published in the legal newspapers and this area is, in fact, included within the proposed and designated area assessment for Project 297. Their second objection pertains to trunk area storm sewer assessments against pro - �that "can contain its present and future water drainage". Enclosed on Page s the location of this property in relationship to the drainage basin and existing storm sewer facilities that presently service this property. The present pond QP -5) that is contained within portions of Mr. Horne's and Horne Development Corporation's property presently has a positive storm seer gravity outlet prcvi- ding direct drainage into Blackhaak lake. The gross acreage of parcel 10-02100- 010-01 is 27.59 acres. 7/10 of an acre was deducted for the existing pond (JP -5) and a 20% credit was applied for potential future right-of-way and easement dedi- cations. This resulted in a net assessable area of 21.51 acres (936,975 square feet) which was assessed at the agricultural rate of 3.4C per square foot. This resulted in an assessment figure of $31,857.17. All lots within the King's Wood Addition were assessed at the single family/agricultural rate based on their ac- tual square footage. These assessments ranged from $442.00 per lot to a nk-wimlml of $3,213.00 per lot for Outlot 3 (2.17 acres). If Mr. Horne will not agree to a waiver of the procedural requirement of individual public hearing notification, the City should pursue a new public hearing process: with a new final assessment hearing. However, because the property owned by Mr. Horne, or Horne Development Corporation, lies within the drainage basins benefited by the Bladchawk lake Outlet and due to the fact that the pond lying within this property (JP -5) has a positive storm sewer gravity outlet into Blackhawk Iake, the staff feels that the assessments should remain as determined and presented at the final assessment hearing held on July 20, 1982. o 3-7 0 0 �L9 .45- .x2fv ,ea� 14W.e ij ,e z/ui 3v PRaTECI. 297 -04EI' A _.. • _ _I. _ .LI - .. A$$}'$$JvjQ�1'1• AR13F1 48 B' 4 A .cA! ab "sI R -'FtR4 1.J �y/•' Cs6 LI ,• INDUS IAAmor .PGR / IVy V CExr \\ ..Rc I. GB. pFL p (p LI _ �� da q.Lr jcE � [' R -r- .._ 1 LI \` v LTTa3 °y x94Yp' it '' 1i, P .zFi�h^ •� PF LI�� csc q\ BDw I Yom` � t , sC PF \• � � LI{E LBP . �^�r�x•�., , i. � R -b / PF L \' _ s _?ELa,uN. 'I-Rt4T*' A - GB g ��...� I I - EExR-4 A C R-} R8 •I/I Qf� PP v 11 1 PF.. li PK. pF R /•:I a� by mx c I Ipr: L e a • . NB PF RB IIB ) :Ee?!I oow ux - \ is • i . RB • 1 PF _ o. yy('i -. V wof• p _s.lw i. PFS• '!�'' '\. �JJ- ri-i�, �y''s N R'4 Pia:. E�v. R:1 . ,pK - - .` PK ` sz - I 1 . _ , FiiC_ PF IJ•RI `\\ ifi C •fPF .. .: /• __..... R 1� R•4 R•4 I 9 � i t.Icixv9''K x pp YG C?M 1 nwa rc�,J1 \ ADDJma K \ �� PK i II A�1'h S,'q� '•+I�1`'' `- i' ,. \\d• r $1i•RI � L4N- .SAR� , " '•n'Y't, L%',' A��•c°' E]ecae✓id •°"L IR-+"'' "'Y �RtiE! W -I - / Il.—�\..q.,'•r}y _:.w�._oz Z - � I PK �- - MR RB c A A'\ A 41A�.�.J.\...` ; R.I '-- 1 A rPF_r rrsr R i Z c A > \` I LR RIMILR IJWSOM \'. 1: % 11.E Y�D�^JII Y R.} I PK~ sLnt ✓ / A ff ! R {\.. I. .]r/ !,!.e .fel %::" �.. •7,•':� R alta' �2 I I �: ..�_y .,,. ;... •�"PN ,.r�L/Fi,tv..1^.•a:°rRa� li' r 1Y A 4 / �./� ' lfglgs4t•4.1.WY'�'�iJ'X ��T�"r]vP7i<�� - nr• ;. PIf YI I - = f>''„tc �.1; f r� \\`"�,1J h''i d• r:. _[A:l ,<! • sl •/-.: I J 'l J+ J .S-Iu t./ 'Y ( f .] !• I, '1J lJ -_.I•N y l lry:r,'r J .: +! y. J. J.1�`.r. J dNJ•iruQ r /C' 14�/-c}`� j D'4�' L' I t. 7 I •�:::•' D 14 f �_ • ._L -=` PARR .. •w%n�r I t ..—_- _.ILD= `•`', - -J �- - - LAS U S POST. I->� C mp'yrp, SERVICE I={ �C4%' —` > -18 D-13 •il /SIf ! RAIIRA: I._-•-t� I ._'�r `�1/I \ I 4, C. > )r {.jR_ /:% EFFR I ' ' °'4 °--22_- / C 20 7�^1y16�i--I' - Lownorli _ �-.. C -?"j �u �p RlocelIt � 011 1 D.20f Y L � � , r .Ax.p• Doo 1 -_ _ _ IC -8 /—��,'�.'-SUPRE. 5-'Lex,Srv�L ,i iI `C-3 ;�/ //`;.� C-10: 'N RT$' C- 3" 11; 30 tl-29' �I ! \rMLL ` -w Ndr¢5-IISTN�2RP � ;+I�!� �i .7' I� S moo:. I .._aa,� . 1 D-19 _ LD -23 I Li \y=28. II D-2 -5 I i _ - 'f-7-jrY�-=- \ J-12 'A �-S.L\a•=XI/ROSP_' 'iIQ� _ -�ti �l� _-� SC ^z �� 9 C I� J -6J-6 1�= BAA < lYl.-���°��I;ir. •� . ' J'4 --_--J-63 ��J-62 \ } M. AUMLE 1 `/ 211, B_3 �J '='/ �_~(J-6• J -SQA I '','' % E.1 CK pf 13-6 FAQ �r\A-213 � \1 L -4 t. j Ip -31 r;�/A-35 ' c°� o,•� _Y.._tlgFs - (`Y L-7 >Y�) r. Lig-g !1, �.. � 3' ! •� /y-�9 26 I /71 �'4jLL_2' aN ti.lK_:_: .: I J-65 zZ %L -25,j \�D/ . 1y I B-24`.. ---8-23 \`�1../t I/ B\0�' A;,;�„a eia v^" :L�p•'� mai, `s' I, /..,/� r.�.;� ' �•!,� / 1 /w E t r' T= ; L• :- L'13 13 \� A-33.'/IA-34 x9.27 L ��..':-�' i�e-11 �j8121 1"14 L. n., 9 /'SIAge,. L-11 =� .•,% ICE(/= ' ly 'OIL9 23' % :.,.L4x _ "jr•I.e..� 1; L e P / AwJS LL, - )+jr >•A�_ a ' r ^r" /_ -I >,:� 381 L__._r_,..8-31 ',e /B-2! Bs' n_- -`� 1: 2--.�— 2 I ` 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Fifteen VACATION OF PONDING EASEMENT B. Vacation of Ponding Easement - Lot 12, Block 9, Beacon Hill Addition -- The City had received a request from the owner of Lot 12, Block 9, Beacon Hill Addition, requesting that a 1975 quit claim easement document which acquired ponding easement rights over what was then unplatted property be vacated due to the fact that it has subsequently been incorporated within the official platting of the Beacon Hill Addition. This previous easement was discovered through a detailed title search of the property. The revised ponding easement as dedicated with the Beacon Hill final plat satisfactorily incorporates the required ponding easement limits. Staff has not received objections to this proposed original easement vacation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve or deny the vacation of the ponding easement acquired in 1975 from Blackhawk Park, Inc., that presently exists over Lot 12, Block 9, Beacon Hill Addition, with a condition that the existing ponding easement dedicated as a part of the Beacon Hill Addition remain in full force and effect. PARCEL 10-02500-021-25 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING C. Parcel 10-02500-021-25 (Project 241), Final Assessment Hearing (Trudi Johnson) -- On February 26, 1982, Dakota County District Court ordered the City of Eagan to vacate the original assessment of $32,323.61 as levied against Parcel 10-02500-021-25 under the ownership of Trudi Johnson as levied under Project #241. The court order indicated that the benefit conferred upon this property does not exceed $11,300. Therefore, because the City has vacated the original assessment against this parcel in total, a new assessment roll for this property was presented to the Council on August 3 with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 7. Enclosed on page 4 �Z is a copy of the final assessment break- down as revised to concur with the district court order of the maximum amount of assessments against this property. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for parcel 10-02500-021-25 (Trudi Johnson) for Project #241 in the amount of $11,299.86. +I 0 0 7O: ANN GDERS, SPECIAL ASSFSSMFNf CLERIC FROM: THOMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: AUGUST 17, 1982 RE: PARCEL No. 10-02500-021-25, REASSESSMENT HEARING (TRUDI JOHNSON), PROJECT 241 In accordance with Dakota County District Court Order dated March 3, 1982, the original assessmend levied at the final assessment hearing held on September 24, 1980 for Project 241 pertaining to the above -referenced parcel in the amount of $32,323.61 was vacated and set aside with a judgment determining that the maxi- mum amount of assessments benefiting this property is $11,300.00. This was based on the determination that the existing 25 acre parcel is undevelopable beyond the existing dwelling unit that presently exists. Subsequently, the following recalculated front footage and area figures should be used in determining the new assessment roll as follows: 1. Sanitary Sewer Trunk Area (3.35 acres) at $590/acre = $1,976.50 2. Trunk Water Area (3.35 acres) at $590/acre = 1,976.50 3. Sanitary Sewer Lateral Benefit from trunk (187.43 L.F.) at $10.75 per L.F. = 2,014.87 4. Water main lateral benefit from trunk (187.43 L.F.) at $9.00/ L.F. = 1,686.87 5. Sewer and Water Services (one pair) at $605.01 per pair = 605.01 6. Street Residential EcTuivalent (187.43 L.F.) at $16.22/L.F. = 3,040.11 T13TAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $11,299.86 These assessments should be spread over 20 years at 8% interest for any unpaid balance in accordance with Council direction at the time of the original final assessment hearing for Project 241. Please insure that all notices are published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owner no later than August 20, 1982. Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works cc - E. J. VanOverbeke, Finance Director Paul Hauge, City Attorney No. 10-02500-021-25 4� 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Sixteen PROJECT 307A FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING D. Project #307A, Final Assessment Hearing (St. Francis Woods 2nd Addition - Utilities) -- On August 3, the final assessment roll was presented to the Council providing for the installation of utilities in the St. Francis Woods 2nd Addition. Enclosed on page is a summary tabulation showing the final assessment rates as compared to those quoted in the feasibility report pre- sented at the public hearing of September 16, 1980. Notice of the final assessment hearing has been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners. To date, staff has not received any objections pertaining to these assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #307A (St. Francis Woods 2nd Addition - Utilities) and authorize certification to Dakota County to be spread over 5 years at 12.5% interest. 43 0 0 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 307A SUBDIVISION/AREA: St. Francis Wood 2nd Addition - Uti.litieS FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: . SeptEmber 7, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES Area 316.84/lot 335/lot Laterals 1319.63/lot 1260/lot QX Service 307.33/lot 250/lot O Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM ® Area 670/64/lot 670.64/lot ® Laterals 1274.91/lct 1230 lot NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 19 lots NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 years RATE OF INTEREST: - 12.5% SANITARY J Area J Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Grading/ Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $178,006.97 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-4 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 9-16-80 +t FINAL F. R. RATES RATES 316.84/lot 335/lot 2301.48/lot 3130/lot 307.33/lot 250/lot 610.85/lot 596.05/lot 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Seventeen 0 PROJECT 324A FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING E. Project #324A, Final Assessment Hearing (Safari at Eagan - Utilities) -- On August 3, the final assessment roll for the above referenced project was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 7. Enclosed on page 4. (o is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compared to those quoted in the feasibility report as presented at the public hearing held on March 17, 1981. Notice of the final assessment hearing has been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners.;, To date, staff has not received any objections pertaining to these assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close approve the final assessment roll for Project Eagan - Utilities) and order certification to collection over 10 years at 12.5% interest. 4s the public hearing, #324A (Safari at Dakota County for 0 PROJECT NO: 324A u FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING SUBDIVISION/AREA: Safari at Eagan - Utilities FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: Sept. 7, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report WATER FINAL F.R. FINAL F.R. RATES RATES SANITARY RATES RATES Area(change in . $715/ac NAArea zoning) Laterals $17.241/L.F._ $22.87/L.F. ® Laterals. $12.875/L.F. $22.85/L.] Lj Service // GiaS��ase F1 Service ElRes. Lat. Benefit/Trunk Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area 5.610/SF. 5.61fi/SE ® Laterals $28.934/L.F. 29.38/L.F. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 5 STREETS��nn // GiaS��ase F1 Surfacing ElRes. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 years RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $280,888.40 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-4 PUBLIC HEARING DATE:_ March 17, 1981 m $14.27B/L.F. $10.28/L.F. • Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Eighteen C� PROJECT 328A FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING F. Project 328A, Final Assessment Hearing (Ches Mar East 4th Addi- tion - Utilities) -- The final assessment roll for the above referenced project was presented to the Council on August 3 with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 7, 1982. Enclosed on page 4.4g is a summary tabulation of the final assess- ment rates as compared to the rates quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on April 7, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, staff has not received any ob- jections pertaining to these proposed assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #328A (Ches Mar East 4th Addition - Utilities) and authorize certification to Dakota County for collection over a 5 year period at 12.5% interest. 47 FINAL ASSESSMENT NEARING PROJECT NO: 328A SUBDIVISION/AREA: Ches Mar East 4th Addition - litilities FINAL ASSESSMEENT NEARING: 9-7-82 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. NATER RATES RATES SANITARY ] Area $370.00/lot $370/lot ❑ Area O Laterals $546.31/lot $823/lot EXI Laterals xj Service $398.56/lot $455.50/10 [Z Service ❑ Lat. Benefit/Trunk Fj Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area $379.56/lot $393.00 Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 28 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 RATE OF INTEREST: 1-2•5% STREETS Grad GravvelgB IJase Surfacing, RRes. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $93,270.80 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-4 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 4-7-81 m FINAL F. R. RATES RATES $508.16/lot $729/lot $398.56/lot $455.50/1c $729.95/lot $338.00/lo 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Nineteen 0 PROJECT 329A FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING G. Project 329A, Final Assessment Hearing (Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition - Utilities) -- On August 3, 1982, the final assessment roll for the above referenced project was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing scheduled for September 7, 1982. Enclosed on page 56 is a summary tabulation of the final assess- ment rates as compared to those quoted with the feasibility report as presented at the public hearing held on March 17, 1981. Notice of the final assessment hearing has been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners. As of this date, staff has not received any objections from any of the affected property owners pertaining to these proposed assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project 329A (Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition - utilities) and authorize certification to Dakota County for collection over a 5 year period for laterals and 15 years for trunk storm sewer at a 12.5% rate of interest., M FINAL ASSESSMENT NEARING PROJECT N0: 329A SUBDIVISION/AREA: Cedar Cliff 2nd Addition - Utilities FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: 9-7-82 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES 0 Area Laterals $657.18/1ot $868/lot © Service $397.15/lot $456/l0t Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM ❑X Area Laterals 3.744/sf 3.74�/sf NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: FINAL SANITARY RATES Area F. R. RATE: ® Laterals $731.10/lot $922/lo ® Service $397.15/lot $456/10 E] Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base ❑ Surfacing Res. Equiv. 33 lots, 11.6 acres (ISD#191) $522.84/lot $430/lo NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 years (laterals), 15 years (trunk storm sewer) RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $108,178.86 CONSTRUCTED UNDER TUE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-4 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: WI -9-1 so 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty OLD BUSINESS. CITY HALL EXPANSION UPDATE A. City Hall Expansion Project Update -- Because of the two (2) public hearings that were held on August 31 and September 2, 1982, there is no discussion anticipated by the City Administrator or formal action required by the City Council. However, the item is on the agenda to allow any final discussion by the City Council or public prior to the referendum scheduled for September 14. LAND USE DESIGNATION/EAGLE'S NEST B. Concepts for land Use Changes for the Proposed Handicapped Facility Location in Meadowland Addition (Betty Bassett) -- At the last regular City Council meeting held on August 17, 1982, Betty Bassett appeared asking for City Council consideration to redesignate the land use for her four lots in Meadowland that have to date been approved for a four unit townhouse to be used as a home for the handicapped. There were a number of questions raised by both Betty Bassett and members of the City Council about the original intent of the unisourse planned development for the use of that property and further what more recent approval was regarding the Eagle's Nest home for that location. The City staff was directed to prepare a chronology of the Eagle's Nest Home prior to the September 7 City Council meeting. City Planner Runkle has prepared a memorandum that includes a report prepared by John Voss when Betty Bassett made application for the Eagle's Nest Home dated April 21, 1976. That information is found on pagesS of through 6Z for your reference. Also enclosed are copies off— minutes of the May 5, 1976 City Council meeting, the August 3, 1976 meeting, and September 7, 1976. Those minutes are enclosed on pages 63 through 67 and will hopefully provide additional background in�ormation as tFe City Council reviews this item. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM or a designation for the property Meadowland Addition adjacent to Rahn as a four unit townhouse to be used the Handicapped. SI To approve or deny procedure that is described as lots in Road and currently designated as the Eagle's Nest Home for 0 0 TO: THCMA.S L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 1982 RE: CHRONOLOGY OF THE EAGLES NEST HCME SUBMITTED BY ELIZABETH BASSEiT In reviewing the applications in the Eagles Nest Horne file, the first applica- tion submitted by Elizabeth Bassett was 4-27-76. The City Council on 5-5-76 approved the preliminary sketch plan concept for a 4 -unit townhouse to be used as a home for handicapped in Section 29, Rahn Road. On April 21, 1976, John Voss prepared a memorandum regarding the Eagles Next Herne facility. Two questions he raised in this memorandum are: 1. Is the proposed use suitable for this area, and 2. Will a new hearing be required or is the proposal in keeping with the Unisource Planned Development? Attached is a concept plan of the Unisource Planned Development, or the Mission Hills North Planned Development. In the area of the proposed handicapped facil- ity, the proposed density is single family low density with four dwelling units per acre. Enclosed is a copy of John Voss' memorandum for your review. Also attached is a survey designating the exact area which Elizabeth Bassett proposed to locate her facility in the Mission Hill North Planned Development. Regarding the application submitted by Elizabeth Bassett on July, 1976, the City Council requested that further study be conducted. On August 3, 1976, the City Council reviewed the State law in regard to permitted uses in single family and multiple family areas for physically and mentally disabled persons. Attached are copies of the statute regarding these provisions for your review. The City Council also voted in favor of the preliminary plat for Eagles Nest Home. On September 7, 1976, there was an agreement entered into between Eagles Nest Home and the City of Eagan. This agreement states that any changes in use must be approved by the City of Eagan. If this agreement pertains to a different use than a handicapped facility, a new application should be submitted and processed. At- tached is a copy of the agreement dated September 7, 1976. In the application submitted, the only legal notice prepared and advertised was in regard to preliminary plat approval. Attached is a copy of the certifica- tion of mailing regarding Eagles Nest Hare Notice of Public Hearing. On March 14, 1978, the Advisory Planning Commission held a special meeting of the Advisory Planning Commission to discuss Eagan Hills West Planned De- velopment and Eagan Hills West lst Addition preliminary plat. Mrs. Bassett appeared at that meeting and indicated that plans had been completed for Eagles Nest Hone but that financing has not been completed and that the proponents for Eagles Nest Hone prefer not to change the location as it was located in the Mission Hills North Planned Development. On March 14, the Advisory Planning Commission reconv ended approval of the Eagan Hills West Planned Development and Eagan hills West 1st Addition which is now Meadow- lands with a condition being a satisfactory agreement with Eagles Nest Hare Inc. concerning location of its development on Rahn Road. A separate mo.- tion o-tion on March 14, 1978 stated that Hall moved to reconfirm prior action of the Eagan City Council on August 3, 1976 granting approval to Eagles Nest Hare Inc. for the installation of a development for handicapped persons consisting of four lots numbered 107-110, Block 1, Eagan Hills West 1st S0.- 0 Thames L. Hedges Eagles Nest Home August 26, 1982 Page two 0 Addition. The City Council approved the Advisory Planning Commission's recom- mendation for preliminary plat and planned development approval on April 4, 1978. In reviewing the documentation in the City files, it appears that Mrs. Bassett received approval for the preliminary plat for Eagles Nest Home. However, there had never been a request for rezoning the property other than what was shown in the Mission Hills North Planned Development and then the Eagan Hills West Planned Development in 1978. The entire parcel for the location of the Eagles Nest Home has been in an R-1, Single Family Residential District from the first time the parcel has been zoned. The only change from single family is the area south of Shale Lane which the Advisory Planning Commission and City Council approved for duplex units. In reviewing the chronology and background information, it still appears that the questions that John Voss set forth in April of 1976 are still the ques- tions the City is asking .today in regard to what the underlying zoning of the property is and is anything other than the Eagles Nest Home permitted without a new public hearing. - DCR/jach 6-3 r. -- MEMORANDUM --. TO: City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission FROM: John S. Voss, Planning Consultant DATE: April 21, 1976 SUBJECT: Planning Agenda Items for April 27th Meeting Eagles Nest Homes The petitioners are proposing to construct a 4 -unit townhouse for handicapped persons on the Unisource property on Rahn Road. The property is zoned Planned Development (PD). The use appears suitable for the area, howev.er, the Preliminary Development Plan submitted with the Unisource Planned Development proposed "single family". The proposal was for cluster single family at a density of 4 units per acre. Conventional single fam- ily development is as 2.5 units per acre, therefore, a higher than normal single family density was anticipated (see Exhibit A). A more detailed development (Exhibit B) was also submitted by Unisource with the original Planned Development which shows the sub- ject area as a proposed outlot and not a part of the single family . cluster plat. The petitioner is only requesting preliminary sketch plan and con- cept approvals at the April 27th meeting. Two (2) ba.si.c questions need to be answered at this time: A. Is the proposed use suitable for this area? Planner's Comment: It appears that townhouses as proposed, located etween proposed cluster single family to the north and a proposed park and the NSP easement to the south,would be a compatible use. B. Will a new hearing be required or is the proposal in keepin with the oriqinal Unisource Planned Development? Planner's Comment: The townhouse use was not specifically designated for this area. However, the proposed use is sim- ply attached single dwellings where cluster single family was proposed and the proposed use will not exceed the maximum four (4) dwelling units per acre designation in the Unisource Planned Development. 2. Zoo Area Development Guide A meeting was held with the MetropolitanCouncilstaff on the Zoo Area Development Guide and the Metropolitan Council staff will be preparing a revised report. No action is required by the Planning Commission at this time be- cause the Met Council will not take action until May 13th. 3. Proposed Dakota County Government Service Center For your information, a copy of the Dakota County Planning Depart- ment's evaluation of alternative sites for a proposed Government Service Center is. attached. SS ii u i iii 9 rtlr u �u PD APPLE VALLEY �yD PD of WE aCFNPUO I Z: -�� �' ice./ I ,0 r^MILY ................... . . . 70 PAA hfi 'fl MVIVIUM PCN5171( 191 el, Mai • .. yam«...., ''urvey fori =souHCE conFCHATICH .... Farcel 1 Co"ncing at the Southwest corner orNorthwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township flange 23; thence North along the West line of said Nortel ' t 1/4 a distance of 483.50 feet to the actual point of be-,. ,ginning, hereinafter referred to as point A;.thence continuing North along said Went line a distance ;of 110,00 feet; thence Easterly deflecting'to the right 90 degrees, p distance of 718,00 feet; thence :Southerly deflecting -to the right 90 degrees, a distance of 110,00 feet; thence Westerly deflecting to ithe right 90 degrees, a distance of 218,00 feat to the point of beginning. And reserving the West 133.CO feet for road: -...': - .. Parcel 2 Beginning at point A; thence Southerly.along the West line of Bald Northweet4'l/4 a distance of 100.00 feet; thence Easterly deflecting to the left 90 degreen a distance of.218;00 feet; thence Northerly deflecting to the left 90 degrees a distance of 100.00 feet; thence 'Westerly deflecting to the left 90 degrees a distance of.218.00 feet to the point of beginning. And_reserving the Went 33.00 feet for road.. _ ... Parcel 3 - Cos®eneing at the Southwest corner of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29 Toinnhi 27. Hangs 231 thence North along the West line of said Northwest 1/4 a distance of 151.85 feet to the ectua l' point of be- ginning; thence Easterly deflecting to the right 90 degrees a distance or.180.00 feet; thence Easterly 99.19 feet along a tangential curve concave to the South having a central angle of 17 degrees, 55 ainutes, 47 ascends, and -a radius of 316,98 feet; thence Southeasterly tangent to last described curve a distance of 32,50 feet; thence Northeasterly deflecting to tithe left e0 degrees a distance of 40;00 feet; thence Northerly parallel with said Wast line a dlatanceol feet; thence Northwesterly deflecting to the left 67 degrees a distance of 111,69 Peet to -the Northeast corner of said Parcel 1; thence Southerly parallel with said West line a distance of 230.00. feet to the Southeast corner of said Parcel .2; thence Westerly deflecting to the right.90 degrees a -distance of 218.00 feet to ea id West line; thence Southerly along said West line a distance of 231.65, feet to the point of beginning. And reserving the West 33.00 feet.and the Southerly 40.00 feet for road._• .1 T` �lSaltJSi S SalYey"i - :.� 4'a 7"•`> !tl""'•Y' n. 'i ... :'.l Messy taTm 7/s/76 ..•1..aueaMa tae Preaerty 4lieetbad saeve a 7. .i !sa [We the sasve plat 4 e eeteaet nptuestatten at said survey. 1 �.• •sap v E t - n }: r <+- -• �� r .,�, _Calvin a Badleed Nlae_aR- M ,Ma I ¢' •�"'-'-� I [ )r• l � _ l e. � • a Q eel., !• O 4 O .�nn•n.,a.w- a .. •� . lar.ee - lot. . •. n .ror.r Mn'ie'q•y, "I 'flees I + . 0 Imo' '.�'y''r ••�, ••• . 14t 00 2 "l S 57�1'E'ET tit+; I [ )r• l � _ l 1-4 rer.Kt•-w:• O . •. n 1-4 rer.Kt•-w:• § 462.357 PLANNING, ZONING PLANNING, ZONING be initiated by the Note 1 rt owners as defined Subd. 4. Amendments. An amendment a do Qf affe�atzd P�°may � Yy agency shall be and would be subject to the governing body, the planning agency, or by pe the planning ge Y d the municipalitY• Id. in the zoning ordinance. An amendment Tt there s one, for stlot udyband report and may not be acted ould be requited to advise a referred to the planning agency, a those municipalities which upon by the governing body until it has received the recommendationfromtthepdate of ,sive municipal plan of thea agency on the proposed amendment or until 60 days have elapsed agency. could reference of the amendment without a report by the planning ag .spore of or imOrove the srltod rut the Pta^^i^B^� . ordinance shall pool distriet to oomD1Y w'dt its Suap;ly to cities of the first CltassC1tInn such ciies of ties ams dmentseto avz°nin bee this su tvt- unitY development. pp•Atty. Sion aPP Y be made in conformance with this section but only after there shall have been tiledni of B 1966 office of of city reat estate situate nconsent of 0 within 100 feet of the total con owners of two-thirds guous descriptionsseveral descriptionspurchasing any such contiguous property Public health, real estate held by the same owner or any party within one year preceding the request, and after the affirmative vote in favor thereof by a promoting the P majority of the members of the governing body of any such city. The governing body of late the location, adopt a new zoning dinance h�percentage of lot such city may, by a two-thirds vote of its members. atter hearing. P, 'ae4trea, the density and ordinance without such written consent whenever the whole planning of he c tY or of an of den space r trach industry, board of such city shall have made a survey Mail es of land for trade, not less than ci acres, within which the new ordinance or the amendments or alterations ° od the uses 1 conser- and alterations renders servation, water supply the existing ordinance would take effect when adopted, and shall have considered whether °fir 7lPay to direct sunlight the number of descriptions of real estate affected by such changes sats of the the obtaining of such written consent impractical, and suchi Poi^�hegpropocommission or 1 control or other pure° bibs rt in writing as to whether in its op �,. No regulation may prohibit with planning board shall repo are reasonably related to the overall needs of the community, that comp verning body in any case a public ubdivtston 3, re lations may g° section. The and area. The to existing land use, or to a plan for future land use, and shall have conducted a l numbers, ish shape hearing on such proposed ordinance, changes per of general c)r alterations, irc1 tion at least once each sings, structures or land and toy week shad have been givenbody of the IBM in one distnct may week for three successive weeks poor to such hearing, which notice governing to the time drig these regulations snhaal by place and purpose of such hearing, and shall have reported to the go city territory and recommendations in writin& is and adjustments xt and maps• sty its findings Is to the board of y re ions Lo unin un or town which Subd. 6. Appear and adjustments. upon compliance with any ruts has the conditions I t not in a county our munict- may be taken by any affected Pe appeals and adjustments has the following o or more nonconttgu b the zoning ordinance. The board o[ is suthorized?o controIt he zonti POwers with imposed Y respect to the zoning ordinance: two noncontiguous municiny city 1 To hear adecide appeals where it is alleaedadmin shtrative officer in the ere is an error in any nforce- dzoning regulations. AnY qui he same extent as if such properLY requirement, decision, or determination made by is a ment of the zoning ordinance. county or town board adoP (2) To hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance m ea tan for iaatances where their Strict enforcement ^sedans d ration, ase undue ndt(grhip ant such variances the adoption raft the polis es and stances unique to the individual property with the spirit and intent e of carryonly when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keepingto ning ordinance andthe submit it to the ed for earth sheltered ,n, Subject to' require of of the ordinance. Undue hardship udVariances shall be grantto.inadequate access a zoning ordinance by s direct sunlight for solar energy Ya when in harmony with the and ames� Construction as defined in section 116H.02, subdivision 3, body as the case may appeals and adjustments or the g� r" under the ordinance for the governing be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted r amendmentthereto y hall be adopt, ordinanceThe board of apps �n s land is tThe under rho axone ordinance family Planning agency published in Lha Property in the zone where the affected Pe use he hearing shall be p may permit as a variance the temporarythe case may be may :ahs Prior to the day of the hearing• body as the case may family The board or governing protect adjacent of five acres duelling as a two family dwelling. notaries affecting an oarteahe hetes R ®pose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to p n to lays before the day within 3•rt0 feet of Properties. implement the policy of this state ed wholly or Poatri�ving marled n°Lice, Build. 7. Permitted single family use. In order to trmsopns should not be excluded by the P°cp°aa. determine -War mentally retarded and physically handicappedPe hall any appropria1e records w state the responsible pe Ietmeed group home or foster home serving six �itfewer si single familymresidential lase of e notice and a list of the own a eanicipal zoning ordinances from the benefits of normal residential surroundings, a asted to byted ve mailed notice m . dndicapped Persons shall be considered a pe ,s. The failure to gi tog'_:-koperty for the purposes of zoning. e shall not invalidat t e.P of d 103 subdivision has bee sy § .462.357 PLANNING, ZOMNG I " 9ubd. a. Permitted multi -family use. Unless otherwise provided in any town, munici pal or county zoning regulation as authorized by this subdivision, a state licensed residers-. tial facility serving from 7 through 16 mentally retarded or physically handicapped persons shall be considered a permitted multi -family residential use of property for purposes of ' zoning. A township, municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional use or special use permit in order to assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility, provided that no conditions shall he imposed on the homes which are more restrictive than those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the same zones, unless the additional conditions are necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of the residential facility for the mentally retarded or the physically handicapped, Nothing herein shall be construed to exclude or prohibit residential homes for the mentally retarded or physically handicapped from single family zones if otherwise permitted by a local zoning regulation. laws 1965, a 670, § 7, eff. Jan. 1, 1966. Amended by laws 1969, c. 259. § 1 eff. May 1, 1969; laws 1973, c. 123, art 5, § 7; Laws 1973, c. 379, § 4, eff. July 1, 1973; laws 1973, c. 539, § 1; laws 1973, e 559, §§ 1, 2; laws 1975, e. 60, § 2; Laws 1978, c. 786, §§ 14, 15, eff. April 6, 1978; laws 1979, Ex.Sesa, a 2. §§ 4$ 43. _ Law Review Corommu ries Impact of energy legislation on real estate. Do- syl L Peterson 37 Bench and Bar No. 4, p. 35 (Oct. 1980), Impact of variances David P. Bryden 1977,. 61 Minn. Law Review 769. Land use controls Jerome F. Fitzgerald. 24 Bench and Bar No. Z P. 17 (Feb. 1967). Metropolitan council and land -use planning Robert L Hoffman and Oliver Byrum. Novem- ber—December 1976, 45 Hennepin lawyer 4. Minnesota's Flood Plain Management Act— State guidance of land use controls 1971, 55 Minn. law Review 1163. Subjectivity, expression, and privacy: Problems of aesthetic regulation Stephen F. Williams 1977, 62 Minn Law Review I. Zoning; Minnesota supreme court 197i-1972 1973, 57 Minn. Law Review 940. Library references Municipal Corporations 4601.1. Zoning and Land Planning eee4, 134, 151 ct seq., 351. 354. CJ -S- Municipal COrportions §§ 224. 225. C.J.S. Zoning and land Planning §§ 3, 5 to 7, W, 12 to 14, 16, 65, 67, 71, 97,177, 180 to 184 189. United States Supreme Court Occupancy of one -family dwellings by tradi- tional groups see Village of Belle Tem v, aortas, 1974. 94 S.Cl. 1536, 416 U.S. 1, 39 LEd.2d 797. Zoning, Persons included within single family. see Moore v. City of Fast Cleveland, Ohio. 1977, L 97 S.Ct. 1932, 431 U.S. 494, 52 Ed.1i 531. Index to Notes In general 3 Amendments 4.9 Cmsmuction anti application 1 Extensions 4.6 Hearings 2S Purpose 3.5 104 PLANNING, ZC Note 1 Referendum 4 Review 5 Retionitg 4.7 Validity 'A Validity of ordinen Variants 4.5 th Vaudlty Evidence did not dl. which refused 1 for construction of traffic would have hood and that chum surrounding reside Congregation of Jell 1975, 303 Minn. 79 This section and rezoning by order real estate situated sought to be rezone rational delegation vete persons. O'Br 285 Minn 378, 173 1. Construction ar Enforcement of v is favored where vi lure City of Minn 300 N.W.2d 2. Repeated proses tetras or fines did remedy in enforcing operators a zoning of such store; thus operation of the stc Administration of mental not a propri not be estopped iron ordinance notwidua liance upon prior it ordinance. Frank's Roseville, 1980, 295 Interpretation of tion of law for aria zoning authority, w is not binding on th Statute required adopted before in adopted. and did n nance conform exec that the Plan be ame was amended Su Neighborhoods v. N.W.2d 885. For there to be landowner must de deprived, through a tion of a0 the reasoi v. City of Blaine. N.W.2d 272. The Supreme CO comuue the provisic Ing body may amen, 1969 Amersdment Added the last two sen- tenor to subd. 1 relating to extension of zoning regulations into untneorpooned areas, 1973 Amn'iments, Laws 1973, a 123, art. 5. § 7, was a general authority W ". W Permitting the con - solidation of the terms "vi sages" and `boroughs 'alb the term "Clues" Of the SUbslllatiOn OI the "statutory term cities" for "villages" and/or "hot- OughL" laws 1973, is 379. induded within the purposes for zoning, "conservation of shorelands, as defined in section 105.485,' and added subd. 8 delineating ' the extent of that authority. Laws 1973, a 539, inserted the third sentence of subd. 6(2). Laws 1973, a 559, increased area in which notice must be sent to owner property from 200 ., to 350 feet from the property to which the amend- ment relates in subd. 3, and in subd. 5 substituted "total contiguous descriptions of real estate held by the same Owner Or any Petty Purchasing any - o cntiguous Property within one Year preceding the request" for 'real estate affected" in subd. 5. Laws Amendment. Added subds. 7 and 8. 60, § 3, provides that the act be- came effective the day following final enactment. (Governor's approval April 30, 1975) 1978 Amendtnms- Added "access to direct sun- light for solar energy systems as defined in section 116H.02" within the riot sentence of subd. 1. Added the second sentence to subd. 6(2). 1979 Amendment Added the second sentence to sutld. 1. and the third sentence to subd. 6(2). Laws 1979, EeSess, e 2 did not contain a specific effective date, but did include appropria- tion items. See § 645.02 for method of determin- ing the effective data Cron References Extent of municipal authority relating to shore. i lard devel0 § 105-485. pment beyond state standards, see Zoning and subdivision regulation within Order- l ly annexation areas, sec § 414.068. Law Review Corommu ries Impact of energy legislation on real estate. Do- syl L Peterson 37 Bench and Bar No. 4, p. 35 (Oct. 1980), Impact of variances David P. Bryden 1977,. 61 Minn. Law Review 769. Land use controls Jerome F. Fitzgerald. 24 Bench and Bar No. Z P. 17 (Feb. 1967). Metropolitan council and land -use planning Robert L Hoffman and Oliver Byrum. Novem- ber—December 1976, 45 Hennepin lawyer 4. Minnesota's Flood Plain Management Act— State guidance of land use controls 1971, 55 Minn. law Review 1163. Subjectivity, expression, and privacy: Problems of aesthetic regulation Stephen F. Williams 1977, 62 Minn Law Review I. Zoning; Minnesota supreme court 197i-1972 1973, 57 Minn. Law Review 940. Library references Municipal Corporations 4601.1. Zoning and Land Planning eee4, 134, 151 ct seq., 351. 354. CJ -S- Municipal COrportions §§ 224. 225. C.J.S. Zoning and land Planning §§ 3, 5 to 7, W, 12 to 14, 16, 65, 67, 71, 97,177, 180 to 184 189. United States Supreme Court Occupancy of one -family dwellings by tradi- tional groups see Village of Belle Tem v, aortas, 1974. 94 S.Cl. 1536, 416 U.S. 1, 39 LEd.2d 797. Zoning, Persons included within single family. see Moore v. City of Fast Cleveland, Ohio. 1977, L 97 S.Ct. 1932, 431 U.S. 494, 52 Ed.1i 531. Index to Notes In general 3 Amendments 4.9 Cmsmuction anti application 1 Extensions 4.6 Hearings 2S Purpose 3.5 104 PLANNING, ZC Note 1 Referendum 4 Review 5 Retionitg 4.7 Validity 'A Validity of ordinen Variants 4.5 th Vaudlty Evidence did not dl. which refused 1 for construction of traffic would have hood and that chum surrounding reside Congregation of Jell 1975, 303 Minn. 79 This section and rezoning by order real estate situated sought to be rezone rational delegation vete persons. O'Br 285 Minn 378, 173 1. Construction ar Enforcement of v is favored where vi lure City of Minn 300 N.W.2d 2. Repeated proses tetras or fines did remedy in enforcing operators a zoning of such store; thus operation of the stc Administration of mental not a propri not be estopped iron ordinance notwidua liance upon prior it ordinance. Frank's Roseville, 1980, 295 Interpretation of tion of law for aria zoning authority, w is not binding on th Statute required adopted before in adopted. and did n nance conform exec that the Plan be ame was amended Su Neighborhoods v. N.W.2d 885. For there to be landowner must de deprived, through a tion of a0 the reasoi v. City of Blaine. N.W.2d 272. The Supreme CO comuue the provisic Ing body may amen, 6rRr FItF T .. MIS ACRF,E?t!:N1', daicd ci is _ri day of .:.r 1976, by and be the. CI'T'Y OF H'AGAN and EAMES NL.-, HU:'i.S, IM'. a Hinre.vota nen-profit corporation; HTT:;ESS::Th OilEREAS, Eja,Jcs P:;:st ?;cwrs, Inc., as bu ter, aim' Unisource Curpora- Lion, 'a:: seLLur, o;'. a two acr,: parcel of 1c.nd in the. Suutl,vcst Quarter (SWIA) a[ Lhe. NLtrLirrest Quarter (;`7.d1;'.) of S,!etiva 29, Tow'nshi.n 27, nanve 29, ivinU adja- C curt to and Gnat of Rahn, Ro.M, i,rve jointl.v aphllcd to the City of Eagan for wac- essary allpru•:al.:, ineloaliaS cwnc�•pt :11'41 f^_aliMirsry plat appro+ ill, for the con- structiun of a gn:cp hum, for arpruxieately Lhircv physically disabled persuna; ..-and 6712k£AS all nccesSncy licensos f.rum th!! Stateof Miunc,:cta and giber authuri- tics havu bean acquired by Iia,gIes `ioat Ilum.—j Ilse„ or wi11 be acqui_ted prlur Lo grant of the building permit arl1 ccnstruction of the group hurze; ani 6iliEliE,:S, the Ci.Ly of Ea.;an has ;;ranted con^ -:pt appr.rval am! prelimin.lry plat approval for the devnlop^ent of LLe grccp h•:ze at the lucatioa n2ncfured above 'and ih` parcies de.-Jre to entar inLa an Aoreemant regardiaS any change in use or lic_nsic, of the group hu-nc; ti1/:4 '1'HE'R L'Ui!e, for aro! in consid,:ratiun of Lhc,gran [ of can:cpt and pre Llmi- -.a:c ;,l;c a,protal by t:hc Ci Ly n; EaK.n, the parties agrc0 aS follrrJs: That Lagle.^. 1;ext lArz,es, Inc. aErres that in Che evert that there is any chm,l;a in ase- of tliu group hunie or in tho event that any einnbt! iu Eha license require- rnonis by ehc Statc•. of 111rnv:.,!ta ur by .ny oth!!r Licennin•; autlwrity fur the opern- tion of the grur.p l:or.d takt•s plc:e, th_!t in any enc of those e-enta, 1%tg ,,a i,'(,st Ilomen, Inc. shall appl.) i th; !-..i-,,an City Council for rr_vicw and approval of ally char.: in use and sb,tll ioep tip City, :f F.cl;an nctlfied of any such changes.at all i 7 � ' , CEJ I an.l __�_�_•�— J _ . CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) I., ALYCE HOLKE, the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, state that on the ?,,i day of .T„iy , 19_7L9 I served a copy of a Notice of Hearing, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part .hereof, covering the application of the preliminary plat of Eagles Nest Homes ' personally upon each of those persons whose names and addresses are reflected on the records of the County Auditor for Dakota County, Minnesota, as owners of property proposed to be assessed for said improvements, by depositing a true and correct copy of said Notice in the U.S. Mails at Eagan, Minnesota properly addressed to each of said persons. WITNESS my hand officially as said City Clerk and the seal of the City this 2nd day of July x'1916, (S E A L) City CleIrk City of Eagan Dakota County, Minnesota U 5-5-76 2. Jean Parranto Application. Jean Parranto appeared on behalf of his application for variance from setback provisions for building permits on parts of Lots 7 & 8, Block 1 and parts of Lots 10 & 11, Block 1, Cedarvale Office Park. The APC recommended approval. Upon motion by Rahn, seconded Smith, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED to recommend the variances for approval. REGLUR COUNCIL 11EPETING. LAWRENCE WENZEL APPLICATION. Larry Wenzel again appeared on behalf of his .application for an 30' x 200' addition to the present building at 3600 Kennebec -%Drive, Lot 2, Block 3, Cedar Industrial Park and a variance for front yard parking provisions under Ordinance 052. The APC recommended approval. Upon motion by Polzin, seconded Wachter, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED that the application for building permit and for variance be approved according to the APC recommendations. JEAN PARP-41-ITO APPLICATION. Jean Parranto appeared again on behalf of his application for variance from set -back provisions and building permit for office building on Lot 7 & 8, Block 1 and variance on Lots 10 & 11, Block 1 Cedarvale Office Park. The APC recommended approval. Upon motion by Rahn, seconded Rydrych all members voting yes, it was RESOLVED to approve the variances for•both lots as recommended by the Board of Appeals and the building permit for parts of Lots 7 8 S Block 1 was recommended by the APC. EAGLE NEST HONES. Mrs. Betty Bassett appeared on behalf of the application of Eagle Nest Homes for approval of preliminary sketch plan concept for a 4 unit townhouse to be used as a home for the handicapped in Section 29 on Rahn Road across.. from Shale Lane on the Unisource property. The APC recommended parking in the rear and the applicants agreed to move the parking. The building would consist of trio double bungalows on a 2 acre parcel. Polzin moved and Rahn seconded the motion to approve the concept plan subject to the grant by the owners of a 50 foot half ri-.ht of way on Rahn Road and further that the owners in the future provide for a temporary 63 -3- • 5-5-76 _ easement for construction of a storm sewer adjacent to Rahn Road; further subject to recommendations of the APC and further subject to the building plans being resub- mitted by the APC for approval. BOND ISSUE ELECTION CAMVAS. Upon motion by Smith, seconded Wachter, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED that the resolution included in the extract of minutes covering the special election for the Civic Center bond issue be and it hereby is adopted and approved. VOTING PRECINCT CHANGES. The Clerk resubmitted a proposal for setting up 7 precincts and realigning them within the City. Upon motion by Rahn, seconded Smith, all members voting yea, it was RESOLVED to approve the precinct redesignation. SYSTEMS TECHMOLOGY. Mr. Tony Kohnen appeared on behalf of the request of Systech Technology for a lease for the former Cedar Grove Utilities Plant on Cedar Avenue owned by the City. There were questions from the Councilmen as to whether the plant would comply with all applicable regulations. Mr. Kohnen indicated fast they would. There were also questions about potential odor problems, possible need for screening in the area. The recommendation was that the rental for the first 5 years be $500 and the second 5 years be $750 with renegotiation after the initial 10 year lease. The City Atty, will redraft the lease and send it to'Systech. ORDNANCE #52 - AMENDMENTS. The Council discussed the recommendation of the APC that there be no change in the provision regarding beauty and barber shops in residential areas so that in order for an applicant to establish a beauty or barber shop in a residential area, a request for variance would be required. The Council determined that a procedure followed by the City Clerk that all variance requests be forwarded to the APC before the adjustments and appeals be continued in the future. The PPC also recommended that an Estate zone be setup to provide for e.g, minimum of 20,000 to 25,000 sq. foot lots within a subdivision. It was L suggested that this could create greater problems for the APC and Council in the future in the event that owners within the estate zone subdivision may try to sub - 61 -4- 9-3-75 C•".P.T: 11T.,1119 - VA;T•L''?CI•Tile Council next considered t0aPplicati.on of Carl Heine for variance under Ordinence $52 from tLe public street rcgcircm::nt for single family dwelling on a five acre perc_l cn County Road 41 0. Tire AFC racow_ mended approval with conditions. Uprn moti:n by Wachter, seconded Smith, all membera voting yes, it was P.ES0LVED that the a;:)lcnrl.^n bp approved subject to the recgm"eviations node by the APC. 1:Ai17 I111AS 111C. - VCGT.' S LIQUOR LI=Rler. P.r. P.i-.hard l orsch, attc '!c„ appnsr^ on behalf of the c.pplication Ci: liolly Inns, Inc. for traosfe: of VOP,i's l.i;t:or license to holly Irns, Inc., a Ulnneacta corporati.cz. Several representatives itoo Holly Inas, including Na. PappRs, President., were present. Smith moved to racomme^a approval of the transfer subject to approval of an agreem3nt concernin;, a resident manager anal compliance %rith all appllcable ordinances, Rydrych reconc.rd the potion and all members voting in favor. Mr. Korsch submitted a proposed apvli;a+I:.: fir review covering the subjects. CUAALI*S LIBWERG , INC. - ON SAL" IIOUCR LICENSE. The application of (._izr.' Lindberg , Inc. for ca-vale liquor license at 840 Yankee Doodla Scctien 14 was next conaidered. M:. Lindberg indicated that the parcel would he 3.6 acres inclnd.'_*g nq 73rk ng spaces seating about 200 people. It would be at the sate location ec the pzeviens application for on-sale liquor license approved for Jerome Hagerisister. Mr. Lindberg was present and reviewed the plans including concrete blank building and that the opening would be in April or May o.� 1977. Upon moti.on by V...chter, seccndad Rahn, all members voted in favor, it o:.1s P::SOi Vl°til to approve thr_ application. it was noted that Mr. Lindberg o: :lc. k1i.l.:r.i Hinkley willi:c., the mauger. EAC.T.Iff VEST HOMES - Pl_ TS'?TNARY PLAT. The Mayor indicated ti•e F}.`Lir.se:.ea Of Eagles Nest Homes, Inc. and Uninource Corporation for prcl si�sry 91 r Eagles Nest lien=s in the South-emot One-gr.arter (STA) of the Mortharest Ona-qu-iter (111%) of Section 29 on Rahn Road would be discussed next. The APC recormcn3ed -3- bs • • 8-3-76 approval of the appli^.ation. Mr. John V..lein appeared for the applicant as did Urs. Pose Grengs and Mrs. Betty Bassett. It was noted there crocld be two buildirga Cwith two units each on a two acre parcel. Mrs. Bassett reviewed letters frcm ct'.:c:r communities stating their views regarding grcl+i homes. Mrs. Betty Hubbard from the St. Paul Schools was present. A laren nun' -3r of neighboring recider.ti.al esmero were presnnt some of whom objected to the application. A review of the state law regardinE permitted u3e in dingle family and multi -family areas for physic -ally rnd mentally disabled was discussed and the preliminary plat indicating three sepa-at'� lots was reviewed. After very extended discussion, upon motion by Rydrych, second<.- Rahn, all members voting in favor, it war RESOLVED that the Council be on rscord approving the prelininary plat for Eagles Nest IIcmes. Mrs. Bassett ir..3icnted that the nor. -profit corporation would agree with the city in writing that in the event there is a change in use or state licensing of the group home that r -t approval uould be required. GLEM +?RESTOU - PLATTING T?ATIMU APPLICATION. Ren Mitchell, attorney aP :_.;• ._ on behalf of the application of Glenn and Betty Preston for waiver rf platting under Crd_nanca 410 and 02 for division of a single family lot into three lots covering Lot 5, nighview Acres in Section 4. Mr. Preston requested that the easement ti:a was recommended by the APC over the East 30 feet not be required because there were 60 ' private right-of-way easements on the property to the Bast. Upon motion by Rydrych, seconded Wachter, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED that the application be approved with oanditions #2 ani 0 fron t1;= ArC and that the 30 foot easement not be required. ESTAT`, ".74TIM OED11TAMCP PTO. 52. The review of this ordinance amsndsani. sac continuedi until. the next v..-t:ne. IUTP. PROJECT #104 - Lr.i.ZTIGTIN AVENTIE. The City Eno. a^.d Cir.y t.rt,-. Cif. c^_r.ocd negotiations with the Greet American Insvrance Co., tha bonding corp= -j for Crim -y Construction Co. regarding repair work on Lexington Avenue. The Eng. was rcqueste.: to continue negotiations. -4- 66 9-7-76 contractor on the 197Ragan Park Construction ProjectAlequesting that one additional year warranty period on the Oak Chase tennis court be granted commencing one year from the date of final inspection because of,the sinkage problem on the tennis court. Upon motion by Wachter, seconded Rahn, all members voting yes, it was RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Park Committee be approved and the letter be forwarded to B -Tu -Mix. CARLSON LAKE TRAIL. The City Atty. indicated that an error had been dis- covered in the description on trail easements on the South side of Carlson Lake and presented Quit Claim Deeds running to the owners with a request from the owners for trail easements with the corrected legal description. Upon motion by Polzin, seconded Rahn, all members voting in favor, it was RESOLVED that the Quit Claim Deeds presented be approved and authorized for signature. PROJECT #168-A - SIBLEY TERMINAL PARK STORM SEWER PROJECT. A contract with Parrott Construction Co. covering Project 11168-A consisting of storm sewer Iimprovements to the Sibley Terminal Industrial Park area was presented. Upon motion by Smith, seconded Rahn, all members voting yes, it was RESOLVED that the contract be approved and ordered executed. EAGLES NEST HOMES AGREEMENT. Upon motion by Smith, seconded Wachter, it was RESOLVED that the agreement between the City of Eagan and Eagles Nest Homes be approved and authorized for signing. All members voted in favor. SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING. The Council determined that a special meeting will be held to discuss the 1977 Budget and the proposed police facility at 7 P.M. on Wednesday, September 15th at the City Hall. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting adjourned 11:30 P.M. DATED: 7- -76 7G -11- 67 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -One NEW BUSINESS SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS A. Special Assessment Committee Recommendations -- The Special Assessment Committee met on August 30, 1982 to review requests by 12 citizens pertaining to special assessments. Enclosed on page 6 q is a copy of the agenda listing those individuals who requeste consideration pertaining to their assessments. Items B-1, 2, 4, and 6 were previously discussed under the public hearing portion of the September 7 Council agenda as being continued from the July 20 Council meeting. Enclosed on pages 70 _ through 7;, is a copy of the Special Assessment Committee minutes per- taining to their recommendations to the City Council. Therefore, there are eight items to be considered for action by the Council after review by the Special Assessment Committee. These will be addressed as follows: 1. A-1,2,3,and 4. Anderson, Maesaka, Berg and Kyllo (John Croft Acres) Enclosed on pages 7 3 through _60. its a copy of the background information pertain ni g to this special assessment credit request pertaining to area reductions as presented to the Special Assess- ment Committee. Staff recommended that the assessments be ad- justed in accordance with the prepared table and the Special Assessment Committee recommended concurrence with this recom- mendation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To reduce the trunk area storm sewer assessment for Anderson (10-18600-072-00), Maesaka (10-18600-062-00), Berg (10-18600-050-00), and Kyllo (10-18600- 011,020,030,040-00), all in accordance with the table enclosed on page 20. go 0 AGENDA EAGAN SPECIAL ASSESSMENT C(7&141= EAGAN MINNESOTA CITY HAIL MONDAY, AUGUST 30, 1982 4:30 P.M. 11 I. 4:30 - Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance II. 4:35 - Adopt Agenda III. 4:40 - New business A. Project 297, Blackhawk Lake Outlet - Area Reduction 1. Don Anderson (10-1860.0-072-00) 2. Clifford Maesaka (10-18600-062-00) 3. Inga Berg (10-18600-050-00) 4. Rose Kyllo (10-18600-011,020,030,040-00) B. Project 297, Blackhawk Lake Outlet - AssessmentObjection 1� Barry & Pearl Lemieux (10-01600-010-05) Q David.Ashfeld (10-02100-010-02) 3. Floyd and Victoria Bryant (10-02100-010-04) Q Henry Englert (10-01600-010-50) 5. William Bri stle (10-01600-030-79) ® James Horne (10-02100-010-01 & King's Wood Addition) C. Project 297, Blackhawk Lake Outlet - Deferment Request I. Leo Murphy (10-02100-012-28) D. Project 259, Vienna Woods Street and Utilities - Defermenl 1. Carol Lindo (Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods) IV. Other Business V. Adjourn Q = CONTINUED PUBLIC BEARING FROM 7-20-82 M • n IIs. •r o -:y I v I:r y r• g, is •• 1 Id' a' r• u � I:q� v ICI. 1 A meeting of the Eagan Assessment Committee was held on Mondav, August 30, 1982 at 4:30 P.M. at the City Hall. Those present were Mayor Bea Blomquist who chaired the meeting,'Member Dale Vogt, Councilman Tom Egan and Planning Commission Member David Bohne. Members Don Knight and Art Rahn were absent. Also present were Public Works Director Colbert, City Engineer Rosene, Hefti, and City Attorney Hauge. The Agenda was approved with the exception that Henry Englert had indi- cated that he was withdrawing his objections to the assessments, due to the fact that his land is under Green Acres and he also qualifies for Senior Citizens exemption. In addition, Carol Lindo had called and indicated she would not be present but asked that the Committee consider her request for deferment of assessments. Tom Colbert explained to the interested persons present the process that the Special Assessment Committee goes through regarding requests for revisions to assessments, including the review of assessment appeals brought before the City. ;1 P.'* "i; %'• 1 I a •'• • v Ebur property owners in the area of Kyllo Lane had submitted requests for reduction in the storm sewer .assessed area under Project #297 consisting of storm sewer outlet to Blackhawk Lake and Highway #13. Their letter indicated that a portion of their lots was within Blackhawk Lake, below the controlled water elevation of 792.30. It was noted that Policy #82-3 was approved re- cently which provides for the elimination of land below the controlled water elevation from area calculation and the staff recommended that the appropriate credit be applied to the assessments and approved at the final assessment hearing held on July 20, 1982 based upon eliminating the assessments below the controlled water elevations. Don Anderson and Dr. Clifford Maesaka were present and agreed with the staff recommendations and asked that they be adopted. Egan moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend to the Citv Council the revision as proposed by the staff. All voted in favor.. I:n •rt � II 9� Y L IIP11 ;1 M'1'1� I' • '1: I 1 � ;,�-` IP Mr. Colbert reviewed with the committee the objections that were filed by Mr. and Mrs. Harry Lemieux regarding the assessments against their property for the Blackhawk Lake Storm Sewer Outlet. It was noted that approximately 50% of their property drains into the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin and about 508 into the drainage to the north, into the Coachman Road drainage basin. Normally, the City has assessed an entire parcel, even though it is within two drainage basins when assessments are being levied. Noting that 5.08 acres is in the Blackhawk Lake drainage area, the assessment would be revised if the Council were to adopt a split assessment basis. Attorneys Howard Knutson and Mr. Dinger appeared on behalf of the Lemieuxs and discussed the proposed 70 r� Assessment Committee August 30, 1982 0 assessments, noting that a 5 acre parcel, or less, under Eagan Policy, would receive the large lot assessment arra the assessment would be levied on 16,500 square feet. There was discussion concerning the proposal to defer the assessment on the balance of the Coachman Road drainage basin parcel. Mr. Knutson indicated that the owners would drop the assessment appeal on the portion where the Lemieuxs have their hone, within the Blackhawk Lake drainage portion of the property, if the City would defer the other half. It was noted, however, that this deferment would be based upon assessment in the future at rates then in existence. After discussion, Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council to accept the staff recommendations, subject to an agreement to be entered into between the pro- perty owner and the City whereby the property owners would dismiss their appeal with the understanding that the Blackhawk Lake drainage area would be assessed at the present time at the current rates, and the Coachman Road area would be deferred until such time as the assessment for that area is levied for storm sewer trunk purposes with asssesments being levied at the rates then in existence. All voted in favor. 1• 11 '1: 1"'s 1 •.• :1 r'I:h I' '1: k IY.W Tom Colbert then presented to the Committee the written objection on behalf of David Ashfeld covering a 13 acre parcel of property on Pilot Knob Road. It was noted that the property owner had not been noticed of the original public hearing in May of 1980. Mr. Ashfeld was present and stated that he felt that there was insufficient benefit to the property at the present time and that he had no intention of developing the property at the present time. Mr.. Colbert explained the nature of the trunk storm sewer assessments. After discussion, Egan moved, Bohne seconded the motion to accept staff recommendations and forward the recommendations to the City Council to determine whether to hold a new hearing on the preliminary report or whether to proceed with the hearing before the Council as to the benefit received by the property for the storm sewer improvements. All voted yes. ' / 'U :1'1'/• •1 r :1 r 1:1• I 1: • 1 Y :•1 Mr. James Sheldon, Attorney, and Flovd Bryant appeared regarding the notice of assessment appeal brought by Mr. and Mrs. Flovd Brvant regarding the Blackhawk Lake Outlet. It was noted that the Bryants had not been noticed of the hearing on the preliminary report and Mr. Sheldon indicated that it did not appear that there was sufficient benefit to the property to warrant the assessments. He indicated that he would not at the present time decide whether to waive any objection to procedural defects and no action was taken by the Committee. 1 •:r• •a 1 Y" a••1 :.. Y MTNr1a r 'c •1 �7 rro I} A letter had been received from Mc. and Mrs. William Bruestle objecting to the Blackhawk Lake Storm Sewer Trunk assessments. Charlotte Bruestle was present and indicated that they were unable to be at the assessment hearing and had questions concerning the assessments. It was noted that the area water assessments had been levied at an earlier time, but trunk storm sewer area assessments have not been levied. After resolving the questions that 2 71 9 0 Assessment Committee August 30, 1982 Mrs. Bruestle raised, Bohne moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that the assessments remain as levied. All voted in favor. c., ' u • r c, : r•. r Mr. and Mrs. James Horne appeared regarding their objections filed at the assessment hearing concerning storm sewer assessments on the 38 acre parcel owned by them on Pilot Knob Road. Mr. Colbert explained that notice, accord- ing to City records, had not been sent to the Hornes regarding the hearing on the preliminary report and also, discussed the benefit issue. Mr. Horne stated that his land could contain its present and future water drainage and therefore, there is no benefit to the property for the improvements. Mr. Horne covered the history of storm drainage regarding his land and stated that he felt the City intends to use some of his property for storm ponding. He stated that 290 acres will be included in the Blackhawk Lake storm drainage arid that an additional 3,375 are draining through the Blackhawk storm drainage area. Mr. Horne stated that he would not waive objections to the storm sewer hearing procedure and the City Attorney recommended that the council start the hearing process from the beginning. Vogt moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that it restart the hearing process covering the Horne property with a hearing on the preliminary report. All voted yes. Mr. Murphy was present and requested that the City Council defer the assessment on his 40 acre parcel owned by him on Deerwood Drive. It was noted that the property currently qualifies for Green Acres and Mr. Murphy was unsure whether he would request deferment of the assessments with no levy at the present time, or levy at the present time with Green Acre deferment. Egan moved, Bohne seconded the motion to recommend that Mr. Murphy work together with the staff prior to the next Council meeting to determine which proposal he would recommend that the City Council adopt covering these assessments. All voted in favor. CAROL IBM - PKO XV #259 A letter from Carol Lindo who lives in the Vienna Woods Addition request- ing deferment regarding deferred assessments for street and utility improve- ments based on hardship was next discussed. She was unable to attend the Assessment Committee meeting and it was noted that she had appeared before the City Council on several occasions regarding her claim of hardship. No spe- cific criteria has been established by the Council regarding hardships that Bio not qualify under the age 65 provisions, and therefore, no action was taken by the Assessment Committee. It was forwarded to the City Council for action. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. All voted yes. PHH 7 ,� Secretary • • SPC 8/30/82 1. Don Anderson (Parcel No. 10-18600-072-00) 2. Clifford Maesaka (Parcel No. 10-18600-062-00) 3. Inga Berg (Parcel No. 10-18600-050-00) 4. Rose Kyllo (Parce7sNo. 10-18600-011,020,030,040-00) These four individuals are being grouped together for discussion purposes because of their collective objection to eir trunk area storm sewer ssessment as describ- ed in the letter enclosed on Page. Attached on Pages � through � are location maps of the respective parcels for each of the individuals and the amount of their land that lies beneath the controlled water elevation of Blackhawk Lake as established at 792.30. The Lake configuration as shown on these location maps is not accurate and is for conceptual configuration only as verified by the Dakota County Auditor's Office. The staff overlaid the lot configuration over a topograph- ic map to determine the actual limits of the controlled water elevation at 792.30. This topographic overlay is available on Page IN . The collective objection by these property owners relates to the area below the con- trolled water elevation being included in their net assessable acreage. Recently, Policy 82-3 was approved which provides for the elimination of land below a control- led water elevation from area calculations. After recalculating the lotand providing the necessary credit for the land below the water area, on page, a table was prepared delineating the respective credits as requested by the objecting Property owners. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because Policy 82-3 was being processed simultaneously with the preparation of this assessment roll, it was not properly applied to these parcels in question. There- fore, the staff concurs with the property owners' objections and recommends that the appropriate credit be applied to the assessments that were approved at the final assessment hearing held on July 20, 1982 in accordance with the table on Page ,t- 73 Z' • AD Kyllo Lane Eagan, Minn 55122 21 July 1982 Thomas A Colbert Public Works Director City of Eagan Ref: Project # 297 (Storm sewer outlet to Blackhawk Lake and Highway U13) Dear Mr. Colbert: This letter is to appeal our assessment.for the storm sewer improvement on Blackhawk Lake. We, the undersigned are all property owners in Jon Croft Acres (on Blackhawk Lake). We feel the algorithm for determining the amount of assessment ( 3.4 cents per square foot on the first 16p500 sq ft of each acre in a given parcel) was applied unfairly to the property in Jon Croft Acres. As a result of conversations with Mr Colbert today, it appears that'the area for assessment in Jon Croft Acres included area within the lake (under water), whereas other lakeshore property was not assessed for lake area. The lake area is up to nearly 50% of the assessed area on some property (see attached plot map). We contend that our assessment is: 1) Not equitable (we only ask to be treated like other property owners). 2) Unreasonable. (How can area under water benefit from a storm sewer project). Accordingly, we ask that our respective areas to be assessed be recalculated to exclude that area which is under water. Respectfully submitted, /760 170 ��.�,2c�' 4�Le Ae /0 -I i'Gou -06.1 000 I% Yo � dy,.,,�C G�^'w� /a - / 8 G 60 -cc}" J' o d ' /ti-/Br000- 17_00 'ej -a (.00-090-06 Ed •• /�- •6o -030-9. is - /o -co -o Y0-!! e Pomo F/o ff Sc ,fYl '� �� ca z7o / o � lNpo `ro ggY Ttil / a Pruben b Donna Z z M_ v \� i ' % Iu "c Luther M• 8 a Oil w � is Tr q z o40 -7f i L z s Ubl osd o4o 030 J- P 9SO-7.0- f L J ., i P 1 ,SI SYa//aid i.,k� Ij1 pSIT Ac ... 9 w 01, ra w 'o B / W i O i �I I�B C ` V'1 IT' ,� - "' • 070-75 r\ `^' — • a 1 1 ` • le. a.a a.�r OI:•Z. \ Pic hard 6 ThP/ma 11 eVN720LLtp �` v '• ,euPya.- oqc.-?r q.. WArim- i 71 Ac. ` ELEV 7923 LOT I BLK,21 . � v o � 4 yr:l r 41 Allce 'Y/. eai. s P o 1 /3 93 Ac. 1 N r orA� afo'ZJ / I/ vrrrr..ojj .. \ I ,rl rx r a .bri a ILO asoma o p4z, mv bnr 10 /f(+ \ \ . -�-- `e /t/]ap essay a"/ o \"\ L \ Ql "n h� o y H V'A Wra. 7 W 14y +ir„ w s �•: rte„ U 3 / . ` r~ '^�14!•'':. Air,-w d pf -7J roz. i • ,r- .ast .® /�. ap 0 fd o� �C MI /477 e � .. nest r, Jnr r✓ Q N C . ew.r `..mr rx. Brei_ \( I0Z E b S 9 np 6 I r. Q r d c_ 1 A M1 ka w ' W + w A.1 1,76 ms OO �— �A a N r I n ct ` c• d1 Z1. '~ ° t 5" \� �o Ob do `e r 5 7 65 4 3 2' PJ /YJ vJ r oc o� r DON . v Gcinnar J• 6� ANOSot/arria>' S. p E2�f Lar/son M CLI�rI 4-CSA:KA ril m z \ a �i`• / J C- y IIN a r - �� a" INyA'•-'ayc}3�na+Yaiea*�-� W �- `�/ ?��`;�. R., wvo' f3E2-riE'aS-'c nl .. .. �l.a Rost De L/S/ / A4, Ro sC-- e 031e r 0 20 sr 021� O c iJ9 ° • 7f 5.r He-MO � // p 203E KYalo , I V V V 4 o _ N a a m 0 2 Q 0 D,oGunnar J. 6� 1 Co "A 10MS0%r i Narr/aJ S. ca rZ50/7 I M R'CSAMA C IN 07A o.. f3eR.y /,' •ctK RoStr— De 1.15 ,. ` ,nsrxw.a;�r�/ra��w�'• ��i' icv_L�o�. - oYI ..•✓ _-... .. .� -�t ICY LLO � 07/ '• I 0 N W 2vsra<`;; 02 Rd.�•.r i.iln6A•.H' Ii°u+MA f /JC. p ILOSF - - CLj kYioe l N 1. L51 —I �� \ �l � 1� •^ • �\' �,' �j ,Z. kyM+dNtk_7dTd �-Z, ,='�. �iH. 7i 1; :- 1; max:: •1 : •r.J4 ;,•:``:!', :y �i fl';!�/�%. r � / /C ../ ` / y: / n`` / i r. �•a X41 `,_� ✓�/r�/I % I:l\% /� �'E1 ,s•` r35:ti ��g^Q '��. �`.\. ����\ \t t�' ,\\yt \`\ .l ` ;� � �_.. /' ! �k:J�. �"e7t�•*w^.[.t+—",�'�"x•i�,\.�"`'!`g.t`\.' _ao � � LY L r t'S `rte . - \ � \\ 1 111 1 � . �ii ^' � /+ / `s�ry h� � i� � la,r F.l � :r•. ~� .: �� � , I 1 � i / � � � N \i'''�4r .''a�'dih'�#y`w�er!'fr� . iti>J 1 y� �.�; `` �I �1 r•\ � �.� � ; J � rcg p..f M,��.' �\� �„�tic2't� �.a^ , .. - '' i .'sF' x}w ° _ t\t• ,t �. - 'k DZ l -e l�� 'T ), type t a \'. 1 ya w,P"!Ty!"° oLM"^'�' !�.}fi✓a�?r�}�"+S - +�����,yc�i` n. ,t �� ��'�;M` �1 A+iih, ti�i,�tD �-Yr[�"✓"'I•r6` 1 ,.i� :1 I itJI'� ,'.,''.•' r��``� . ,rlM• � ,r:ci�,3r"J�� 1 r'1 � � � i �' ��� I.1 .1 � 1 ' ,id...' �'../'t�, �.�h1'Ty�r.�/y�`a�)•a�lt riY t. ". t. '- � I a I' r. ?' Y ,t tJAY ,T�:�VIOj� ..'�+".4Ji.1�'T ".r'W�'ry:sa\ � J[ _ !r'r•• J' / � r �- � 1 �" A /�� � ���R}•sc '+r '- "`!.44.z v}cs� m .µ,., Y, rv' t A� ��,�t�y�.;: r: ' 1 A.d.:_t�{'.c 4•. ,� tel_ .�''-.-j•� '-�y�. i l ..� i r•,� .e-. .�..[x .'fid -1ivano 1 � I 1 111 [•. 11 ,11 `r.:;(�1\ `�[� I+OS21�GNt/ �•/ - t ..� ,, /.// �r�. TABLE - A. PROJECT 297 BLACIQIAWK LAKE OUTLET - AREA REDUCTION AREA BELOW NET ASSMT 7-20-82 PREVIOUS PROPOSED RE- PARCEC. TOTAL AREA 792.3 ASSESSABLE ACRES RATE ASSESSMENT TOTAL VISED ASSMT DEDUCTION CREDIT 10-18600-072-00 136,608 SF 17,865 SF 118,743 SF $561/ac $1,759.00 $1,531.53 $227.47 (Anderson) (3.14 ac) (0.41 ac) (2.73 ac) 10-18600-062-00 102,685 SF 35,750 SF 66,935 SF $561/ac 1,322.00 863.94 458.06 (Maesaka) (2.36 ac) (0.82 ac) (1.54 ac) 10-18600-050-00 93,350 SF 30,500 SF 62,850 SF $561/ac 1,202.00 807.84 394.16 (Berg) (2.14 ac) (0.70 ac) (1.44 ac) 10-18600-011-00 206,327 SF 24,500 SF 181,827 SF $561/ac 2,657.00 2,339.37 317.63 (Kyllo) (4.74 ac) (0.56 ac) (4.17 ac) 10-18600-020-00 133,310 SF 14,600 SF 118,710 SF $561/ac 1,717.00 1,525.92 191.08 (Kyllo) (3.06 ac) (0.34 ac) (2.72 ac) 10-18600-030-00 78,350 SF 3,600 SF 74,750 SF $561/ac 1,009.00 964.92 44.08 (Kyllo) (1.80 ac) (0.08 ac) (1.72 ac) 10-18600-040-00 71,350 SF 24,235 SF 47,115 SF $561/ac 919.00 605.88 313.12 (Kyllo) (1.64 ac) (0.56 ac) (1.08 ac) 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Two 0 2.,B-3. Floyd & Victoria Bryant (Parcel 10-02100-010-04) Enclosed on pages Yl through $ S is the background informa- tion pertaining to e formal appeal that the City received subsequent to the July 20 final assessment hearing for Project 297. Although a written objection was not received at the time of the final assessment hearing on July 20, this parcel was inadvertantly omitted from the individual public hearing noti- fication mailing list for May 20, 1980. It is the recommendation of the City Attorney that, based upon the formal appeal being submitted combined with the technical defect in the public hearing notification process, this special assessment for Project 297 be cancelled and that a future project be designated to conduct the proper public hearing process as it pertains to benefit received from this property by the trunk storm sewer improvements within the district. It is also recommended that a property appraisal be performed in conjunction with this future public hearing for trunk area storm sewer. The special assess- ment committee concurred with this recommendation for Council consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To vacate the approved final trunk area storm sewer assessmentas approved on July 20, 1982 for Project 297 to Parcel 10-02100-010-04 (Floyd & Victoria Bryant) and order a new public hearing process to be initiated to incorporate a property appraisal process. a 0 0 SAC 8/30/82 B. PROTECT 297, BL%3M WK LAKE al= - ASSESSMENT OBJECTION 3. Floyd and Victoria Bryant (Parcel No. 10-02100-010-04) BACKGROUND INFORMATION Enclosed on Pages >& and �rk is a copy of the formal notice of appeal listing their reasons for objection to the assessments levied under the above -referenced project. Enclosed on Page ;; 3& is an area location map referencing this parcel in respect to the overall assessment area for Project 297. The gross acreage of this parcel is 9.05 acres. After applying a 20% credit for potential future easement and right-of-way dedication, the net assessable area was 7.42 acres (315,500 square feet) which was assessed at the agricultural rate of 3.40 per square foot resulting in a net assessment of $10,727.00 against this parcel for Project 297. STAFF RECOMMENDATION This parcel lies within the drainage basins benefited by the storm sewer'project for the Blackhawk Lake Outlet. All assessments were determined in accordance with City policies and the feasibility report for this project. Therefore, staff feels that the assess ent as levied is in accordance with existing policy and equitable and the property benefits accordingly. Therefore, the staff recommends that the assessment remain as levied at the final assessment hearing of July 20, 1982. sa C� • Rete,+J6 lq.E w STATE OF MINNESOTA I ' '(p•+�' DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF DAKOTA /FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT --------------------------------------- ../ 'C C. Floyd Bryant and Victoria Bryant, 3981- R1 Appellants, Vs. NOTICE OF APPEAL OF STORM City of Eagan, Dakota County, SEVER IMPROVEMENT 7971 Minnesota, (Improvement Project No. Respondent. TO: THE RESPONDENT ABOVE-NAMED and to NICK VUYOVICH, CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the appellants above-named hereby appeal to the District Court from the proposed assessment mcre parti- cularly described in Exhibit A hereto attached and incorporated herein by reference. Said assessment relates to the land of the above-named appel- lants more particularly described in said Exhibit A which Exhibit also shows the amount of said assessment. Said appeal is taken upon the following grounds and upon such further and additional grounds as may appear from the record of hearing on said appeal: 1. That respondent herein lacks jurisdiction to levy said' assessment. . 2. That the proposed assessment is arbitrary, capricious, confiscatory and unreasonable. 7. That the levying of said assessment constitutes an uncon- stitutional taking of the appellants' property. 4. That the proposed assessment does not result In any benefit, special or otherwise, to the subject property, or if there Is any bene- fic to appellants.' property, said benefit is less than the amount of the proposed assessment. S. Appellants' property has not and will not increase in mar- ket value as a result of the improvements of respondent. _ 13 - - 0 WHEREFORE, appellants respectfully pray that said assessment be set aside and cancelled pursuant to law, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable. ��� / DATED: F" b McMENOMY, SHELDON, DUSICH & HANSEN Jay A—,ALL Bernie M. Dusich Attorneys for Appellants Dakota Central Offices 14450 South Robert Trail Rosemount, Minnesota 55068 .Phone: (612) 423-1155 •3uapuodsaa jo sauawanoadwl aqa to ilnsaa a se anleA Ia51 —aew ul asv"Oul IOU film pue lou seq Aaaadoad ,s3uelladdv S •3u3wssBsse pasodoad aq3 jo 3unowe aql uegl ssal sl 11jouaq pies 'A3aadoad ;sluelladde of >�3 / .•-` ///�.`//�_, J/ �fY4F�7 -I ��A PK. GB.. .AAE a ' PROJECT 297 —ASSGSSNIINT AREA A - • A «: _ LI �B NB .�� FP L, •y ` '� \ A' I er) .""ti`I `l E� 'Wnbjis CSI IAL :AR A �• �• .asc Y/ CG GB' I • • L11 vu _ aye i' P ,yrs � LTTo+ �/ !H x4FWit PF SC PF••. LI .Len -��•t.r-. . R•1e �. •: �•'+`` s .rEieeuu IC"'.+tE]t— � E R-li // // u PF P . A ����'•.... .'RTS p NILLAx LE I ( • A it I \VRC:.'. l'' :' 02:`•• !' . ( - r— GB =aAA A L�Ev..Ti I EEx R-q A_4 i R-3 •'i t 1 PF..li Pte. . A r RB g ° PF �✓� PF NB_ R /• NB R•7 B-Z R•q ".' 's •] o -E �Q 3C _.zr• _ .b? .,� }iQl�j-�jy '' ` .l Vii[ PK I',. �R� '•. L%i,,�' —E- R-4 TxOM45 I / tr.i� :r••t t�„ : �" "(''' (' l I' A i Yzu.a.- A =f -. a [GBAr jwgR_70" - "El °Aj A_ �linf i �j R•q R•q �l /A��\�) i ?-4�R•4 I r ( ' .. Ywi.MS - ,fix �, CSC— ,r r par E �t �%•�YI`7 ���1;q^� uslLA y I ? 'ry:rl.. l .. .. awA �\ A00, •: i4SIJt '`: �••LtL. tJ' CSC ��. 'I lc�e;w\'=�-i� -?1.t R-I --� •\ `•'�.n✓` .. .t � -fLtrr I ; PK •, . I 1 N IA °°� � �(�. '. � ' ..+r rte. \ �. .�• L ` �J.o��„t r:: Rs111 SAFARI W11 .:..d-Y,•i/.'sA• ';� A `.\ ^-•'' I E6AT Gin/i R••IK �\ �_ LA2 RNCw RB A A A A A ,ti- —� \ •+•-+h' R•I -�R 3 (n r-f \ IPF!, resr I[''�' fes) �• Z /D LB •-'i -cxrtR r I R.Z ,:It- �� R_t; •;��.. /�.. "\ F `` m 'I \� • Rl A l ___._•i' Iii.F(�:.r.`.`L� • , j N�� •R-I --WLER.°A[V$0. __ __ _ xA T R•J RI "A7 }�!;-Q -11 �}t-11_ ��•w 1Y:7 R•I I�':� 4 iy;:p.n: !'I :... •i{I ..."•li' i':;' 'n <�l$;•I _A-,1 J \ G=J PK PK.�f' Iii: __.. �; •' w rxoe ln, A A sfQJ•Otp! 4•IN1Y•"'>)F r _+ ���.1 "'• r • '71 !_ , fS^xw 1. ur Y) ,, 1J ��� I,"-.\",N�.j-/ rt1 y, r H, `� `'- ...SPK F ��—,-, mm • at. �'. ” I .-' `\ 'I}::`� s' ';+��". ! E�•il�� 1:fiT' "� �• J,/' y iT 4.•+ ti � d' 1 .Ati C l P R•IA qq li S l I - I _C I� Z rx� a 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Three 3. B-5. William Bruestle (10-01600-030-79) Enclosed on pages Q 7 through �Q are copies of the back- ground information pertaining to this written request by Mr. and Mrs. William Bruestle pertaining to their assessment. After explanation of the trunk area storm sewer assessment, it was the special assessment committee's recommendation that the storm sewer assessment as levied on July 20, 1982 for this parcel be approved which was also concurred with by the property owner. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept the special assessment committee's recommendation to reaffirm the final assessment for Project 297 as levied on July 20, 1982 to Parcel 10-01600-030-79. $(� 0 0 SAC 8/30/82 5. William Bruestle (Parcel No. 10-01600-030-79) Enclosed on Pages O?q and X is a copy of the letter of objection that the City has received pertaining to this referenced parcel resulting from Project 297. on Page �K is an area location map showing the relationship of this property to the overall assessment area for Project 297. The gross area of this parcel is 50,200 square feet. As such, it qualifies for the City's "large lot" stone sewer policy which provides that only the first 16,500 square feet of each acre of a homestead- ed parcel less than 5 acres be assessed. Using the single family/agricultural assessment rate of 3.4C per square foot, the assessment as approved by the Council on July 20, 1982 final assessment hearing amounts to $645.00. in the letter of objection from Mr. & Mrs. Bruestle, they state that they are being assessed for "this water area" on their 1981 property tax statement. The assessments associated with Project 297 are for trunk stonn sewer area assessments and that the "water area" that is referred to in their letter is resulting from the trunk area water assessment levied under Project 24 in 1976 for a 10 -year period. v • a�� i is � • � Because this assessment was in acoordance with all existing City policy pertaining to trunk area storm sewer assessments and because this property is entirely locat- ed within the Blackhawk Lake drainage basin, the staff feels that the assessment as levied is accurate and proper. ?herefore, the staff rec=nends that the assessment as levied at the public hearing of July 20, 1982 reT in as is. -97 40 , •� /76P/ �� 6-7 -- - _ _ .. � iS9 �PK PROPRQ7LCP 297 X S*F A AREA -,4 f u f Wo R Cs' c kl L 11 INDUS IAL PAR. A IN T ,dsc A SML PF LI -csc SiF R -i LI t A "!fit A 17' :i lJ 111J 11 GB R-4 RB .NO" PF! R-4 N I N 3C PLC R 4 A ELIA "A NJ T R A PF RB A rr5r z LB 1 ENTER : j! R-2 A A x J, Z) A .1 A 4r 14, PK A ` j;, i � R•IA R m A I Za A cm R-1 I PF r NB \R-3 PF 114--: R-4 csc 4 �R ELIA "A NJ T R A PF RB A rr5r z LB 1 ENTER : j! R-2 A A x J, Z) A .1 A 4r 14, PK A ` j;, i � R•IA R m A I Za A cm R-1 I PF r NB \R-3 PF 114--: Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Four 4. C-1. Leo Murphy (10-02100-012-28) Enclosed on pages 191 through C/4- is background information pertaining to the request presente by Mr. Murphy pertaining to deferment of the trunk area storm sewer assessment until future development. While it was noted that the property is presently under green acres, Mr. Murphy was going to determine whether he would wish to continue the deferment under green acres or pursue his request for deferment by special agreement with the understanding of future assessment in accordance with rates in effect at the time of development. If the assessment is deferred in accordance with green acres, it would be deferred at the interest rate levied with this project (12.5%). Whereas, if the assessment is deferred to some future date and rate, the historical increases in the trunk area storm sewer have been averaging approximately 7.2% over the past 12 years. The special assessment committee recommended that the City Council accept whichever method of deferment is requested by Mr. Murphy, which request should be made available by the September 7 Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the deferment of trunk area storm sewer assessments by special agree- ment as requested by Mr. Murphy for Parcel 10-02100-012-28. 91 SAC 8/30/82 C. PRO= YKr• • •Ea• = FSQUEST I. Leo Murphy (Parcel No. 10-02100-012-28) C • Y '• P I • •il!4 1! � � Enclosed on Page );�_is a copy of the memo that the City received from Mr. Leo Murphy requesting deferment for the trunk area storm sewer assessments as levied under this project. Also enclosed on Page '--*4 is a location map shoeing this parcel in reference to the overall assessment area for this project. Mr. Murphy's property in question is presently in Green Acres. The total acreage is 38.97 acres. After applying a 208 credit for potential future right-of-way and easement dedica- tion, there was a net assessable area of 31.18 acres. Using the agricultural as- sessment rate of 3.4t per acre, the resulting assessment totaled $46,177.00. The reference to the "George Ohman sr. farm" pertains to the trunk area sanitary sewer and water assessments that were proposed to be levied against that property locat- ed in the southeast corner of Cliff Road and Pilot Knob Road under Project 235. Those trunk area assessments were deferred with the understanding that they would be re -levied in accordance with rates in effect at the time of subdivision or de- velopment occurred. Mr. Murphy is requesting the same deferment consideration for his property. Because this property is presently in Green Acres, all assessments levied against this property are automatically deferred until such time the property loses its Green Acres status through development and/or subdivision. The staff feels that this Green Acres deferment would be more financially advantageous to the property owner than a deferment which would allow the City to assess at future higher unit rates for trunk area storm sewer. Under either proposal, the City would not be able to derive any revenue from this assessment. Therefore, staff would not have any objection to either letting the assessment stand as is with deferment through Green Acres or to have this special assessment deferred by special agreement as entered into and executed by Mr. Murphy which would allow the City to levy the trunk area storm sewer assessment when the property develops at rates in effect at that time. 921- . To: Mayor and City co.unciL -7 -J - From: Lea MurphQF Re: Blackhawk Lake Storm Sewer Assesment 7 Cs-�-ew W". I was.a member of the Cauncil the assesements-against the George Ohmam Sr.. farm. came before uz� for deferment,. In. discussion. between council and staff there waa.,a concensusstbat it would be to the city' admantage financially to, postpone the assesmentsun, tIM the development plat came in for the property„ because of the inflation factor.. Because of the unbeli:eable amount of the assesment I have no; aT• ternatIve but to ask. for a-, deferment until the property is: developed. Your consideration. in tbis_.matter will be apprciated.. Because of a meeting conflict..I will not be able to attend ment hearing and am. taking this_meanstoconvey my request. WE the asse s - ASS- PK PRaJECP 297 A. .o RSR de;, •; 48 - 0CE � r • � NLlin�•i 14 •lam F P ` \ s3 I PsFc DICSC IMOUS IAL Pp PLOT 'ice • _ _ - 18 _ %�'�<...` j�l` ..�. _ _ _ ..Est GB .08` pp a S S Rc I 1 r Rt u. ' LI caN rEr ICE rE - 't ••• LI U.L ' _ .. I '.I �• L ag / Q]ll 'W toS \ • I l✓ ✓� Lt� .'�. R4 i1 ar+k r 'rr PF LI R-I .00 LI LSM. ^-, caatgovcIR, R•I F _/ s' L I l' . ^tom'.R-I // I / m PF L ,: . ' .R.., `+'P x.FElBaUeL1CT.+ia L R•1; J/ s A GB--•nt�'E.�� 1 EEN A` / I y A - s R•} !IPF.. R-4 RB y�/J� P�f pF Y.✓_ �I PF R /•• Al 1NB R•3 —�N ._ N..... �7 NB :.tic'N iT PF h r R 1 AL1y./A\ p ( PF g. 3"2 sworn i III Re. / l •R 311 -\9 !' '3, O .� -' -iAvmi C1f •s) A R•a /•' q s PF�`.� : �L•...., ��%.i t� C N R-a 3C RPK It ttl - I'/ IY•I.raO / A ; REI .: .,.s .:CtAR• ywr1_7o-J!"... j A k7'ra.:• -�dl. N _+�'w _ . PK .` PK :.o -sc T . - TRa ..... _ jEk. `F c PF •_. Y � ; .saR1 rL �rc C R.a,. 'R•q Ij 1pL�rvq: R a `4 3-4 I �� ccrr CSC sNv .t j 11 t rq•_g7 unC'[a s : tt-4 r app :.tLSAry1 '1( KK. s ij CSC ��t<7y�YIr' ��"7�.�./ R•I `_�` t'^1K C •S+A'rm+• too.. •�]`, 1 1 ` •� .mo i / ri / C^O ::.:: T 9.A" h I, A L[ I .CJ. RJ.'S.: I/' EAX/Ii< .R-I R-I AMER -- RB A'`. A A'A .n..a-..s++-'s R.I- •. vRc} 2 �\1 II� A PF • rtst• A j Ij� tJJ\ t R•I 11 __ _ - LS R-1 A /� _•_a �.:/RR:{L. AI 1 IFrtr7t R I _ .c I •or. aR.LtR'+•cvsoR �, . _ r . A./- so�n4y R 3 R•�1 �q�� p .t ",1_'• :rr:.. •. �.'� ;•) i\; .' Ileus_ i�-•r.LP R ssn+, y. :� ✓�. J s1 PK r, . I 4 A AQ R i �R�" "! I `rJ l -, 'A _ I � ,L'/. � A � s Y r �,UsptCf C•.JMY'�gF ' t t".wal)n 77. _ r �� � [][. ]✓,iJ t"ta 7•/',fes J rr \tr �� )"�Y]J�'Mi"".J'riiri� � Il •I1• ./..:I • � Jtry �Y'- � ^{w. 9 �' a'� � . r yJ t s•r..J 4I .. '�.. a.. r ar_-1.9'-�.+ aas:?.L'.Ya�+'d "i a...•� I PK Ff i 1jR•IA 94 I II •, P i c1,, ;r— A ) An. L �iAt I Fv A _ 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Five 5. D-1. Carol Lindo (Lots 10 & 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods) Enclosed on pages cl�o through `f is background information pertaining to MrsZfndo's request for deferment of interest and penalties that are being levied due to non-payment of assess- ments for Lots 10 and 11 in Block 2 of Vienna Woods Addition. Mrs. Lindo was unable to attend the special assessment committee meeting of August 30 and the special assessment committee for- warded this request onto the Council with no action due to the fact that this request is based on financial hardship considera- tion for which the City does not have any specific present policy for consideration by the special assessment committee. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the deferment of interest and penalty for special assessments levied against Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods, as requested by Carol Lindo. ys SAC 8/30/82 D. PRW= 259, VIENNA MODS STREET AND UTILITIES'- DEFER4agT REQUEST 1. Carol Lindo (Lots 10 and 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods Addition) Enclosed on Page L br is a copy of a letter that staff received fran Mrs. Lindo re- questing deferment of interest and penalties resulting from nonpayment of annual assessment installments for streets and utilities over Lots 10 and 11 within Block 2 of Vienna Woods Addition. Enclosed on Page 4mis a location map showing these two lots and also Lot 32, the present residence of Mrs. Lindo. Mrs. Lindo is re- questing a financial hardship deferment consideration based on the fact that she cannot meet the existing principal annual installments, much less than the interest and penalties that are incurred through non-payment. The assessments for streets have previously been eliminated from consideration for Lots,10 and 11. The assess- ment spread for the remaining ; utility improvements together with their annual in- stallment requirements are defined on Page %. YC y C 40 1111D n a. Because this request for deferment is based on financial hardship considerations, staff has no formal reasmendation to make. 0 /,or 3.;', 3u< ;Z, Vev, ,O� aJ, 77tef"a— it 4t teL Jlf� Ck �b�n.t,c�+u- �.�-..�.tr( �G�a.�..QG���.2 �.�d.B�v,,�. '„C�.r.�,t wsiq.,, C►`.! 62700 o 00 0 d,,- q,; .4d _A&ka-,e- 67 CIUV� cu� a-n!rt.ucs.Q to- U.L"fi, I 3-t b4.,� , OLtvAo,,,f I at 7 � U/� /rLzve,- pleL�jt�� aa, 4 JAI& t -kA- &rU- -f4l-a %971 4tv.+ CIL44 d -I .2 -.t4t, 'n ff;q��A L-Vtl "4-X alJ b I a Dlta • R'_un woo wm wm woo ua wffsT I's nee m�rr naa aa�. .a n`I uec •aec nw I a... • s 6 a �L_° `S ■1_L�.a 10 aao w vwt a i.l tirG.�.T!-� i• _•il -15. £i 16 n, o° am , wm um vm wm uoo • rr ' ray' Y- 1] f I •)•aa-�1 ro t.- assn Da - 8 _ _ o•ly - q _JJa. ru C . .T ii �r °').",;a�! 1 1 ' ,t.IY I ,..•.+ ea. P11 T N Y ,air OAK I •- a9 , n1 n •asp .• rn a! ,a. >p �•__ i 17 `*DDRIVEIN -n,w-- - I Ji �,,,, 12 . c r : • 1• 13 . S I • Iasi VIBURNUM res Do Y —- d• DL .= ']i RIL a... .100 ,DC \• ' t 5 OW 1p t _ ] B • - _ ] g:« a ,.e a p�4 ■ •$: , v:,, .. -, r _. I � ° e - • ! f,n ,. , •n • Ien sin e,t ' � .,. a� ] i C' Ye , ,o°�f ':'� I YI Y seem •im ane um nm n°e �a. S � •° ,� � h i a o) �.r d ' 1 �. / \�nD. �y fid. I • . un 10 O 1.8 _ ,e m ,p•/ �•'a4' _ FDS^ 7^ a !,n { a.,t O .a I '1 Y eo Y- n .`y 1a n 4;y 1e Ya oy •'!,,,m' y+ "a • i,'='•t QOM= ] Is _ _ _ _ _ _ ,•, - - 7-_a of>!r gee ao .nip rRi„ a.. 14 11 a: . Jaerr "`L: d•+'..] �/y�/ • B Y Y .- Ri .r r • o •'I'°yy' 6 - 0Dco,. W0 -w I C e LQ ,D Do_e•» --WIP c�,.''vir• 9, 1 1.,• V I E so I. N \ 1 n:n R ,o so y.hi i'Nq g/d b `e 17 7 li • e e•n� -Y w•' m , °° A/p • rips acne II- i .7 ■ I: • 6 '• Dvgs..,rb .>, •ems a3_ •wnrt ., •e opo.os .. s, B!✓Co":_i_ rf 1 •:, I e. w 2 a ` v'°q'.__.... Y °' LANE -- ' ly y�'y a 15 1! «/ °'J •a ea+�lr 1 Y. vim• �eDm room • �I..----''v'--I_-- °L '.\10:.;��•C .•w'aw. x g] .r'. o, , .o.I mc'•• . ow.n 7 Y6 f.t�&r.-,• • w" 17a�rw+s Z 1 .ux n,:. ''2 , •sI� _'+ 8��: is y i7 zE $ ] z rto 21C U r a ` . C 1 +- i ] i. IC i ass'° f r. ,I^ F•opo-�—a,r _h •■I •••yiii«<'. p•n 9 !O ! qn nn 10f,e p!r_ np�Ll 3] leb W e.•n . u• .y . •nm nm n m o an J 17 A`, y `E 4 II B u w1n D•e.n Ia • ] z• iZ Imo 70 8 t■ s tot1 to n z�,`? I � .i ,ct �Y �� b+ E. Ya ..6 o•o-•r C •-`,r '- ^ atl•ti 8r ] W 4 - F� KINGS ROAD ^r, - ��� _—__'!i'I..YL �:L'L�� _—am a ;!.'' .vr.Ynf. :c. -!�• fwf uuul I• :no' r.yof er •D aY.D' • d_r • I� t a ,r1 L un iem' em -epo' un "-Hee un :ew rnr i.a. yu,. �3 :1° ieoo roam fe oo aaq f jB •,,arVa/c A01 20 ' I =af 117 n '� 16 i . 1] elf Y Y• �I1 .mm - nm om uoc weo noo a• 8 ] S v •asp .• rn a! ,a. >p �•__ i 17 `*DDRIVEIN -n,w-- - I Ji �,,,, 12 . c r : • 1• 13 . S I • Iasi VIBURNUM res Do Y —- d• DL .= ']i RIL a... .100 ,DC \• ' t 5 OW 1p t _ ] B • - _ ] g:« a ,.e a p�4 ■ •$: , v:,, .. -, r _. I � ° e - • ! f,n ,. , •n • Ien sin e,t ' � .,. a� ] i C' Ye , ,o°�f ':'� I YI Y seem •im ane um nm n°e �a. S � •° ,� � h i a o) �.r d ' 1 �. / \�nD. �y fid. I • . un 10 O 1.8 _ ,e m ,p•/ �•'a4' _ FDS^ 7^ a !,n { a.,t O .a I '1 Y eo Y- n .`y 1a n 4;y 1e Ya oy •'!,,,m' y+ "a • i,'='•t QOM= ] Is _ _ _ _ _ _ ,•, - - 7-_a of>!r gee ao .nip rRi„ a.. 14 11 a: . Jaerr "`L: d•+'..] �/y�/ • B Y Y .- Ri .r r • o •'I'°yy' 6 - 0Dco,. W0 -w I C e LQ ,D Do_e•» --WIP c�,.''vir• 9, 1 1.,• V I E so I. N \ 1 n:n R ,o so y.hi i'Nq g/d b `e 17 7 li • e e•n� -Y w•' m , °° A/p • rips acne II- i .7 ■ I: • 6 '• Dvgs..,rb .>, •ems a3_ •wnrt ., •e opo.os .. s, B!✓Co":_i_ rf 1 •:, I e. w 2 a ` v'°q'.__.... Y °' LANE -- ' ly y�'y a 15 1! «/ °'J •a ea+�lr 1 Y. vim• �eDm room • �I..----''v'--I_-- °L '.\10:.;��•C .•w'aw. x g] .r'. o, , .o.I mc'•• . ow.n 7 Y6 f.t�&r.-,• • w" 17a�rw+s Z 1 .ux n,:. ''2 , •sI� _'+ 8��: is y i7 zE $ ] z rto 21C U r a ` . C 1 +- i ] i. IC i ass'° f r. ,I^ F•opo-�—a,r _h •■I •••yiii«<'. p•n 9 !O ! qn nn 10f,e p!r_ np�Ll 3] leb W e.•n . u• .y . •nm nm n m o an J 17 A`, y `E 4 II B u w1n D•e.n Ia • ] z• iZ Imo 70 8 t■ s tot1 to n z�,`? I � .i ,ct �Y �� b+ E. Ya ..6 o•o-•r C •-`,r '- ^ atl•ti 8r ] W 4 - F� KINGS ROAD ^r, - ��� _—__'!i'I..YL �:L'L�� _—am a ;!.'' .vr.Ynf. :c. -!�• fwf uuul I• :no' r.yof er •D aY.D' • • I� a el un iem' em -epo' un "-Hee un :ew rnr i.a. yu,. �3 :1° ieoo roam fe oo aaq f jB •,,arVa/c A01 20 ' I . nIs 117 n '� 16 i . 1] elf Y Y• �I1 .mm r.r nm om uoc weo noo a• •asp .• rn a! ,a. >p �•__ i 17 `*DDRIVEIN -n,w-- - I Ji �,,,, 12 . c r : • 1• 13 . S I • Iasi VIBURNUM res Do Y —- d• DL .= ']i RIL a... .100 ,DC \• ' t 5 OW 1p t _ ] B • - _ ] g:« a ,.e a p�4 ■ •$: , v:,, .. -, r _. I � ° e - • ! f,n ,. , •n • Ien sin e,t ' � .,. a� ] i C' Ye , ,o°�f ':'� I YI Y seem •im ane um nm n°e �a. S � •° ,� � h i a o) �.r d ' 1 �. / \�nD. �y fid. I • . un 10 O 1.8 _ ,e m ,p•/ �•'a4' _ FDS^ 7^ a !,n { a.,t O .a I '1 Y eo Y- n .`y 1a n 4;y 1e Ya oy •'!,,,m' y+ "a • i,'='•t QOM= ] Is _ _ _ _ _ _ ,•, - - 7-_a of>!r gee ao .nip rRi„ a.. 14 11 a: . Jaerr "`L: d•+'..] �/y�/ • B Y Y .- Ri .r r • o •'I'°yy' 6 - 0Dco,. W0 -w I C e LQ ,D Do_e•» --WIP c�,.''vir• 9, 1 1.,• V I E so I. N \ 1 n:n R ,o so y.hi i'Nq g/d b `e 17 7 li • e e•n� -Y w•' m , °° A/p • rips acne II- i .7 ■ I: • 6 '• Dvgs..,rb .>, •ems a3_ •wnrt ., •e opo.os .. s, B!✓Co":_i_ rf 1 •:, I e. w 2 a ` v'°q'.__.... Y °' LANE -- ' ly y�'y a 15 1! «/ °'J •a ea+�lr 1 Y. vim• �eDm room • �I..----''v'--I_-- °L '.\10:.;��•C .•w'aw. x g] .r'. o, , .o.I mc'•• . ow.n 7 Y6 f.t�&r.-,• • w" 17a�rw+s Z 1 .ux n,:. ''2 , •sI� _'+ 8��: is y i7 zE $ ] z rto 21C U r a ` . C 1 +- i ] i. IC i ass'° f r. ,I^ F•opo-�—a,r _h •■I •••yiii«<'. p•n 9 !O ! qn nn 10f,e p!r_ np�Ll 3] leb W e.•n . u• .y . •nm nm n m o an J 17 A`, y `E 4 II B u w1n D•e.n Ia • ] z• iZ Imo 70 8 t■ s tot1 to n z�,`? I � .i ,ct �Y �� b+ E. Ya ..6 o•o-•r C •-`,r '- ^ atl•ti 8r ] W 4 - F� KINGS ROAD ^r, - ��� _—__'!i'I..YL �:L'L�� _—am a ;!.'' .vr.Ynf. :c. -!�• fwf uuul I• I I I I ASSESSMENTCUUE TOTAL ASSESSMENT Iot 10, Block 2, Vienna, Moods S/W L SIMT 448 4P232134 DECREMENTS IN PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST INSTALLMENTS TO UE INCLUDED WITH TIIE ;:ENERAL TAXES FOR TIIE YEAR BALANCE DUE INSTALLMENT INTEREST I YEAR ASSESSMENTS CODE AMT. INC. INTERLST 41232.34 423.23 556.67 1980 S/W L STMT 448 9d1 I 190 3.609.11 423.23 304.73 1981 S/W L SIMT 446 727196 31385.88 413.23 270.87 19aZ S/W L STMT 448 694110 21962.65 423.23 237.01 1963 S/W L SIMT 448 66u124 2539.42 42!.23 203.15 1984 S/W L SIMT. 448 626138 2.116.19 423.23 169.29 1985 S/W L SIMT' 448 592152 19692.96 423.23 135.43 1906 S/11 L SIMT 448 55616o 1.265.73 413.23 101.57 1987 S/N L STMT 448 524180 846.50 423.23 67.73 1988 S/W L SIMT 448 490196 423.27 423.27 33.87 1989 S/W L STMT 448 457!14 • NOTES: 1. These figures are identical for Lot 11, Block 2, Vienna Woods. 2. These figures represent the assessments levied for utilities under Project 259, Contract�5. 3. The year referenced is the year the assessments were incurred and are due the following 4. For each lot, the penalty for 1980 due in 81 is $98.19 and the interest for 1980 due in 81 is $39.64. 5. For each lot, the penalty for 1981 due in 1982 will not be levied until January of 1982. Interest and penalty are based on a formula of Dakota County. 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Six 0 6. Other - George Dougherty (Parcel 10-02100-030-03) Enclosed on pages 161 through /OZ. are copies of correspon- dence as submittedbyy Dakota County or eorge and Neoma Dougher- ty requesting senior citizen deferment for the assessments levied under Project 297. This information was inadvertantly omitted from consideration by the special assessment committee and is subsequently being submitted directly to the City Council for their review. While Mr. Dougherty does not meet the age criteria for a senior citizen, his wife, who is presently in a nursing home, qualifies for the age requirement. Therefore, staff would like direction from the Counil pertaining to spouse qualifica- tions for age requirement for senior citizen deferments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the senior citizen deferment requested by Dakota County for Mr. and Mrs. Dougherty for Parcel 10-02100-030-03. /00 r D.a K OT a COUNTY BY. PAUL EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER M.13. • A x 1RY`o. July 14, 1982 Mr. Eugene J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 RE: PROJECT NO. 297 PARCEL 10-02100-030-03 CITY OF EAGAN, ORDINANCE NO. 66 RELATING TO SENIOR CITIZEN HARDSHIP Dear Mr. VanOverbeke: VETERAN'S SERVICES WILLIAM A. MEYER. JR. DIRE-TOII OFFICE 357 - 9TH AVENUE NORTH SOUTH ST PAUL. M N 5507° PHO'IE7 512-457-0501 Per our phone conversation with Paul Hauge, Eagan City Attorney, and with you this morning, we are requesting Senior Citizen Hardship Special Assessment Deferral for George and Neoma Dougherty. The following is a slight resume as we know it from our office file: George S. Doughert Date of Birth: 9/6/21 U. S. Army: 9/12/42 to 12/14/46 Rated 408 disabled by V.A.; increase to 1008 pending. Rated totally disabled by Teamsters Union; and in receipt of disability pension. Neoma G. Doughert Date of Birth: 10/21/05 _ Health: Confined to wheelchair, and in David Herman In -Care Center, Nursing Home, Minneapolis, Mn. Social Security Pension: Goes to nursing home; balance of monthly cost is provided by Dakota County Welfare; see statement signed by Diane Reller, dated 7/14/82. It is hoped that this information will be of some assistance in qualifying George and Neoma for Senior Citizen Hardship Special Assessment Deferral. If you should need any further information, please do not hesitate to call upon us. Very truly your, WAM:sv /0 1 William A. Meyer, r., Director CC: Mr. George S. Dougherty TO: FROM: DAKOTA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE DIVISION 357 9th Avenue North South St. Paul, Minnesota 55075 (612) 457-0611 SUBJECT: ----- - DAT E: ............... - - - --- ------ - IOZ SIGNED: 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Seven CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PATRICIA LEAHY B. Patricia Leahy for a Conditional Use Permit for Carry Out Food in a Neighborhood Business District -- A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting on August 24, 1982 to consider an application submitted by Patricia Leahy requesting a conditional use permit for carry out food, or delicatessen, in conjunction with a bakery located at Lot 1, Block 1, Bay #1, Silver Bell Shopping Center. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of the conditional use permit to the City Council. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's report found on pages10 3 through /0(, for your reference. For additional informatione action that was taken by the APC, refer to a copy of the minutes found on page 107 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the recom- mendation of the APC to approve the conditional use permit as stated. /03 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CARRY OUT FOOD APPLICANT: PATRICIA LEAHY LOCATION: LOT 1, BLOCK 1, BAY #1, SILVER BELL CENM ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: NB (NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 24, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: AUGUST 18, 1982 REPORTED BY: DATE C. 1qjNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a conditional use permit for carry out food, or delicatessen, in conjunction with the bakery located in Lot 1, Block 1, Bay #1, Silver Bell Center Addition, Section 17. ,aowW71N For the past few years, the Silver Bell Center has been constructed and neighbor- hood businesses have been occupying the Silver Bell Center. In Bay #1 of the Center is the location of a bakery which is on the end facing Silver Bell Road. The applicant, Patricia Leahy, would like to enter into a joint venture with the bakery and provide a small delicatessen for carry out items or specialty items in conjunction with the bakery operation. It is staff's understanding that be- tween 80% and 908 of the business will be carry out food. In reviewing Ordinance 52, Zoning, for the Neighborhood Business District, the permitted uses are very specific and under permitted uses only allows the provi- sions for sit-down restaurants. With 80% of the business being carry out food, staff has suggested that the applicant make the application for a conditional use permit in order for the applicant to comply with Ordinance 52. Therefore, the application for conditional use has been submitted. The parking for this operation has been reviewed and is adequate for this addi- tion of a delicatessen. Please find attached a copy of a letter by Patricia Leahy indicating her propos- ed objectives and proposed site plan for the delicatessen located in the bakery in Silver Bell Center. If the conditional use permit is approved, it should be subject to the following conditions: 1. All other ordinance requirements shall be met. DCR/jach /03 0 0 City of Eagan RE: Conditional.Use Permit Gentlemen: I propose to take over the front end retail of the existing Silver Bell Bakery in the Silver Bell Shopping Center. Expansion will include the addition of a chicken and rib cooker with venting, steam table, additional refrigeration and an exterior sign. The Hours being contemplated are 6 A.M. to 11 P.M. This varies from the present hours which are 5:30 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Sincerely, Qae-z � Patricia Leahy v 1755 Kyllo Lane Eagan, MPI 55122 454-7770 16 4 \4c"-�c Ilk C".4� Re T.AaV. C—%Sc IV to, 0 • • SUBJECT TO APPROVAL MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA AUGUST 249 1982 A regular meeting of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 24, 1982 at the Eagan City Hall commencing at 7:00 p.m. Those present at the meeting were Chairman Hall, Members Mulrooney, Turnham, Wilkins, Krob and McCrea. Absent were Members Bohne and Wold. Also present were Public Works Director Colbert, City Planner Runkle, Assistant City Engineer Hefti and City Attorney Hauge. Chairman Hall chaired the meeting. AGENDA Upon motion by Krob, seconded Wilkins, it was resolved that the Agenda as distributed, be approved with the understanding that the Planning Commission will not act on the adoption of the Subdivision Ordinance during the current meeting. All voted yes. Upon motion by Hall, seconded McCrea, it was resolved that the Minutes of the regular meeting of July 27, 1982 be approved with the exception on page 6, relating to the William Dolan application, that homes "could" be 45 feet in width in Brittany 4th Addition. All voted in favor. PATRICIA LEAHY - SILVER BELL CENTER DELICATESSEN The public hearing regarding the application of Patricia Leahy for condi- tional use permit for carry -out food for delicatessen in conjunction with bakery located in Lot 1, Block 1, Bay pl, Silver Bell Center Addition, was then convened by Chairman Hall. Patricia Leahy was present and explained her proposal to the Planning Commission. There were no objections to the applica- tion and she indicated.there would be no sit-down, all take-out, that there would be a sign on the outside and that some remodeling would take place. The bakery hours would be the same as the delicatessen hours, according to Ms. Leahy. Mr. Runkle indicated that carry -out provision requires conditional use permit in a Neighborhood District, under the zoning provisions. Krob moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to approve the application, subject to compliance with applicable City ordinances. All voted in favor. 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Eight ITALIAN PIE SHOPPE/AMUSEMENT DEVICE LICENSE Italian Pie Shoppe for a License for One Amusement Device -- An application for one (1) amusement device license has been filed by the Italian Pie Shoppe. The amusement device application is specifically one pac man amusement device machine. The Italian Pie Shoppe is located at 1438 Yankee Doodle (Yankee Square Shopping Center). The City has previously denied an application at the Mediterranean Cruise, Applebaum's Supermarket and convenience food stores. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the amuse- ment device license application for one machine at the Italian Pie Shoppe. IR FINANCING/ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO. D. Road Machinery & Supplies Company for Extension of Industrial Revenue Financing Bond Preliminary Approval -- Recently, approval was given to amend the industrial revenue bond financing procedural manual to allow for an industrial revenue bond under a public of- fering conditional upon a properly secured letter of credit. The City Administrator sent a letter to all pending applicants of indus- trial development revenue bonds to provide a reminder as to when their applications expire and advise them how to request and exten- sion and to provide an awareness of the City Council's change in policy regarding the letter of credit to secure a public offering. Enclosed on page loll is a copy of the letter sent by the City Administrator to aTI appficants whose industrial development revenue bond preliminary resolution have temporarily expired and who have not requested any extensions to date. Mike Sill of Road'Machinery and Supplies Company did make a request for an extension, a copy of his letter is enclosed on page 1!0 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To aprove or deny the exten- sion for the preliminary resolution for industrial development revenue bonds for Road Machinery & Supplies Company. /dg BEA BLOMOUIST MAYOR THOMASEGAN JAMES A. SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER COUNCIL MEMBERS 0 CITY OF EAGAN :',9795 PILOT KNOB ROAD P.O. BOK 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOTA' 55112 PHONE 454.8100 0 THOMASHEDGES CITY ADMINISTRATOR EUGENE VAN OVERSEKE CITY CLERK August 10, 1982 -: ` Dear all applicants whose industrial development revenue bond preliminary resolutions have expired: The City of Eagan has a policy Yr�tlereby approval for industrial develop- ment revenue bond applications are regarded as active and pending applica- tions for a period of fifteen (15) months after preliminary resolution appro- val. If final resolution approval is not requested or granted within the fifteen month period of time, the application is no longer valid. Several applicants who have not placed industrial development bond issues within the fifteen months have requested six month or one year extensions, which in most cases are granted by the City Council. If your plans were to request an extension and you now recognize an over- sight, please make a formal request for a time extension by August 31, 1982 and your request will be considered at the September 7, 1982 City Council meeting. If no request is made by that time, the City of Eagan will determine that your application is inactive and no longer a valid con- sideration for industrial development revenue financing. The City Council recently did take action amending the industrial revenue bond financing options to include an industrial revenue bond under a public offering condi- tional upon a properly secured letter of credit. A letter outlining the City Council action was sent out to all applicants who have active preli- minary resolution approval by the City Council. A copy of that letter is attached for your information. If you would like additional information or have questions on the City's guidelines, please feel free to contact Mr. Gene VanOverbeke,•the Director of Finance/City Clerk or me at any time. Sincerely, r�a Qj Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator TLH/hnd Enclosure 10 9 THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY. Michael R. Sill Chairmen arw Chia Executive Officer August 16, 1982 City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road P. 0. Box 21199 Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Attention: Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator Dear Tom: Thanks for your letter informing me that 15 months has transpired since we received approval for our industrial development revenue bonds. -,':., „_:;a•::::= Needless to say, with the economic conditions what they are, we have not actively pursued the construction of our new corporate headquarters in Eagan. It is still our inten- tion to build on our site when economic times return to some form of normalcy. I would like to request an extension for the maximum allowable time, and I will keep you posted as to our progress. If it is important that a representative of our company be at the council meeting on September 7, please give me a call. MRS/sld since ely, Flo I 4901 West 80th Street a Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437 a Phone: (612) 8353535 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Twenty -Nine JPK PARK CO/IR FINANCING EXTENSION E. J.P.K. Park Company for Extension of Industrial Revenue Financing Bond Preliminary Approval -- The same letter was sent to J.P.K. Park Company as referenced in the previous item. J.P.K. Park Company, in a letter found on page 112 , is also requesting a time extension. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny an exten- sion of time for the preliminary resolution approved to J.P.K. Park Company for industrial development revenue bond financing. 0 0 J.E. Wranto ssociates inc. Commercial and Industrial Realtors Appraisals Real Estate Development August 23, 1982 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road PO Box 21199 Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Dear Mr. Hedges: The J. P. K. Park Company application for industrial development revenue bonds in connection with the proposed shopping center at Diffley Road and Nicols Road will expire shortly. It is requested that the Eagan City Council consider extending this application for an additional year in view of the relatively high in- terest rates. during the past two years and the amendment including public offerings upon a properly secured letter of credit. JEP/sah 3908 3908 Sibley Memorial Highway 0 Eagan, Minnesota • 55122 0 (812) 454.1800 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty SIGN ORDINANCE VARIANCE/COCA COLA F. Coca Cola Corporation for a Variance to the Sign Ordinance An application was submitted requesting a variance from Ordinance #16, the sign ordinance, to allow the Coca Cola logo and name to be painted on the east wall of the Coca Cola building located on Lots 4 through 13, Block 7, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #1. The City Planner has prepared a report that describes the applica- tion in detail and also provides background on the provisions of the sign ordinance. To review the report, a drawing of the sign and location maps, refer to pages /14 through 1j A color drawing of the sign is enclosed in your packets without a page number. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the re- quest of the Coca Cola Corporation as presented in the variance application. 113 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE - COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY NIIMEST APPLICANT: com-COLA BOTPLING caTANY miDWFST LOCATION: LOTS 4-13, BLOCK 7, EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK #1 EXISTING ZONING: I-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: SEPTEMBER 7, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: SEPTEMBER 2, 1982 REPORTED BY: nAI C. RUNKLE, CSiy PLANNER An application has been submitted requesting a variance from Ordinance #16, Sign Ordinance, to allow the Coca-Cola logo and name to be painted on the east wall of the Coca-Cola building located on Lots 4-13, Block 7, Eagandale,Center Indus- trial Park #1. Presently, Coca-Cola has expanded their facility and is the largest bottling facility in the country. Presently the facility contains approximately 350,000 square feet. The identification they presently have is a small pylon sign which is visible on Eagandale Blvd. They also have small raised lettering on the front of the building. The applicant has requested to be able to get identifica- tion from T.H. 55. The building side orientated to T.H. 55 contains 243 lineal feet which is very large wall for any building in the metropolitan area. Coca- Cola Bottling has requested to get identification and would like to 'paint their logo and name on this side of the building. In reviewing alternatives, staff had suggested that they look at raised lettering which would be in conformance with Ordinance #16. However, the applicant has stated that raised lettering of this size is very costly and Coca-Cola feels they can achieve the same effects and maintain as high of an image by painting their logo and name as compared to pro- viding the raised lettering. It is staff's understanding that the identification on the east side of the build- ing would primarily be used during the daytime hours when the transport trucks are out of the parking lot. In the evenings, the Coca-Cola trucks will be park- ed in the parking lot and identification for the building will be seen on the trucks in the parking lot vs. the identification painted on the building. Ordi- nance #16, Subdivision 6, states no signs are allowed which are painted directly on the building but Coca-Cola wishes a variance frau this provision because of the size and magnitude of the wall of the building and feels they can do as good a job by pathting the graphic on the side of the building as compared to using raised lettering. Coca-Cola has also indicated that this would be maintained on an annual basis in order to keep an attractive image in the industrial park. P+ 9 0 .I • •• :• 1 ••; I• • • IS. 0MS SI' S I' 71 1' •C • In reviewing the application, staff has had two concerns regarding the request for identification to be painted on sides of buildings vs. conformance with ordinance #16. The first concern is in regard to the upkeep and the attractiveness the paint would have over raised letters. Coca-Cola has assured staff that they would be willing to agree to an annual maintenance of the graphic in order to keep the attractiveness of their building. The second concern is in regard to a precedent regarding painting on the sides of buildings. In reviewing this aspect, staff does not feel a precedent would be set in regard to the size of the facility. As stated above, the wall where identification would be painted is 243 lineal feet. The size and magnitude of the wall is worthy of having special consideration vs. buildings that would typically have walls of 50-75 feet in length where raised letters could be provided quite economically to identify buildings. Therefore, consideration may be given on the size of this facility and because of the magni- tude, special consideration could be given for Coca-Cola Bottling Midwest. If approved, the variance should be subject to the following conditions: 1. An annual maintenance program be agreed to by Coca-Cola which is set forth by the City Council. 2. If the identification becomes unattractive, Coca-Cola will agree to remove the sign or come in conformance with ordinance #16 regarding raised letter- ing. DCR/jack. )i5 •s8T E1E,g7 4 AT DKWF-•T+lFJ COW • �I FJpen Fec®ly /�/e.../ne Bou k, mw...t K $2tlC( Leach& Lhdstrm kc I (1ICtitC(� and Ertg�eers III�Ju :ws Q �� soca oca Co8a Bottling, Midwest, Mc. Eagan, Minnesota tA EXISTF40 VENDFIG FACLff Y 72' HIGH COCA COLA U.S.A. BUILDING TOWER' Em V— vlf NEW CONCENTRATE MIXNG FACLrrY NEW SALES/ j 45' HIGH ROOF AREA EXISTM WAREHOUSE/ Dismmrim I CAN?4140 FACLrFY FACILITY I Ji JEW REBE FACLrFVli :JW Cif .IE IT EagaffWale BoLdevwd — — --- --- ----- SCALE I' SW -0' PRELIMINARY SITE INFORMATION - - - - --- salt ki'm tv 4 1 1 -1 1 &K K.4 h 4 S14; u h�PE�;EDO A \ I = MM -808-2 . Tt T• •Y• \ `` y/` �^� � :V .til J.'• '•'$ .�V.i ::. • r• i \ /;/ �,,:r.r: •iii'/r4:'/.f/ ,•...• ...... ET�� Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -One SPECIAL PERMIT/NAEGLE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING CO. G. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company for a Special Permit for an Advertising Sign to be Located in Cedar Ridge Second Addition -- An application was submitted to the City requesting a special permit for an outdoor advertising sign located on the southwest portion of Lot 2, Cedar Ridge Second Addition. For a report and additional information on the special permit request of Naegele for the sign, refer to the City Planner's report found on pages 12,() through 12.4- ACTION 2,4. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the ad- vertising sign as applied for by Naegele Outdoor Advertising Company for Cedar Ridge Second Addition. III 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN ' SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT FOR AN OUTDOOR APPLICANT: NAE= OUTDOOR ADVERTISING COMPANY SIGN LOCATION: LOP 2, CEDAR RIDGE 2ND ADDITION - SEC'T'ION 30 EXISTING ZONING: LB (Lra= BUSINESS DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF REPORT REPORTED BY APPLICATION SUBMITTED: ,ped y r. w• : . ROW -4-14-0 4r W1 0 ML•IT'a An application has been subndtted requesting a special permit for an outdoor ad- vertising sign located on the southwest portion of Lot 2, Cedar Ridge 2nd Addi- tion located in the SA of Section 30. As directed by the City Council, outdoor advertising signs must receive a special permit granted by the City Council. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co. has submitted an application for a special permit to construct an outdoor advertising sign. Ordinance #16, the Sign Ordinance, references criteria for outdoor advertising signs. These criteria are as follows: 1. Advertising signs are permitted on property zoned business or industrial 2. No sign shall be located nearer than 20' from any street or highway rights- of-way 3. No advertising sign shall be located nearer to any other advertising sign than 1,000 lineal feet on the same side of the street or within 300' lineal feet of any other advertising sign on the opposite side of the street. 4. No advertising sign shall be located on a platted lot which contains a busi- ness sign or within 300' of any business free-standing ground sign or pylon sign measured on the same side of the street. 5. No advertising sign shall be located within 200' of any residential zone whether on the same or the opposite side of the street. 6. No advertising sign shall exceed 250 square feet in area except when adjacent to limited access highway, in which case the City Council shall determine the maximum size after reviewing applicable conditions including terrain, safety factors, etc. 12.0 Special Permit for Naegele outdoor Advertising Co. September 7, 1982 Page two 7. No advertising sign shall exceed 40' measured at lot level or roadway level. whether lot level or roadway level is used is based on visibility factor on the adjacent roadway. In reviewing the application submitted by Naegele outdoor Advertising Co., it appears that they have met all the criteria for an outdoor advertising sign. The applicant is requesting that the sign be 10' 6" by 36' for a area of 378 square feet, or have the option to go to 450 square feet of signage or less if deemed appropriate by the City Council. It is the City's understanding that there will only be one side of the sign which would have advertising placed on it. In re- viewing the proposed location, it appears that Naegele does meet the criteria set up in Ordinance #16. Enclosed are exhibits of the proposed sign and the lo- cation as to where the sign will be located. If approved, the special permit should be subject to the following conditions: 1. When construction occurs on Lot 2, Cedar Ridge 2nd Addition, the advertising sign will have to be removed. 2. The sign shall not exceed 450 square feet of signage or whatever is designated by the City Council. 3. The sign shall not be higher than 40' at this particular location. 4. The sign shall be required to meet all setback requirements of Ordinance #16. 5. The sign shall meet all other applicable ordinances. DCR/jach ia( 'h4 /p ill--------- ---25258-- --- T S89°5355 -W -- 5.G AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT e. O \ O. 0 D 19 �. 16' .rm 5.0-1 j 262.56 S890 5355"W SOUTH LINE OF T/ -C NW/14 OF SEC 30, TWP. 27, RGE23 IZZ �71bS i, � � i rt..,. �: f �.. .: / LI to w,nJ¢ll A sc G 1 _ � 7• 1 J A LI I B1/'( Lir R•I .�Jt Js• opR LI _I `CEr wEl •I l t l Ijj �1 �T Al //�"�_�'//I R • IC I � . K.FELUAUN A',��ii1J1J}1I ' I R.'41 I� � fNLLANwLE �F( r �" "tycEN AN it rl s PR 4(' l H A ,w I vGB m5'".11 R-4 A /i rRB e s A N . n FF y�B � 1 Sil JP? veB_2 se.00L A s �R7C _ 1 �, J`": cL.nR .I I •/ }77 x A rwc. A NEIeIiK sl�� r 98999.:e el AR ERw J A r F.}J_ 1 A M�� y ROD, vi.+s yc fv`Ci R.4 r R 4 MARI Yrs L`. R'4J , R-IC _ N k 4 7: \ 'S. '410' L CSC 3� A•I.. R• I a P' I ' `•r . P ..atm ;0h. PK ,c , -FB• , R .. r \�' I, L .,.SAFARI A ' 1' A LE �0 .. b� EAT F 6GGN//x I❑DI RIVER RB I •,aA A . A A A / .. R•I TEST r c Z"5rA ENTER R•2 Ix A A R7 �A m WINKLER/J�SON,: Gj' -.T�Jj /� A \V AOOITION A QSL({T ti'i - I J'i� It J V l t'i+:l L yJr /0 at,rY V z. "so'I.Ly A/ ti14 v Y R tll s'' 4 fav A PK o qJ+ A A Jlr''9.Mb�.pitftiElN�7'9l�Ua' . J45�J yAJy, J.JI J }J yyUTv Fv, J J \ if 1 }I1 L, yJ J J 1j r• R-IC �� p P R-IA I A ` i APPLE VALLEY / AI / 111:181 Zoning maw of Eagl GOOD �•�.. ve YL Olt PREPARED E.. rZo rt RON,��, 7/tP,I-• ESIKOO, ROSENE . ANOERLIK a ASSOC.. INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS , \►.'l�` �al1r>', ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA ro••.•v Ivu nx.xv nu r �� Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Two TEMP. ADVERTISING SIGN/THORNWOOD TOWNHOUSES H. Temporary Advertising Sign for Thornwood Townhouses -- An appli- cation was submitted by Lexington Development for a temporary sign described as 4' x 8' or 32 sq. ft. in size to be located at the southwest intersection of Duckwood Drive and Lexington Avenue. The proposed sign is for advertising townhouses that have concept approval in St. Francis Wood 3rd Addition. Enclosed on pages 1;ththrough 117 is a copy of maps that illustrate the location o e sign as prepared by Chief Building Inspector Peterson. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a tem- porary advertising sign for the proposed Thornwood Townhome develop- ment. lX5 3665 Widgeon Way, Eagan, MN 55123 • 454-5921 / 224.5790 ij U7-otj d A -J C • .Sv . SVNofooD PoME'S a78 A-i2/002T biz. 2)own/—'7w,j A2POQ.•T �i TNUL MA/. Ts/07 C-4 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Three TEMPORARY. 3.2 BEER LICENSE/MICHAEL DUBOIS I. Michael DuBois for,, a." Temporary 3.2 Beer License for September 11, 1982 -- The City has"received an application for a 3.2 temporary beer license from Michael DuBois who resides at 3155 Hwy. 13. Mr. DuBois is a free lance musician and is requesting application for the license to be used in conjunction with a party he has scheduled for September 11, 1982 at that location. The City has not processed any 3.2 temporary licenses to individuals for the purpose of a party. Most applications have been for either charita- ble, non-profit or softball organizations. The City Administrator did ask for a letter stating how the profits were intended to be used by Mr. DuBois and it was his statement in a letter attached on page JArl that if there is a profit the money will be used as a pria_e_To_r a ping pong tournament. The ordinance, Ordinance #43, Section 43.15, Temporary On -Sale License, reads as follows in subdivision 1: "A temporary on -sale license may be issued upon application to the Council to any charitable or non-profit organiza- tion for a fee prescribed by. the Council on a one day basis not to exceed two consecutive days. The Council shall prescribe such conditions to the permit as it deems advisable and necessary under the circumstances." Since this license appears to differ from other 3.2 temporary beer license applications, it was placed on the regular agenda for discussion and consideration by the City Council. Mr. DuBois is planning to be in attendance at the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a tem- porary 3.2 beer license to Mr. Michael DuBois. i ;LS 0 0 - _..-m-��`+---r—• 1. :.'LTn•.r�.•+a--r. `--'.,Tai: �.r'�'"SLI? �,..--r-r-�.,-• �r„�'�j'a^�Fa>r _ _..-mrda' V%'_:. ' I• I' 11. �t I•: IfI, lIV. j.tl I I t I,} i�F';1 117 , .! 0 "S lf[ jlt 1 ys,!l If �51F �! !•I'1 't I Ix IV i,uJl la IL n al �h 6 t, N , ,.,,wTiYf°:,S•<"+a-.rtii::.. t 1 I L 7� 1 .I 1 V i,i / I i ! `�� LI iJI 1 i ` 1 P `'IirV 1 I`. i�1 l I Il cj r rl F 1' YXI • 11 -' :I .C� 1 V � � x JILLL F i I L:i�I 1 n. ', .. 1 J l�' 11 I-:1 i t.. a •(;I'{ I al f,'I I1 I "t\, f �I ) ••5,; 1 - II II. •I � 'I \I'yS •111 ' ! Ia , :' �, � i I : i itI•a 1' a s ya' so If I i' 1L ' I ' I :, '''Ir '.� .r..n.' •AL1 1, .•, ..J 1. , 41 �'4 I" 'I ..I ,•;.1. L1. 04 �L, : ..i' .. •.1 ::!.L: 'I -''•'i' •. �n.j�� a x'.•i. a{i(�. 11. J•a�. lif'.L ��'.'•I��� /I/^L'' tu 111 I I !•, IJ, II 1 ,-- 1 , ' 1 I: r 1 ` - .. ,. .. -1c 1 ,- - ,• .. .. E Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Four STOP SIGN PETITION - JADE LANE J. Stop Sign Petition - Jade Lane at Pumice Lane -- Enclosed on pages Iills I through _ 3 are copies of a petition and location maps of existing stop signs and petitioners who are requesting the installation of a stop sign on Jade Lane at the intersection with Pumice Lane. It appears that this request is in response to stop signs that were installed at the intersection of Carnelian Lane and Pumice Lane by Council action on September 16, 1980 which the residents say forces the Carnelian traffic onto Jade Lane to avoid this four way stop intersection. Based on the configuration of the intersection of Pumice Lane with Jade Lane, the staff does not recommend approval of the petition request for stop signs on Jade Lane at the intersection with Pumice Lane. However, if stop signs are to be installed at this location, it is requested that a three way installation be provided to control Pumice Lane entering onto Jade Lane. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the request for installation of stop signs at the intersection of Jade Lane and Pumice Lane in response to a submitted petition. 136 • I • PETITION REQ STOP SIGN I/we, the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of the City of Eagan to install stop signs on 3r _ /e L at the intersection with A.M;r-C I/we, request this installation for the following reasons: 1. 5A74c; y t o-4" a-„ .L../c& a---? Wa c�w 2. 3,2� CL 4 c k' ado e42Qo r�oaG CGrO on A10 h 3. nL�,t of Giw. -u9 ow rri•�' ��'�'ycc� do `t' %l ��e.c�f'•' • A -."d �l:a o 4 • %o 4C I/we request that the City Council take this petition request under consideration at its earliest opportunity and that we be informed as to when it is scheduled so that we may appear in person if we so choose. NAME (Please print and initial) ADDRESS C£c{AR GAQyE~7 1. I. DELI t1 1"E�asoAj G4^a �� 1./)RNFr,7AA� Li 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. S. 9. 10. 11. 12. -"Lot6 fts Zo}S N*S- o� 44 ALk 5 F3 [3LkS ro kky _I. NkS lrBSD �mO, �h • Lot 7 A/kS Yo 93 / Hj nN/•/ P Lam -L 1a+6 B&Y 131 0 0 PROPERTY OF PETITIONER • REQUESTED LOCATION FOR STOP SIGN __.--- 0 _ r� o ¢ro uu «w uw nn nu no •eu ,o aoe S Yz • If 0. f . („ eky •S I 10 . 11 , I. 12 i 13 «' is ]] - -K q14 , d,.o I• ! ����,r ,mrirx, 4;i! a"= �9.wra.� 1 •• "10 ,dwr,!` • �s'r TACONITE TRA:` ! 3' :a"` tIl ,00a nw . . «, •,m •,+� e• s� 0.0«- i I I I ,-.$1c ' i 1° S • - o• f •I• r. Y��\ 1• I 1• I I ZJ ' • 5 + n , - _ !W ia ' -,p�nw_�uw YN`e,'NZ I° •r �� ••z• nw I ww », If L'z' -.,.; ••e .- and .w« *f mi ] �,c. F+1 Iy , a 32 S �.. •• 1 v! • ,! _ ]t !1 30 5 �q zs > '0 'to ,a, •V�'v ro ,ae 1- y tT i f •e wt� o 31a ,,Y i r••�'fi ii !• _ �=•-=in F+�»4i.3.� e:� �� �d• l`y; �' r � • i+ `. to - , -PUM POINT'[..• •.Y tl • •! tl 'e-� ma wa •,c �iJ• J 2p�•J ,•o . 1 i 30 • _ - Y ellb• ;� 8i + • a 4 3 wt m,r OYrf �I- H ✓;.• at i tt '.ryf�� t]. tr: w to 9 c t Us '�• ` • I • - s �• 15 rYti :• it zt if iq S a „ l° r . e ital. _ e Je.- win l F- -e. nnas,cl ,.I„aTa. �ilaa�TAe ( •,•Y,lr•• y\�/i+n.n }o r. yat •A .,•n y3 e:Jn Jain -ria �Tef'Se �«• •/�t'i.-f. o try •.' - _° ; .Kyr• 'L H,o w �J•!'y p F' • uI'fr'N. �e e, , «zz J6 !E I�.`,• 'CARNELIAN;m- 9 11 _ t. pa 1 qoe I r cN4x •/O GeU• •'.r•- �. .. -LTJ T "uT•w N r.% • �yc nu.. ^ d ^IT roe - f • e zo moo .ma «, ue '•;•i ,1'r;�!!,-.� :{r O�� '•:'F..iy:••;:; • . 4 3 SO Is 20 ._ y • ep 1 p Wrr:ijj'•::•::�;y+.wo- VoM��.l_F :'J :J.l�.�1y'4h���) .. 3,1' 1 - �esa' •e e+ ' •'!T,Y' L s p : d rii•i' i'.: _:; �r , �.r..z•i , _f' rti� 'r.. bf • 4 ZV;?.Q�}v a• • 95:}.i}'::.: 3 11 ;i N Ai Qr :Y 1° ..+y.:.. 'fJyr byg� _,zl� L. _.e. -teras«•. _ z �j� .+,.•+ :✓ar. :LANE • .�: + I, y ...,,. •S 1• �^ " iii ..•. ......... :.,:;,�..: Jf : BLUEBILL �1 �'v =J� CA HAW. • 011R. eJ�1�; !�;� r 0• 4T, � _J �r l 4 9i-- r` SILVER BELL Qcr - ---- ✓ L V �7� R m w L ( ;, f i z p p > . BL ACKHAWK �L+ a s L 'RE K PALfS .' rlq c = CIR Willillum,vE`.(/pP(A�]Rk J m m R 2 c CW C HR E WJOOHAVEN c 0 CT JO`-' w a 0, G TRAIL rn JPQ D. rIR a N nn PaQ�� ^.. T Q� o� VEN RT DAVENPORT AVE y Oa. Jy Q� 'g CIN A ~ IR.a NTIC / o. �vP iF1. �v T. ABBRO gaRTELL "AVE /moi v _I_ DEERWOPO N FLI,, �z .F J Z A NIT TR rg N'TUMt r011l�E LA 1 PL J UESTON - DR CARNE*L14N i CARNELIAN cc000`(PARK ,., MEADOWLARK JADE LA. ", J d A. i - ... J 'c .' EADOW RK Ro _ ATHRYN 3ccrI 4G ¢. r/ r• as / A ,f RCON LA CO Rd Nr� 15. J CT II 1 IDIFFLEY ,ROAD �Q1/ II � 1No. Q. L ¢ I! / / �/ .cl I j¢ TIMHER 11 /� i I I I 0. �AON§EIRS C Oq 4yf / 1 y /' I `i �ljP W G' m // CAN S Ar,K }...,> 2 y aw - A ESTL; NG CLEMSON / / w RA LIR. � 0 _ Z_a DR D o w - ..... - -- sGC4so L 44 r F v V .'yr: � _ / �, WAI.NU c• :. J MA, ._AF JJ• +' q / > i 3 DR z HI L BEE. HER c.n_ 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Five WIND ENERGY/COMMI'NICATION TOWERS ORDINANCE K. Consideration of a Wind Energy Systems & Radio/TV Towers Ordi- nance -- The Advisory Planning Commission has reviewed the wind energy systems and radio/TV towers ordinance and is recommending approval of the ordinance to the City Council. This action was taken at the APC meeting held on August 24, 1982. For a copy of the ordinance, refer to pages 1'35' through /4f2 Upon approval of the ordinance, the same wirT-5e—sent on to—'Rit e—municipal ordi- nance codifier and incorporated into the codification proceedings. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the wind energy systems & radio/TV towers ordinance as presented. ) 3 `t 8-30-82 0 0 WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEM AND RADIO OR TV TOWER HEIGHT LIMITATIONS SECTION 4._ PLACEMENT, ERECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS AND RADIO OR TV TOWERS. Subd. 1. Purpose, Construction and Definitions. A. Purpose. The purpose of this Section shall be to regulate the placement, erection and maintenance of wind energy conversion systems and TV or radio towers in the City so as to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the City. B. Construction. All terms and words used in this Section shall be given their common sense meaning considered in context, except as hereinafter specifically defined. C. Definitions. 1. "Wind Energy Conversion System" -- A device such as a windcharger, windmill, or windturbine which converts wind energy to another form of usable energy such as electricity or heat. 2. "Radio or TV Antenna" -- Any radio or TV antenna in excess of the height limitation imposed by the Eagan Zoning Ordinance No. 3. "Tower" -- Any structure used to elevate a wind energy conversion system or a radio/TV antenna in excess of the height limitation imposed by the Eagan Zoning Ordinance No. Subd. 2. Conditional Use. A. No wind energy conversion system or TV/radio antenna as described in subdivision 2 shall be erected anywhere within the City without first submitting an application for and obtaining from the City a conditional use permit and compliance with the procedures provided in the Zoning Chapter: i 13S B. Application for said permit shall be made to the City in the same manner as a building permit pursuant to City of Eagan ordinance code. A building permit formula should be used to calculate a fee which shall be payable at the time that the application is made. C. Prior to the issuance of a permit, the applicant shall provide to the City documentation or other evidence from the dealer or manufacturer that the wind energy conversion system has been successfully operated in atmospheric conditions and is warranted against any system failures under reasonably expected severe weather operation conditions as established by the building official. The application shall also provide to the City documentation that the tower structure for the system has received a professional engineer's certification. Subd. 3. Requirements and Specifications. All energy conversion systems and radio/TV towers (where applicable) erected anywhere within the City shall comply with the following requirements: A. Applicable provisions of the Eagan Ordinance Code including the applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code (standards) therein adopted shall be complied with in addition to those requirements set out in this ordinance. B. Wind energy conversion system tower foundations shall be designed to resist two times the wind uplift calculated pursuant to the Uniform Building Code as adopted by the City of Eagan and shall have a professional engineer's certification. C. No part of any wind energy conversion system or TV radio tower or any equipment or lines used in connection therewith or connected thereto including any tower foundation areas, shall be constructed or main - 2 1 36 0 0 tained at any time permanently or temporarily, in or upon any drainage or utility easement. D. No wind energy conversion system tower or TV/radio antenna tower shall be constructed within 20 feet laterally of any overhead electrical Power line (excluding secondary electrical service lines or "service stubs".) Setback from said electric distribution lines shall be at least five feet. E. No wind energy conversion system or TV/radio antenna supporting tower shall exceed a height of 100 feet, or the distance from the tower to the nearest property line, whichever is less, measured from the base of the tower to the highest point of the tower, without a variance. F. Wind energy conversion systems utilizing propellers shall not have rotor diameters greater than 35 feet. G. All wind energy conversion systems shall be equipped with automatic speed control devices as part of their design. H. Blade arcs created by a wind energy conversion system shall be a minimum of 30 feet above the ground. I. Wind energy conversion systems and towers shall be adequately grounded for protection against direct strike by lighting and shall comply, as to electrical wiring and connections, with applicable federal regulations, Minnesota State Statutes and regulations, as well as City of Eagan codes. J. All lines and wires extending substantially horizontal above the ground from a tower or extended to a building, tower or structure, shall be at least eight feet above the ground at all points. K. Wind Energy Conversion Systems and commercial radio/TV towers shall be guarded against unauthorized climbing. The first 12 feet of the tower shall be unclimbable by design or enclosed by a 6 -foot high, nonclimbable fence with a lockable gate. 3 137 Subd. 4. Insurance. All personal radio and TV towers shall be adequately insured for injury and property damage caused by collapse of the towers. All other applicants must provide liability insurance in the amount of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $50,000 for property damage for any liability that may arise as the result of collapse, falling debris, electrical discharge or any other occurrence causing damage or injury to persons or property resulting from the wind energy system or radio/TV tower. Subd. 5. Towers. Only one tower exceeding the limitations of the zoning ordinance shall be permitted in a residential lot. Subd. 6. Abandoned Towers -- Removal. Any wind energy system which is not used for twelve (12) successive months commencing the effective date of this ordinance, shall be deemed abandoned and shall be removed as abandoned property. Subd. 7. Variances. Variances from the strict provisions of this Ordinance may be granted pursuant to the variance provisions of the Eagan Zoning Ordinance. Subd. 8. Existing Systems. Wind Energy Conversion Systems and radio/TV antennae in existence at the time of adoption of this ordinance shall be granted conditional use permits. However, safety measures which are requirements of this ordinance shall be complied with if not involving major structural change to the tower or substantial expense to the owner. Subd. 9. Violations. Any person violating the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day such violation continues shall constitute a 5 139 • E L. Personal TV and radio towers shall be unclimbable by design for the first 8 feet or completely surrounded. by a fence in excess of 3 feet in height. M. Except for illumination devices required by FAA regulations and residential lighting in compliance with City codes, no wind energy conver- sion System or tower shall have affixed or attached to it in any way any lights, reflectors, flashers or other illumination devices. N. No wind energy conversion system shall have attached to it in any way any signs (does not include equipment labels), banners, or placards of any kind, except for one sign, not to exceed two square feet, which dis- plays suitable warning of danger to unadvised persons, the systems manu- facturer, and energy shutdown procedures. 0. All wind energy conversion systems and TV/radio antennas shall comply with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Noise Pollution Section (NPC 1 and NPC 2) as amended. P. All wind energy conversion systems and TV/radio antennas shall comply with all applicable Federal Communications Commission regulations as amended. Q. All such structures shall comply with all applicable Federal Aviation Administration regulations as amended. B. The interface of the wind energy conversion system with the consumer's electric service shall be performed pursuant to all applicable federal and Minnesota regulations. The owner shall notify their local elec- tric utility company in advance of such interface. The company shall review and comment upon any applications affecting their service. Both parties shall regulate their activities in a cooperative manner including the purchase of excess electricity by the utility company if required by state law. 4 131 0 separate offense and be punished accordingly. Subd. 10. Effect. L This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after the passage and publication as required by law. BY: BEATTA BLOMQUIST, MAYOR This ordinance adopted: CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN ATTEST: E. J. VANOVERBEKEp CITY CLERK This ordinance published in the Eagan Chronicle: i+o 6 0 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Six CONTRACTOR LICENSING ORDINANCE L. Consideration of a Contractor Licensing Ordinance -- The con- tractor licensing ordinance has been reviewed by City Councilmember Wachter and revised by the City staff and City Attorney's office. A copy of the contractor licensing ordinance is enclosed on pages 14 a through J+T for your review. Upon approval of the ordinance, the same will—incorporated into the ordinance codification docu- ment. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the con- tractor licensing ordianance. /4! E CITY OF EAGAN ORDINANCE NO. n AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE LICENSING OF CERTAIN BUSINESS AND OCCUPATIONS AND PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION THEREOF. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN ORDAINS: SECTION 1. LICENSES REQUIRED. Before any person, firm or corporation shall engage in the business of doing or performing any of the various types of work hereinafter listed in this section within the City of Eagan, the applicant shall first obtain a license to do so as hereinafter provided: A. Concrete work, concrete block work, concrete block laying or brick work, including fireplaces. B. General construction including erection, wrecking, alteration or repair of buildings and completing of all work included in the general contract. (See Section 9). C. Heating, ventilation, air-conditioning, refrigeration equipment and gas piping. "Air-conditioning equipment" as used hereunder shall not be deemed to include the installation of window air-conditioning units. D. Roofing. E. Installation of above and below grade swimming pools. F. Siding contracting including the installation or removal of wood, aluminum, steel or composition siding. Nothing herein shall be construed as preventing a property owner from performing his own work providing all provisions of applicable City Code or Ordinances are adhered to. SECTION 2. APPLICATION. Applications for such license shall be filed with the City Clerk on forms furnished by the City and shall be approved by the City Council. SECTION 3. FEES. The fee for each license shall be $25.00 annually. 1 i42 SECTION 4. ISSUANCE OF LICENSE. All licenses shall be issued by the City Clerk after approval by the City Council. SECTION 5. EXPIRATION. All licenses shall expire on December 31 following the date of issuance unless sooner revoked or forfeited. If a license granted hereunder is not renewed previous to its expiration, then all rights granted by such license shall cease, and any work performed after the expiration of such license shall be in violation of this ordinance. SECTION 6. DISPLAY OF LICENSE. Each licensee shall make certain that the license is prominently displayed or readily available for the City Protective Inspection Department personnel review. SECTION 7. RENEWAL OF LICENSE. Persons renewing their licenses after the expiration date shall be charged the full annual fee. No prorated license fee shall be allowed for renewals. SECTION 8. VARIANCE. The City Council may issue a variance hereto, waiving the requirements of this Ordinance or any portions thereof in the event of a declared emergency or clear hardship and for such period, of time as deemed by the Council to be necessary. SECTION 9. A. GENERAL CONTRACTORS. A license granted to a general contractor shall include the right to perform all of the work included in his general contract. Such licenses shall include any or all of the persons performing the work which is classified and listed in Section 1 above, pro- viding that each sub -contractor or person performing such work is supervised by or in the regular employ of the general contractor and qualified under state law and the provisions of this Ordinance to perform such work. In these cases the general contractor shall be responsible for all of the work so performed. B. EXCEPTIONS. Electrical, plumbing, water well and HVAC contractors shall not be covered under the general contractor's license. They shall have State or City Licenses, Bonds and Insurance on file with the City. SECTION 10. QUALIFICATIONS. Each applicant for a license shall satisfy the Council after recommendation by the City Protective Inspection Department that the applicant is competent by reason of education, special training, experience, and that the applicant is equipped to perform the work for which a license is requested, in accordance with all State of Minnesota Laws. Where a State of Minnesota license is required, no license shall be required hereunder, however, evidence of said State license must be submitted prior to issuance of any permits therefor. 2 /1+3 SECTION 11. REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION. The Council may suspend or revoke the license of any person licensed under this Ordinance, whose work is found to be improper or defective or so unsafe as to jeopardize life or property. The person holding such license shall be given twenty (20) days notice and granted the opportunity to be heard before such action is taken. If and when such notice is sent to the legal address of the licensee and he fails to or refuses to appear at the said hearing, his license will be automatically suspended or revoked 5 days after the date of the hearing. SECTION 12. PERIOD OF SUSPENSION. When a license is suspended, the Period of suspension shall be not less than thirty (30) days nor more than one (1) year, such period being determined by the Council. SECTION 13. REVOCATION UPON VIOLATIONS. When any person holding a license has been convicted for the second time by a court of competent jurisdiction for violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance, the Council shall revoke the license of the person so convicted. Such person may not make application for a new license for a period of one (1) year. SECTION 14. SURETY BONDS. No license granted under the terms stated herein shall become effective until the licensee shall have filed with the Clerk a surety bond in the penal sum of Five Thousand and no/100 ($5,000.00) Dollars, operating in favor of the City and conditioned that the City will be saved harmless from any loss or damage by reason of improper or inadequate work performed by the holder of said license under the provisions of this Ordinance. Such bonds shall be subject to approval as to form, execution and surety by the City. SECTION 15. LIABILITY INSURANCE. Each person holding a license hereunder shall file with the City Clerk a policy of public liability and property damage insurance which shall remain and be in force and effect during the entire term of said license and which shall contain a provision that it will not be cancelled without at least thirty (30) days' written notice to the City. Public liability insurance shall not be less than $100,000 for the injuries, including accidental death to any one person, and, subject to the same limit for each person, in an amount of not less than $200,000 on account of any one accident, and property damage insurance in the amount of not less than $50,000 for each accident or mishap. Said policy of insurance shall further provide for indemnity and security to the City of Eagan against any liability and/or responsibility for the acts, actions, or omissions of the license of any of the agents or servants of such licensee subject, however, to the limitations as to amount herein stated. No work shall be done under any license hereunder until said insurance policies shall have been filed and approved by the City Clerk. Provided, however, that in the case of plumbers who have obtained a license to perform such work from the State of Minnesota, there shall be no liability insurance required under the provisions of this Ordinance. 3 144 • 0 SECTION 16. PENALTIES. Any person, firm or corporation convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance shall be punished by a fine of not more than Five Hundred and no/100 ($500.00) Dollars, or by imprisonment for a period of not more than ninety (90) days, or both, but in either case, the cost of prosecution may be added. Each day's violation of the provisions of this Ordinance shall constitute a separate offense. SECTION 17. SEVERANCE. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable and if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall for any reason be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, sentences, clauses and phrases of this ordinance but they shall remain in effect, it being the legislative intent that this Ordinance shall stand notwithstanding the invalidity of any part. SECTION 18. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and publication. Adopted by the City Council this day of ATTEST: Its Clerk CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN By: Its Mayor /45- 4 , 1982. 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Seven CABLE COMMISSION UPDATE E A. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commission Update -- The last regular meeting of the Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commission was held on August 25 in the City of Burnsville. Eagan City Council representative Jim Smith will comment on the action that was taken at that meeting. The next regular meeting of the Cable Commission is scheduled in the City of Eagan on Thursday, September 9, 1982. There is no action required. CONTRACT 82-10 B. Contract 82-10, Receive Bids, Award Contract (Tower View Road - Streets) -- At 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, September 1, 1982, formal bids were received for the above referenced contract. Enclosed on page 14'7 is a tabulation of the bids received with the low bid compareUto the engineer's estimate and the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 3, 1982. The alter- nate bid provides for the replacement of the existing 12 inch cast iron pipe (C.I.P.) with a 12 inch ductile iron pipe (D.I.P) for that section of watermain that must be removed and relocated to a lower elevation due to the proposed grade of the new Tower View Road profile. Because C.I.P. is more susceptible to cracks, leaks and breakage and due to the fact that this is a trunk line providing providing service to the City's elevated 0.5 M.G. water reservoir on Univac's property, staff strongly recommends that the alternate bid be accepted which would provide for a replacement of the section of pipe with D.I.P. All costs associated with this work will be assessed due to the fact that this lowering is necessitated by the construction of Tower View Road to provide access to the adja- cent properties. In addition, the bids received 8.32% below those quoted at the public haaring. The staff has received a right of entry from l.'nivac's property while a formal easement document is being processed through their organization. While it was anti- cipated that the Lone Oak Heights plat that was approved by Council on August 17 would have been recorded by September 7, the developer has not yet fully complied with the final plat conditions placed by Council at the August 17 meeting. Subsequently, the staff has prepared a separate street and utility easement document for execu- tion by the developer and that document has been executed. These two developers would provide all the necessary easements and rights- of-way for this contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids for contract 82-10 and award the contract to the low bidder, Buesing Brothers in the amount of the alternate bid for $101,750.85. /4� 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 0 CONTRACTORS Buesing Bros. Hardrives Inc. 0 Our File No. 49255 TOWERVIEW ROAD STREET & STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS CITY CONTACT NO. 82-10 CITY PROJECT NO. 360 EAGAN, MINNESOTA Alexander Construction Co Bituminous Roadways Inc. DLR Construction Co. Enron Utilities Richard Knutson Inc. McNamara Contracting Valley Paving Inc. R -So Contracting H.S.H. Construction Co. BID TIME: 10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T BID DATE: Weds., Sept. 1, 1982 TOTAL BASE BID ALTERNATE BID $ 98,810.85 $101,750.85 99,108.60 102,272.60 99,395.25 102,675.25 104,546.00 106,730.00 NO BID NO BID I NO BID _ NO BID NO BID NO BID NO SID I I ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE------------ $106,000 Feasibility Report (Alternate Bid) $110,980.00 Engineer's Estimate 106,000.00 Low Bid 101,750.85 8 over (+) or under (-) F. R. -8.328 /4-7 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Eight CONTRACT 82-11 C. Contract 82-11, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Hilltop Plaza - Utilities) -- At 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, September 2, 1982, formal bids were opened for the above referenced contract at City Hall. Enclosed on page /+9 is a copy of the bid tabulation with the low bid comparison -7 -o -7 -Fe engineer's estimate and the price quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 3, 1982. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids for Contract 82-12 and award the contract to the low bidder, Encon Utilities, in the amount of $26,904.50. 148 0 • Our File No. 49258 HILLTOP PLAZA SANITARY SEWER, WA'1'F:HMAIN 6 STORM SEWER CITY CONTRACT NO. 82-11 PROJECT NO. 363 EAGAN, MINNESOTA CONTRACTORS 1. Encon Utilities Inc. 2. F. F. Jedlidd 3. T & S Excavating Co 4. Ridiard Knutson, Inc. 5. Widmer Bros., Inc. 6. Austin P. Keller Construction 1505b BID TIME: 9:30 A.M., C.D.S.T. BID DATE: Thurs. September 2, 1982 TOTAL BASE BID $26,904.50 27,575.00 28,519.99 31,099.15 31,217.50 34,655.00 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE .................. $31,400 Feasibility Report $33,420.00 Engineer's Estimate 31,400.00 Low Bid 26,904.50 8 over W or under (.-) F.R. -19.5% J4q Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Thirty -Nine CONTRACT 82-12 0 D. Contract 82-12, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Galaxie Avenue - Surfacing) -- At 10:45 a.m. on Wednesday, September 1, 1982, the formal bid opening was held at City Hall for the above referenced contract. Enclosed on page ,/5) is a copy of the bids as received with a comparison to the engineer's estimate and the amount quoted in the feasibility report for Project 316. After checking the extension and addition of unit prices, the low bid amount should be corrected to $171,388.50. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids for Contract 82-12 and award the contract to the low bidder, McNamara Vivant, in the amount of $171,388.50. 1S 0 L GAIAXIE AVENUE STREET SURFACING M.S,A,P. NO, 195-103-03 CITY CONTRACT 82-12 EAGAN, MINNESOTA CONTRACTORS 1. McNamara Vivant 2. Alexander Construction 3. Bituminous Roadways, Inc. 4. Hardrives Inc. 5. Valley Paving Inc. 6. Buesing Bros. ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE ------------ 0 Our File No. 49260 BID TIME: 10:45 C.D,S,T BID DATE: WEDNESDAYj, SEPT, 1, 1982 TOTAL BID BASE $171,304.12 185,501.75 191,942.50 192,849.00 NO BID NO BID $197,000.00 Feasibility Report $186,900.00 Engineer's Estimate 197,000.00 Law Bid 171,304.12 8 over (+) or under (-) F.R. -8.34% iyl 0 Agenda Information Memo September 3, 1982 Page Forty 1983 BUDGET HEARING 0 E. Establish a 1983 Budget Hearing for 9-21-82 City Council Meeting It is recommended that a public hearing be set for the September 212 1982 City Council meeting to allow public input into the budget process. The City Administrator will have a summary of the proposed departmental budgets available for that meeting that will illustrate the results and intentions of the City Council from the September 16, 1982 meeting. It is expected that the mill rate will be set by the City Council at the October 5, 1982 City Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve a budget hearing for the September 21, 1982 City Council meeting. s/Thomas L. Hedges ity Administrator IZ-1:L- MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: SEPTEMBER 3, 1982 SUBJECT: INFORMATIVE Update of Aeronautics Rules Enclosed on page 16+ is a copy of a letter from MnDOT Commissioner Dick Braun regar id g an upcoming procedure for updating the aero- nautics rules that could impact the airport zoning ordinance that will be considered by the joint airport zoning board and ultimately the City of Eagan. Protective Inspections Monthly Report Enclosed on page 15r is a copy of a protective inspections monthly report for the mon-t of August. Municipal Bond Newsletter/Ehlers & Associates Enclosed is a copy of the most recent newsletter from Ehlers & Associates financial specialists. (Pages /5(. through lS- 7 ) s/Thomas L. Hedges ity ministrator /S3 .0 t!`�NNE�r4 e Minnesota n Department of Transportation Transportation Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 OF �r 5 TFP� office of Commissioner (612) 296-3000 August 20, 1982 Eagan City Council c/o Tom Hedges, City Administrator 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Dear Madame Mayor and Members of the Eagan City Council: It has come to our attention that the Eagan City Council has denied Amcon, Inc.'s application for rezoning for its Ravine Plaza project. Our staff has been working with the Eagan Planning Commission and Council on this matter for some time now primarily on the potential impacts of proposed airport zoning at Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. Since you are familiar with the legislative mandate for airport owners to adopt an airport zoning ordinance, I felt that you should also be made aware that the rules guiding this zoning are now open for comment by in- terested or affected parties. This update of the Minnesota Code of Agency Rules pertaining to Aeronautics could take until next spring or summer providing time for comment, draft, review, hearing, comment, redraft, ap- provals, publication and implementation. This update of Aeronautics Rules could, but will not necessarily involve zoning. I intend to make all currently operating joint zoning boards aware of this update procedure although most interested parties have no doubt read it in the August 9, 1982, State Register. If we can be of further assistance in this matter, do not hesitate to con- tact our Aeronautics staff. Sincerely, Richard P. Braun Commissioner 1s4 An Equal Opportunity Employer _4D -0m LI DISPEMON/OFIZCF POURS PROTFCTIVP I21SPFr.riorS �. MNP Y REPORT AUGUST, 1982 NATW.. OF BUILDING PER= ISSUED Amber This Month Year -To -Date Building 141.0 929.0 Pl�ing 111.5 802.0 19 46.0 372.5 Adninistrative/Office 101.0 1067.0 Fire Marshal 25.5 270.0 Miscellaneous 16.0 186.0 General Office 165.5 1163.0 PermLt Processing 100.0 754.5 City Council Meetings. 0.0 1.5 10SM OF PFR`IITS ISS 0 0 0 This Month Year -To -Date R Alding 58 415 Plying .. 38 307 HVAC 47 334 Electric 58 429 Water Softener 5 36 V%11, CeSSn001, Septic Tank 3 7 Signs 6 40 NATW.. OF BUILDING PER= ISSUED Amber a Units Valuation Permit Fee Plan Check Fee T y 19 Single Facnil 19 $1,189,000.00 56,053.50 S3,026.75 $32,849.25 4 A3DleX 4 S 216,000.00 $1,171.00 S 585.50 $ 6,844.50 8 Multi-Fm.ulv 8 S 372,000.00 $2,09o.no $1,045.00 $13,281.00 0 Cormerical 0 0 0 0 0 0 Iruiustrial o 0 0 0 0 0 Institutional 0 0 0 0 0 3 Res. Carage 3 $ 16,200.00 $ 163.50$ 0 $ 172.00 3 Swim. P001 3 S 25,000.00 $ 211.50 5 49.25 $ 273.25 21 MiscellaneoUSI 21 1 S 204,450.00. 51,521.00 S 481.75 $ 2,111.75 _ 58 TOD S 58 i S2,027,650.00 S11,210.50 S5,18R.25 $55,531.75 Total Fees Include: P.uilrlinr, PezrLt Fee, Sts-(1.1arge, Plan (heel_ Fee, SAC 14v.t Fee, T•Tater Cormection Fee, 4hter Iter Fee and Road L'nit Fee. /SS ft.. .. .. EHLI•.06 AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS FIRST NATIONAL-SOO LINE CONCOURSE 507 MARQUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 339-8291 (AREA CODE 6121 File: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates, Inc. Please distribute to governing body members September 1, 1982 Newsletter The tax-exempt bond market continues to be very volatile, with interest rates dropping as the Fed reduced the discount rate and allowed the money supply to increase - as it has previously done when the federal government required large amounts of new money. - Massive federal borrowing would normally be expected to cause a sharp increase in interest rates but the exact opposite seemed to occur, at least for a time, perhaps because of the Federal Reserve Bank's accommodation of the federal government in its financing. The prospect of federal borrowing may be a financing window to look for. Also, a well-read financial commentator, who was previously very bearish on interest rates, reversed his position. + + + + + + + + + + Construction Programs Now? Everybody "knows" that times are depressed, and conventional thinking says t at a government s ou not embark on new projects or incur high interest rate debt. It is hard to think of building when the local economy is down, but contrary thinking says that now is really the best time to buy capital improvements. Contractors are short of work, willing to work for less profit, can pick the best, most productive workers, and project costs are 20% to 30% lower. So, even if interest rates are high, if the principal amount is less the overall cost will be lower. For example, suppose one anticipates contracting a future $1 million project at, let us assume, 9% interest over 20 years. If, instead, one undertakes the project now for $700,000 (30% less) at 11% interest, the annual debt service would be $21,600 less or, over 20 years, $432,000 less. The saving would be even greater if the $700,000 were amortized over a shorter period within the annual debt service required by the $1 million loan. In addition, the community will have had use of the facility and an important source of local employ- ment at a critical time. If you think that the economy will recover, that the community's ability to pay will improve, this now may be the best time to buy a capital project. + + + + + + + + + + Those expecting to issue tax or aid anticipation certificates should be doing their monthly cash flow analyses now for early borrowing. + + + + + + + + + + A Couple of Company Notes: Seegar Swanson, Jr. VP, has moved his residence to Brookfield to be closer to our Aisconsin clients. His phone number is (414) 785-1520. Marilyn Gulke and Steve Apfelbacher continue to serve Wisconsin from the Minneapolis office. + + + + + + + + + + In response to Minnesota city officials' comments on our cash flow seminar, we have scheduled a repeat with two sessions to be held prior to the levy of taxes for 1983. Some wished that these seminars could cover some subjects in more depth. Therefore, by eliminating some topics, we will spend more time on items essential to the budgetary and tax levy process. The repeat program (with some changes) will consist of two separate sessions on Wednesday, September 15 from 9:00 A.M. to 4:30 P.M. and again from 7:30 P.M. to 9:30 P.M., at a location to be announced in the metro area. The first session will be more detailed, going into technical aspects which will be of interest to elected and, especially, administrative people. The evening session will be capsulized and designed especially for policymakers (mayors and council members) but those attending the day session will be welcome on a "space available" basis. Hoping that you had an enjoyable summer, we are Very trul ours, EHL E AN SS I S IN i t L. le4s iS6 �� SUMMARY OF AREA 8016, SALES Net Don Municipality net. Type of Bonds Amount Nates Rete Janes Rating MINNESOTA Marshall 6/7/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 15011 1984-91 10.43% 13.0111 MR Princeton 6/10/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 79SM 1981-95 12.03% 13.01% NIL Princeton 6/10/62 G.O. Improvement Bonds 79M 1984-96 12.47% 13.01% IMI Princeton 6/10/82 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 470M 1983-98 12.471 13.01% M Maplewood 6/14/82 G.O. Temporary Improvement Bonds 3,05011 1985 9.852 13.211 A Inver Grove Heights 6/14/02 G.O. Improvement Bonds 1.5501 1985-99 11.151 13.21% A Sartell 6/14/82 G.O. Bridge Building Bonds 55DM 1985-93 11.73% 13.21% Bea -1 SO llwat[r 6/15/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 400M 1984-93 10.582 13.21% A Wayzata ISO No. 204 6/21/82 G.O. School Building Bonds 4,5901 1985-94 11.331 13.46% A Virginia 5/22/82 G.O. Tax increment Bonds 950M 1985-2002 12.66% 13.46% A Woodbury 6/23/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 1,760" 1984-91 11.15% 13.46% Baa -1 Isantl 6/15/82 Improvement Bonds 82 GO 1984-91 12.00% 13.21% NR lsanti 6/15/82 Bond Anticipation Notes 360M 19W 11.201 13.21% NR Red Wing n 6/28/82 G.O. Water Revenue Bonds 82 72011 1985-88 11.67% 13.41% Aa ' L County 6/29/82 Drainage System Bonds 82 15511 1985-99 12.11% 13.411 A d 6/29/82 Municipal State Aid - Road Bonds of 82 1,0001 1984-2001 12.41% 13.41% A-1 St -.,Cloud 6/29/82 G.O. Tar increment ':011,ia Redevelopment Bonds 2,SOOM 1985-2001 12.37% 13.411 A -I Spring Green 6/20/82 Grant Anticipation Bonds 625M 1984 10.27% 13.41% We ::Pine County 7/6/82 G.O. County Jail Bonds 1,300M 1984-93 11.66% 13.36% Bae -1 'Eveleth 7/6/82 G.O. Grant Anticipation 2,25011 1984.97 12.66% 13.36% Baa -I IOWA Bonds 825M 1984 10.16% 13.36% A 'Golden Valley 7/6/82 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 36011 1985-97 11.65% 13.36% Aa 1' Hastings 7/6/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 10011 1984-93 11.29% 13.36% HR Willmar 7/7/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 1,10014 1983-94 11.15% 13.01% 1 A N State University of Iona (Ione City) 6/17/82 of 82, Ser. B 2,09OW 1985-99 11.63% 13.36% A Willmar 7/7/02 G.O. Revenue Waste 12.970M 1985-2002 10.80% 13.21% A -I lone State University 6/21/82 Treatment Plant Bonds 1,29011 1984-99 11.82% 13.36% A Cottage Grove 7/7/82 G.O. Certificates of 12,97014 1985.2002 10.15% 13.21% A-1 Science, Ames Indebtedness 15511 1984-87 10.20% 13.35% A Ramsey 7/12/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 82 56511 1984-92 11.54% 13.21% Baa -1 Worthington 7/12/82 G.O. Municipal Building 1,000M 1984.93 10.39% 13.411 A-1 Semco Confirm nity S/D 6/29/82 Bonds. Ser. 82 62511 1984-98 11.46% 13.21% A-1 No. 703 7/12/82 G.O. School Building Bonds 300M 1984-93 10.92% 13.261 RR ' Mountain Iran 7/15/82 of 82 5,480M 1985-2o DI 12.58% 13.21% A Omlot% 1/14/82 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 8,37514 1984.96 10.47% 13.21% Aa Des Moines 7/26/82 of 82, Ser A 2,SDOM 1983-94 11.30% 13.21% A-1 Mennefin-County 7/15/82 Library Bond Series 82 3,30011 1983-92 9.93% 13.21% Ana Hennepin .County 7/15/82 Capital Notes, Ser. 82 5,00011 1983-86 8.94% 13.21% Aaa Blooal ngtpo 7/19/82 Permanent Improvement 935M 1984-96 10.93% 12.76% A ' 6/3/82 Revolving Fund 2.70011 1984-93 9.67% 13.08% Aa xln6eaDol is 7/20/82 Various Purpose Bonds 22,50011 1985-2002 11.11% 13.08% Aaa Ml nmeapolls 7/20/82 Venous Purpose Bonds 17,31011 1983-92 and 9.98% 13.08% Ana Minot 6/21/82 Temporary Water and Sever 2002 M' c/as 1/20/82 Special Street Improvement Revenue Bonds 2,400H 1983 11.25% 13.46% on Blsmarck Band 5001 1987-2002 11.25% 13.0811 Aaa po115 7/20/82 Redevelopment Bonds 8,500" 1984-97 9.99% 13.08i Aaa Owe Dona 7/20/82 G.O. Improvement 6 Refunding Improvement Redevelemt Bands 1,61811 1981-94 9.981 13.081 A-1 Cannan fells 1/21/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds Temporary Improvement of 1982 ism 1984-98 11.132 13.08% A Lake Benton 7/21/82 G.O. Temporary Improvement School Building Bonds Bonds, Series 82 07511 1983-85 9.3 17.062 IDL Fridley 7/26782 G.O. Bonds o/ 62 2.05011 1983-99 10.36%6% 12.7% Aa -1 Princeton 7/21/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds of 82 705 705" 1984-95 10.86% 12.766% BA`Ma Glencoe 0/2/82 G.O. State -Aid Road Bongs 82 1,10014 1984-90 9.541 I2.7I% Glencoe 8/2/82 G.O. Hospitalb Nursing Xoim G.O. Samar Bonds of 82 21511 1985-92 9.09% 12.71% NR Revenue Bonds a2 1982 6.1[20111 1985-2002 11.33% 11.71% A McLeod County 9/7/83 G.O. Watershed improvement Bonds of 1982 390X 198/-99 10.741 12.7 A Waseca 8/3/82 G.O. Imp rdvement Bends, Ser. 82 ISO" 1981-93 9.652 12.1 A 54 Cloud 8/4/82 Temporary G.O. Improvement Bonds o1 02 2,800" 1985 8.50% 12.71% A-1 Eden Prairie S/D 8/5/82 G.O. Taa Anticipation Certs. of Indeet. o/ 1983 1901 1987 0.002 12.71% 111 Eden Prairie S/0 8/5/82 Aid ebticlpatlpn Certs. of Indeet. 2,2201 1983 8.27% 12.715 MI SUMMARY OF AREA BOND SALES Net Con Municipality Date Type of Bonds Mount Maturity Rate Jones Rating WISCONSIN Ashland 5/5/82 G.O. Special Assess. Bonds, Ser. 8 990M 1983-92 11.50% 12.78% MA Sheboygan Falls 5/211/82 Special Assn't Bonds 3701 1983-92 11.781 12.731 HR Altoona 6/10/82 Special Assm't Bonds Ser. B 950M 1983-92 12.30% 13.011 HR Glendale 6/14/82 Tea Incremental Bond Anticipation Notes Dist. No. 2, Ser. 82 1,40014 1986 10.501 13.212 MIG -1 OconpMnowoc 6/15/82 Promissory Unlimited Tax Notes 1,8901 1983-92 11.01% 13.211 A Wisconsin Health Facilities Authority 6/11/82 Rev. Bonds, Ser. 82 14,6004 1985. 2003 15.63% 13.21% HR (Madison) B 2012 Manitowoc 6/21/82 Promissory Unllmlted Tax Notes 2,SOOM 1903-92 10.70% 13.46% An North Central Vo -tech N Adult Ed. District 6/28182 G.O. Promissory Notes of 82, Ser. A 2,900M 1984 10.13% 13.41% NR Prairie do Chien 6/29/82 Promissory Unlimited Tax Notes 595M 19113-92 11.48% 13.411 A Milwaukee County 6/29/82 Metro Sewerage Bonds Ser, 82 B 38,000" 1983-2002 12.75% 13.4111 A -I Spring Green 6/70/82 Promissory Notes 265M 1984 10.305 13.41% An Osceola S/D 7/6/82 G.O. School Bldg. Bonds of 82 2,25011 1984.97 12.66% 13.36% Baa -I IOWA Marion 5/18/82 G.O. Essential Corporate purpose Bonds 75011 1983-91 9.70% 12.73% A-1 ^ Webster City 6/7/02 Sever Revenue Bonds 1,10014 1983-94 11.15% 13.01% 1 A N State University of Iona (Ione City) 6/17/82 Academic Building Revenue Bands 12.970M 1985-2002 10.80% 13.21% A -I lone State University 6/21/82 Academic Building Revenue of Technology and Series I.S.U. Bonds 12,97014 1985.2002 10.15% 13.21% A-1 Science, Ames West Liberty 5/24/82 Improvement Bonds I,000M 1983-97 I1.S4% 13.461 NR Cedar Falls 6/28/82 Improvement Bonds 1,000M 1984.93 10.39% 13.411 A-1 Semco Confirm nity S/D 6/29/82 School Unlimited Tax Bonds 75011 1984-95 10.90% 13.41% A Sergeant Bluffs 7/6/82 G.O. Vater Bonds 300M 1984-93 10.92% 13.261 RR Waterloo 7/15/82 Corporate Purpose Unlimited Tax Bonds 8,37514 1984.96 10.47% 13.21% Aa Des Moines 7/26/82 Unlimited Tax Bonds 4.00011 1984-98 10.17% 12.76% Ana Des Moines 7/26/82 Unlimited Tax Bonds 11.150H 1985-95 9.03% 1Z.161 Aaa Coralville 7/27/82 Improvement Unlimited To. Bonds 935M 1984-96 10.93% 12.76% A Urbandale 6/3/82 Improvement Unlimited Tax Bonds 2901 1984-91 9.70% 12.71% A-1 NORTH DAKOTA Minot 6/21/82 Temporary Water and Sever Revenue Bonds 2,400H 1983 11.25% 13.46% on Blsmarck 7/13/82 Refunding Improvement Bonds, Series E 3,300M 1983-98 10.62% 13.21% Aa Grand Forts 7/19/82 Refunding Improvement Bonds 935" 1984.98 10.95% 11.08% A. Minot 8/2/82 Temporary Improvement Warrants 2,100M 1903 8.651 12.71% Me West Fargo S/D 8/3/82 School Building Bonds of 1982 2.9001 1964-97 11.091 12.711 A Dickinson 8/3/82 Refunding Improvement Bonds of 1982, Ser. A 4,10011 1985-2001 II.I2i 12.711 A SOUTH DAKOTA Redfield 8/2/82 G.O. Samar Bonds of 82 21511 1985-92 9.09% 12.71% NR