Loading...
09/21/1982 - City Council RegularAGENDA REGULAR MEETING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL. EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 21, 1982 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:33 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. 6:35 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS 3 A. Fire Department e C. Park Department A.15 B. Police Department p 3 D. l Public Works Department IV. 6:55 - CONSENT ITEMS (One motion approves all items) A. Project #366, Order Feasibility Report (40 M.G. Safari Water Reservoir) A- B. Contract 82-4, Change Order #1 QQ.IY C. Contract 81-5, Change Order #3 V. 7:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS S A. 1983 General Fund Budget Q 5 B. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #327A (Killdeer Addition P Utilities) Final Assessment Hearing, Project #344 (Winkler Jackson Addition Sanitary Sewer) P.� D. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #323B (Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Streets) tl E. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #324B (Safari at Eagan Streets) P ,,F. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #336B (Tomark 1st Addition P' Streets) ISG. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #340A (Windcrest 2nd Addition Utilities) 11H. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #341A (Windtree 2nd Addition Utilities) p X91. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #359 (Park Cliff 1st Addition 1 Storm Sewer. Extension) VI. OLD BUSINESS ').11 A. Concepts for Land Use Changes to the Proposed Handicapped Facility Location in Meadow Land Addition (Betty Bassett) B - Agreement with Harry & Pearl Lemieux (Project 297) P?' C - Consideration of a Wind Energy Systems & Radio/TV Towers Ordinance Northwestern National Bank, Thomas R. HalLbauer, for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Drive Up Bank Machine in a CSC (Community Shopping Center District), CedarvaLe Shopping Center. Eagan City Council Agenda September 21, 1982 Page Two VII. NEW BUSINESS Ar2 A. Sienna Corporation, Rodney Hardy, for a Variance to Allow 20' Q Front Setback for Lots 19-26, Block 1, Wedgwood Addition q.� B. David R. & Patricia B. Odell for Preliminary Plat, Odell's P Addition, Consisting of Approximately One Acre & Containing 2 Single Family Lots in Part of Lot 2, McCarthy Ridge Addition, Section 9 6� C. Gabbert Development, Inc., for a Preliminary Plat, Sheffield Addition, Consisting of Approximately 11.36 Acres and Containing 44 Single Family Lots Located in Part of the E� of the SEk of Section 26 7 % D. Municipal Finance Bond for Joint Venture Senior Citizen Housing Project 9� E. I.R. Financing Transfer from Federal Land Company to Basic r Properties for Yankee Office Building IV qtr F. Extension of Time for Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place P' VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS pq 6 A. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable TV Commission Update IX. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) X. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 1982 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of the September 7, 1982 regular City Council minutes and the September 21, 1982 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration: NATIONAL BUSINESSI WOMEN'S; WEEK, PROCLAMATION Mayor Blomquest has been requested by the Minnesota Valley Business and Professional Women's Club to proclaim the week of October 17- 23 as National Business Women's Week. The president of this organi- zation is planning to be present at the City Council meeting to accept the official proclamation from Mayor Blomquist. Enclosed on page %. is a copy of the National Business Women's Week proclamation. PROCLAMATION For National Business Women's Week Whereas working women constitute 46 million of the nation's working force, and are constantly striving to serve their communities, their states and their nation in civic and cultural programs, and Whereas major goals of business and professional women are to help create better conditions for business women through the study of social, educational, economic and political problems; to help them be of greater service to their community, to further friendship with women throughout the world, and Whereas all of us are proud of their leadership in these many fields of endeavor, NOW, THEREFORE, I Bea Blomquist MAYOR OF THE CITY OF EAGAN by the authority vested in me, do hereby proclaim October 1723, 1982, as NATIONAL BUSINESS WOMEN'S WEEK sponsored by The National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, Inc., and urge all citizens in the city of Eaganall civic and fraternal groups, all educational associations, all news media and other community organizatons to join in this salute to working women by encouraging and promoting the celebration of the achievements of all business and professional women as they contribute daily to our economic, civic and cultural purposes. Date September 21, 1982 By 0 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Two DEPARTMENT, 'HEAD B�'SINESSI FIRE DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department -- There are no items to be discussed for the Fire Department at this time. POLICE DEPARTMENT B. Police Department -- There are no items to be discussed for the Police Department at this time. PARK DEPARTMENT C. Park Department -- There are no items to be discussed for the Park Department at this time. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT D. Public Works Department -- There are no items to be discussed for the Public Works Department at.this time. • 1• There are three (3) 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 additional items unless the discussion required is brief. PROJECT #366 A. Project #366, Order Feasibility Report (4.0 M.G. Safari Water Reservoir) -- On Wednesday, September 8, 1982, the City Attorney and Public Works Director, through the efforts of Councilman Wachter, were able to obtain a purchase agreement from Ida Sieg for the acquisition of 2.09 acres of land for the required 4.0 M.G. water reservoir for the City's high pressure zone to be located just east of Safari Path adjacent to the Apple Valley corporate border. Now that the City has successfully located the site for the construction of this needed reservoir, it would be appropriate to prepare a feasibility report detailing cost estimates for con- struction. It would also• be beneficial to start the preparation of detailed plans and specifications with the intentions of awarding a contract yet this year. This would allow the installation of footings to take place before freeze up and would allow the fabri- cation of the necessary equipment and materials through the winter months to allow construction to begin early in 1983. 3 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Three ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To authorize the prepara- tion of a feasibility report for Project #366 (4.0 M.G. water reser- voir - Safari) and also authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications for contract 82-13. CONTRACT #82-4 - CHANGE ORDER B. Contract 82-4, Change Order #1 -- Additional funds were re- maining in a grant account and it was the decision of the Parks and Recreation Committee, Director of Parks and Recreation, and City Council that a 10 foot wide bituminous trail be constructed between Blackhawk Road and Woodgate Lane and also an eight foot wide bituminous trail along the north right-of-way of Wilderness Run Road commencing at Capricorn Court and terminating at a point easterly as staked in the field. The cost for the 10' bituminous trial is $9,890 and the 8' bituminous trail is $8,062.50. The total change order is $17,952.50. The contractor is Bituminous Roadways, Inc., for a project consisting of Twin View Manor 2nd Addition, Windcrest 2nd, Windtree 2nd and Cinnamon Ridge. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve Change Order #1 for Contract 82-4 for bituminous trail construction in the amount of $17,952.50. CONTRACT #82-5 - CHANGE ORDER C. Contract 82-5, Change Order #3 -- A change order has been pre- sented by the consulting engineering firm to provide some 10" resilient wedge gate valve and box and furnish and install hydrant bottom sections which is an addition to Project 337A in the amount of $2,372 and to provide the finished grading and repair damaged trash guard which amounts to $1,890.75 for Project 345A. The total change order is $4,262.75. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve Change Order #3 for Contract 82-5 to provide the additional work as outlined for Projects 337A and 345A. U Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Four 11 P'UBL'IC HEARINGS 1983 GENERAL FUND BUDGET A. 1983 General Fund Budget -- Traditionally, the City holds a public hearing during the development of the next year's calendar budget. The purpose for holding a public hearing is to allow public input as it may relate to recommended increases or reductions in certain departmental operations. The up to date results of the budgetary process and a to date estimated 1983 budget will be pre- sented and discussed by the City Administrator at the meeting on Tuesday. There is no action required regarding adoption of the 1983 budget; however, action may be desirable for certain parts of the budget if there is public input. It would be suggested that this action be more a referral and consideration in the final development of the 1983 budget. PROJECT #327A B. Project #327 A, Final Assessment Hearing (Killdeer Addition Utilities) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #327A was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compare to those 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, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roil for Project #327A, Killdeer Addi- tion Utilities, and authorize certification to the County for col- lection of assessments spread over five years at 12.5% interest. S FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 327A SUBDIVISION/AREA: KILLDEER ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES 0 Area SF $1147.42 $1520.00 Laterals DP $573.71 $760.00 Q Service $7dt nn $884.00 n Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM rl Area _ SF $789.80 $98$98 Q Laterals DP $.UL.9A 8492.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: iA NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: RATE OF. INTEREST: FINAL F.R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area SF TTT7T.-= $18330 © Laterals DP $560.41 $916.00 ® Service $245.00 $884.00T, Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS ac Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: 568.709 11 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS:__ April 7. 1981 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: m SF $1688.46 $1057.00 DP $844.23 $528.00_;v Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Five PROJECT #344 C. Project #344, Final Assessment Hearing (Winkler Jackson Addition Sanitary Sewer) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #344 was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page $ is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as comparecT—To those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 18, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #344, Winkler Jackson Addition Sanitary Sewer, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments spread over ten years at 12.5% interest. 7 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 344 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Section 31 (proposed Winkler - Jackson Addition) FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER FINAL F. R. U Lat. Benefit/Trunk 10 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM rl Area Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 1 STREETS E] Gravel Base MSurfacing Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: jf /O RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $114,680.12 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-15 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 18, 1981 V RATES RATES SANITARY RATES RATES 0 Area Area Q Laterals Qx Laterals $114,680.12 $118,294.00 IM E] Service U Lat. Benefit/Trunk 10 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM rl Area Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 1 STREETS E] Gravel Base MSurfacing Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: jf /O RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $114,680.12 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-15 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 18, 1981 V Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Six PROJECT #323B D. Project #323B, Final Assessment Hearing (Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Streets) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #323B was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page /p is a summary tabulation of the final assess- ment rates as compare to those 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, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #323B, Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Streets, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments spread 'over five years at 12.5% interest. 9 FINAL ASSESSMENT }FEARING PROJECT NO: 3238 SUBDIVISION/AREA: COACHMAN LAND CO. IST ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES 0 Area QLaterals 0 Service 0 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: .34 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: . S FINAL F. R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base ® Surfacing Res. Equiv. RATE OF. INTEREST: 12.50 TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $60.333.57 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: -April 7. 1981 10 $754.17 $1163.00 _. Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Seven PROJECT #324B E. Project 324B, Final Assessment Hearing (Safari at Eagan Streets) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #324B was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page I'.is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compared to those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on March 17, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has received one objection to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #324B, Safari at Eagan Streets, and authorize certification to the County for col- lection of assessments spread over five years at 12.5% interest. FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT N0: 3248 SUBDIVISION/AREA: SAFARI AT EAGAN FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES QArea QLaterals 0 Service _ 0 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM ri Area Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 5 FINAL SANITARY RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base Q Surfacing Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $70,766.77 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81.10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: March 17 1981 IL F.R. RATES $70.766.77 $87.490.00 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Eight PROJECT 336B F. Project 336B, Final Assessment Hearing (Tomark 1st Addition Streets) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #336B was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as comparo those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on June 16, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent, to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close approve the final assessment roll for Project Addition Streets, and authorize certification collection of assessments spread over five years 13 the public hearing, 336B, Tomark 1st to the County for at 12.5% interest. FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 336B SUBDIVISION/AREA: TOMARK IST ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: Septemner 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES Area Laterals Service ❑ Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM 11 Area OLaterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: FINAL F. R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS 0 Gravel Base DSurfacing Res. Equiv. $31,020.88 $29,890.00 73 ( 1 outlot and 72 units at $215.42 per unit) NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 years RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5 % TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $31,020.88 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 16, 1981 14 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Nine PROJECT #340A G. Project #340A, Final Assessment Hearing (Windcrest 2nd Addition Utilities) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #340A was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compare to those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 4, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #340A, Windcrest 2nd Addition Utilities, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments 'spread over five years at 12.5% in- terest. is FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 340A SUBDIVISION/AREA: WINDCREST 2ND ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES Q Area $97.78 $770.80 Ac o' Laterals $410.58 $623.00 . D Service $97.00 $239.00 E] Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area ( 0468¢) 97SR A7 $266,00 - Laterals PS1?� $522.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: cc NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 0 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS - IJ Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. RATE OF INTEREST: 12 S% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: @q8 67017 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-13 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 4, 1981 Ra $242.86 $243.00 FINAL F.R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area Q Laterals $344.83 $575.00 Q Service $97.00 $239.00 0 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS - IJ Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. RATE OF INTEREST: 12 S% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: @q8 67017 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-13 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 4, 1981 Ra $242.86 $243.00 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Ten PROJECT #341A H. Project #341A, Final Assessment Hearing (Windtree 2nd Addition Utilities) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #341A was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page ($ is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compare T to those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 4, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #341A, Windtree 2nd Addition Utilities, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments spread over five years at 12.5% interest. 17 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING .r. PROJECT NO: 341A SUBDIVISION/AREA: WINDTREE 2ND ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 STORM . ® Area © Laterals (.03740$894.78- $892.00 . 136.01 $185.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: RATE OF INTEREST: 27 Lots 5 12.5% STREETS E] Gravel Base E] Surfacing MRes. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $121,210.00 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-13 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 4, 1981 I$ $711.37 $762.00 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. Feasibility Report FINAL HATER RATES F.R. RATES SANITARY FINAL RATES F.R. RATES Area - El Area ix� Laterals $1396.45 $1895.00 ® Laterals $1821.43 $2655.00 Q Service $212.00 $404.00 © Service $212.00 $404.00 Q Lat. Benefit/Trunk$302.00 $12.90 FF Lat. Benefit/Trunk $218.27 $14730 `FF STORM . ® Area © Laterals (.03740$894.78- $892.00 . 136.01 $185.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: RATE OF INTEREST: 27 Lots 5 12.5% STREETS E] Gravel Base E] Surfacing MRes. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $121,210.00 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-13 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 4, 1981 I$ $711.37 $762.00 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Eleven PROJECT #359 I. Project 359, Final Assessment Hearing (Park Cliff 1st Addition Storm Sewer Extension) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #359 was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page— 7,0 is a summary tabulation of the final assess- ment rates as compare to those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on July 6, 1982. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #359, Park Cliff 1st Addition Storm Sewer Extension, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments spread over five years at 12.5% interest. Iq FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 359 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Section 34, (Park Cliff Development) FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES QArea Gravel Base Laterals Surfacing Service E] Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area OX Laterals $13,614.81 $13,220.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 2 FINAL F. R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 RATE OF INTEREST: 12% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $13,614.81 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: PUBLIC HEARING DATE: July 6. 1982 rM 81-13 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Twelve LAND USE CHANGES - BETTY BASSETT A. Concepts for Land Use Changes to the Proposed Handicapped Facility Location in the Meadowland Addition (Betty Bassett) -- At the last two regular City Council meetings, there has been dis- cussion between the City Council and Betty Bassett, who is the current owner of property described as lots within the Meadowland Addition. There has been discussion regarding the history of the zoning at both meetings and the amount of facts presented to dates raised several questions in many of the City Councilmembers' minds about the real status of the underlying zoning of Betty Bassett's property. In in effort to provide the most detailed zoning report, the administrative intern, Mike Johnson, was asked to madOOM research all minutes and records to provide a chronology of zoning that has been approved for that property. Also, a more concise history of what has happened with the approvals for the Eagle's Nest Home was researched to provide a more precise report for review by the City Council. The following is that information: Eagle's Nest Home Chronology 3-23-76 -- Eagle's Nest Home informal meeting with the Advisory Planning Commission. The minutes indicate that the PD may need revision. 4-27-76 -- Representatives of the Eagle's Nest Home and Unisource appeared for approval of preliminary sketch plan. It appeared that rezoning was not required. The concept was approved subject to final plans being returned to APC for review. 5-5-76 -- Eagle's Nest Home appeared for approval of preliminary sketch plan. Concept plan approved subject to granting of a 50 foot right-of-way easement for future sanitary sewer and final building plans being submitted for APC review. 5-27-76 -- Mrs. Bassett and a person from the Minnesota Commission for the Handicapped, Department of Welfare, discussed the proposed home.,,*6 There was discussion concerning the appropriate zoning. Mrs.V1Was to review the matter with John Voss per recommendation of the APC as to appropriate zoning for the home. 7-27-76 -- Public hearing on Eagle's Nest Home - Unisource Corpora- tion. There were objections by neighboring owners. An additional 17 foot right-of-way on Rahn Road and an 80 right-of-way on the proposed south street were recommended by the engineer. The APC recommended approval. This application covered a part of the Mission Hills PD. Zl Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Thirteen 8-3-76 -- City Council approved preliminary plat subject to the condition that if there are any changes in use or state licensing, City Council approval was required. 9-7-76 -- Eagle's Nest agreement was approved and signed. Zoning History The zoning history has been researched and is documented in the following chronology: 1959 - Agricultural 1961 - Agricultural 1964 - Agricultural 0 1967 - Agricultural 1968 - Agricultural 1969 - Residential Multiple or Residential Urban 1970 - Residential Urban 1971 - Residential Urban 1972 - Residential Urban 1973 - Residential Urban 1974 - (11-26-74) R-1, Residential Single District 1975 - R-1, Residential Single District 1976 - PD, Planned Development District 1977 - PD, Planned Development District 1978 - PD, Planned Development District 1981 - PD, Planned Development District 1982 - PD, Planned Development District ZZ Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Fourteen According to the most recent zoning which is pre -planned development district, the property is zoned R-1, Residential Single District, which becomes the underlying zoning if the planned development agreement should expire and the property would revert back to an R-1 zoning district. The zoning map which refers to R-1 is Resi- dential Urban for the year 1970 is enclosed for your review on page #t ft . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny current land use and zoning for purposes of considering a new concept for the land use of Betty Bassett's property. 3.3 rur j v f91 G I ct Q LEBANON/TWRp � 191 O ZONING LEGEND mwwmu' t - c -i o Ebb 0 EAGAN T( I [ J O I -x C -x . r -__________ 29' ZONING of N 0' 1* TYPES OF ZO •-i—Mom[xnu Y x-x—x[no[xruL o M-[—x[Lo[xmL n x-. y[sm[xruL r. e-f—RmoxxruL M x-e—x[Lo[xneL x WNSH I P —LGIr VDU.E.: C•t —x[.Yr Cpb[x [ • � —UpT reusr: t-[ —xxrvr IMUST:, MAP eeo —i C F —. [.CRS.Ll ' —uLruv.L IC Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Fifteen PROJECT #297 (HARRY & PEARL LEMIEUX) B. Continued Public Hearing (Harry & Pearl Lemieux - Project #297) -- At the September 7, 1982 Council meeting, there was a verbal agreement reached between Mr. and Mrs. Lemieux and the City per- taining to the assessments relating to Project #297 (Blackhawk Lake Trunk Storm Sewer Outlet). The reduction to Mr. and Mrs. Lemieux' assessment was subject to satisfactory execution to be prepared through the City Attorney's office. It is anticipated that this executed agreement will be available for the September 21st Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: If the agreement has been executed, close the public hearing and approve the revised assess- ment to Parcel 10-01600-010-05 (Harry & Pearl Leieux). as Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Sixteen WIND ENERGY SYSTEM & RADIO TV TOWER ORDINANCE C. Consideration of a Wind Energy Systems & Radio/TV Tower Ordi- nance -- At the last regular meeting of the City Council held on 9-7-82, there were several questions raised regarding requirements for an engineer's certification as it relates to the structural stability of the towers and the interpretation of the uniform building code. To date, information regarding the interpretation of the uniform building code is available; however, the various suppliers that were contacted by the City to solicit information helpful to determining the final language in the ordinance for the engineer's certification has not been received. If the informa- tion is received late Friday or early Monday, a special memorandum will be delivered on Monday evening providing the additional infor- mation for final consideration of the wind energy/radio TV tower ordinance. Assuming the information is not available, the City Administrator would ask for a continuance until the October 5, 1982 meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To consider approval or denial of the wind energy system and radio/tv tower ordinance or if information is not available a continuance until the October 5, 1982 meeting. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK B. Northwestern National Bank, Thomas R. Hallbauer, for a Condi- tional Use Permit to Allow a Drive Up Bank Machine in a CSC, Cedar - vale Shopping Center -- At the July 20, 1982 City Council meeting, application submitted by Northwestern National Bank for an instant cash machine to be located in the Cedarvale Shopping Center area adjacent to the detatched Brown Photo drive -up facility was denied. The City staff, City Planner Dale Runkle, has studied the comments and reasons for denial by the City Council, has met with the de- veloper, and reviewed the Cedarvale Shopping Center parking lot to consider alternate locations. For recommendation and review of the City Planner's comments and findings, please refer to a memorandum enclosed on pages 1Z through 34 Also enclosed is a letter from the property manager for t e e arvale Shopping Center complex which is enclosed on page 140 For a copy of the minutes of the action that was taken by the City Council at the July 20, 1982 meeting, refer to page 41 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the drive -up instant cash machine as requested by Northwestern National Bank. z(o TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FFM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 1982 RE: NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK INSTANT CASH MACHINE On July 20, 1982, the City Council recommended to deny the application of Northwestern National Bank for an instant cash machine to be located in the Cedarvale Shopping Center area. It is staff's understanding that the reason for denial was not objecting to the instant cash machine but rather the location the instant cash machine was to be located in the Cedarvale Shopping Center area. Since the July 20, 1982 City Council meeting, staff has had a chance to re-examine the parking areas to the west and north of the Cedarvale Shop- ping Center. In the staff review per Council direction of July 20th, staff has tried to re-examine the parking area around Cedarvale to determine where the best location would be for Northwestern National Bank's instant cash machine. In this review, staff has examined all locations and has de- termined that the best location for the instant cash machine is in the gen- eral location which was submitted for the July 20, 1982 City Council review. The reasons staff feels this is the best location is that: 1. There is already a freestanding Photamat building in this general location and another freestanding facility could tend, to change traffic patterns and congest traffic patterns if placed in the cen- ter of the existing parking area. One time when staff was review- ing locations, there was a carnival being set up in the parking lot between the Shopping Center and the old Jerry Lewis Theater. In placing another freestanding building in between the Shopping Center and the Jerry Lewis Theater could not allow this type of use to occur once the second freestanding building is placed in the parking lot. 2. Another freestanding building would remove a great deal of parking stalls where the building would be located and also for establishing traffic patterns to provide access to this machine. Aesthetically, another freestanding building could make the parking area look con- gested and crowded by placing another machine or box in this general location. 3. In reviewing the proposed location, staff feels that this machine could be placed in or adjacent to the landscaped area to allow the machine to function and serve the general public without having an intrusive effect on the Cedarvale area. Also, the traffic patterns established for this location would allow only the people using this machine to exit the parking lot in the traffic pattern designated to drive from the parking lot to the access road. Although the machine and drive would penetrate the landscaped area provided by the Cedarvale Shopping Center, additional landscaping could be required which would make the machine the least visible of D.-7 - Northwestern National Hank Machine Thomas L. Hedges September 17, 1982 Page two any of the locations which could be proposed within the parking lot area. Enclosed is a copy of the site plan for the Cedarvale area so City Council can review the site plan of the parking lot area. Also enclosed are two site plans submitted by Northwestern National Bank in which one is the origi- nal submission and the second is a revised location in the same proximity for City Council to re -review and possibly reconsider the motion granted on July 20, 1982. If this is approved, the conditional use should be subject to the following conditions: A detailed landscape plan shall be required designating the size, quantity and species of additional landscaping to be provided. Also, a landscape bond of an adequate amount shall also be submitted and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. DCR/jack E19 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK - THOMAS HALLBAUER LOCATION: CEDARVALE SHOPPING CENTER EXISTING ZONING: CSC (COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 22, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 15, 1982 REPORTED BY: DAVID M. OSBERG, PLANNING ASSISTANT An application has been submitted for a conditional use permit to allow a drive up bank machine in a Community Shopping Center District located in part of the Cedarvale Shopping Center. •:iia The applicant is proposing to construct a drive up bank machine which would be used to get cash instantly without having to leave the car. A drive up bank machine in a Community Shopping Center District is allowed as a conditional use. The machine will be located in the boulevard separating the parking area of the Cedarvale Shopping Center and the service road. The applicant has submitted a site plan of the area and also a more detailed site plan of the drive up bank machine area. Staff has provided an aerial photograph of the Cedarvale Shopping Center area to give a better understanding of the potential impact the drive up bank machine will have on the area. Staff would like to point out that this drive up bank machine will be used only to provide "instant cash" and there will be no employees at the facility. Park- ing will not be necessary at the site with stacking spaces for cars provided in the drive up lane. This is not a conventional full serivoe bank that provides employment opportunities for people in the City of Eagan. If approved, the conditional use permit shall be subject to the following condi- tion: 1. A detailed landscape plan as submitted by the applicant shall be approved and a landscape bond shall be submitted and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. DMO/jack 19 74 .14 L OilAll 4 GX VZ: TH' a, pp POW- Z, Y hV. 00, fir S., 4 14 lie, t Nc�m� 0 SE�F,VI-F FlaNr--.) jG> GEPAP�VAL.E �. Vo PlHiON -3iI I 54 -rim V)PI/yial-ix IHI: 9 lri gj-4TI A4,01-* W1'9 V 7 -3nr2i J Ory 0. �� r7jy11�iU(3 +t 12104 If 8E I -i -i i � r u -c - a] UPPER MIDWEST MANAGEMENT CORP P. O. BOX 834 507-359-2004 NEW ULM, MINNESOTA 56073 August 10, 1982 Mr. Tom Hedges, City Manager City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Tom: I am writing to you seeking your support and also the support of the City Council in granting the Northwestern National Bank of Minneapolis the necessary permit to construct an Automatic Teller Machine at Cedarvale. The location, which was turned down by the City Council once, was determined by us to be the best location possible for Cedarvale. It would not cause any obstacles on the lot for proper maintenance. It would not remove any parking stalls from the Center. After. Mr. Tom Hallbauer from Northwestern National Bank met with your City Planner, it was determined, in looking at several alterna- tive sites, that this location is still the best possible location. I am asking that when this matter is reconsidered by the City Council that the original location be approved. Thank you for your help. Sinceergly, � Dave Brown, Property Manager UPPER MIDWEST MANAGEMENT CORP. DB:at cc: Tom Hallbauer Enclosure CE Council Minutes July 20, 1982 NATIONAL BANK DRIVE -OP BANK MACHINE The application of Northwestern National Bank for conditional use permit for an instant cash machine at the Cedarvale Shopping Center was then con- sidered by the City Council. The Advisory Planning Commission at its June 22, 1982 public hearing recommended approval, subject to certain conditions. Thomas Hallbauer appeared for the applicant. He stated that the machine would be automatic without a staff person; that it would be 10 feet high and that it is located within an existing berm in the Cedarvale Center. Councilman Smith objected to the location within a berm which had been required by the City Council some years ago, and intended for landscaping purposes. He suggested that another location within the Shopping Center parking lot be designated for the drive up machine. Smith moved, Egan seconded the motion to deny the application because of the location within the berm and the fact that the current landscaped area is requested to be used for the machine locations. All voted yea. NORTRVIEW MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT The application of Sienna Corporation for rezoning from R-3 Planned Development to allow 65 single family lots and 84 duplex lots and preliminary plat approval of Northview Meadows was then considered by the Council. The Planning Commission had recommended approval at its June 22, 1982 meeting subject to numerous conditions. Rod Hardy of Sienna Corporation, Mr. Brzinski of Suburban Engineering and Marshall Oaks of Ruscom Homes were present. Mr. Hardy indicated that the revised proposal would include 104 single family units and 64 duplex units on the 52 acre parcel. The duplex units would be 6,000 square foot minimum with the single family approximately 7,000 square foot minimums, noting the reduction in the current zoned requirements. The net density would be 4.9 units per acre with a gross density of 3.9 units per acre. A storm water runoff proposal has been prepared and the request was that the City construct the trunks but the developer would construct the street and utilities on the site privately. The northwest pond would be used temporarily for ponding purposes and possibly could be eliminated in the future, depending on the City's requirements. Mr. Oaks explained on behalf of the proposed developer, the current need is for single family homes of a smaller variety. He stated that the average size would be 850 square feet per unit with a minimum of 800 and a maximum of 1,000 square feet per unit. Mr. Wachter suggested that all storm ponds be made permanent to recharge the ground table. There was discussion concerning cul de sacs on the north end and a revision would provide for only one cul de sac. It was recommended the eyebrow be eliminated on Trenton Trail and that the City Council allow front yard variances to accomodate the elimination or the eyebrow. Cary King, a neighboring owner and several other owners were present and asked if precedent would be involved if lot sizes are cut down. Mr. Hardy stated that this provides for a reduction in density and that the property is zoned for R-3 use. There would be provision for double driveway and double attached garage and all units would have basements. After discussion, Thomas moved, Smith seconded the motion to approve the application as revised with the following conditions: 13 4l Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Seventeen VARIANCE - SIENNA CORP. FOR WEDGEWOOD ADDITION A Sienna Corporation (Rodney Hardy) for a Variance to Allow 20 Foot Front Setback for Lots 19 through 26, Block 1, Wedgewood Addi- tion -- A public hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting held on August 24, 1982. The purpose of the public hearing was to consider an application submitted by the Sienna Corporation requesting a ten foot setback variance from the thirty foot setback requirement for Lots 19 through 26, Block 1, Wedgewood 1st Addition. The APC is recom- mending approval of the variances. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's report enclosed on pages through 7 For additional information on the action t at was taken by the*Advisory Planning Commission, refer to those minutes found on page _44 -- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve a variance for Sienna Corpora- tion on Lots 19 through 26, Wedgewood Addition. 4Z CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE FROM THE FROM SETBACK APPLICANT: SIENNA CORPORATION - RODNEY HARDY LOCATION: Lar 19-26, BLOCK 1, WEDGIOOD 1ST ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: Ti -1 UNDER A PLANNED DEVELOP14ENT DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 24, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: AUGUST 17, 1982 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER � 4aftojMw An application has been submitted requesting a 10' setback variance from the 30' front setback requirement for Lots 19-26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition. COMMENTS In November, 1980, the City Council approved the preliminary plat, Wedgwood lst Addition. At that time, staff had listed as a condition that no variances be allowed on the 85 small single family lots unless trees or topographic conditions prevail on the site. Lots 19-26 are fairly flat on the front portion of the lots or the westerly por- tion of the lots and slope drastically to the ponding area encompassed on the back lot line. Therefore, staff can see why the applicant is making the request to only have a 20' front setback vs. the 30' setback requirement. This would al- low some backyard to be constructed with a walk out and have some useable space as rear yard prior to getting into the ponding area. Also, there are some trees backing the lots which may have to be taken down if the houses were made to sit back the 30' as required under Ordinance 52. In reviewing the setback request, Wedgwood Drive would only lots fronting on Wedgwood Drive on the east side where the variances are being requested. on the west side of Wedgwood Drive, lots ap- pear to have access taken from Wedgwood Lane North or Wedgwood Lane South. How- ever, the 30' side setback requirement should be met of the west side of Wedgwood Drive. In reviewing the application for the variances, it appears the only other place the applicant may request the front setback to be reduced are on Lots 12-18, Block 1 or the lots fronting on the west side of Waterford Drive West. There appears to be the same type of situation on Lots 12-18 that appear on Lots 19-26. Attached is a letter from Sienna Corporation stating the reasons for the variance request for Lots 19-26, Block 1, Wedgwood Addition. 43 ,CITYOF EAGAN SIENNA CORPORATION; - VARIANCE, FOR MEDGWOOD 'AUGUST 24; 1982 `PAGE TWO If'approved, the''varianoa should be subject to; the following conditions: 1., All other ordinance requirements should bemmet. DCR/jach 4y- , I WEDGWOOD 1ST ADDITION EAGAN, MN PETITIONER: REQUEST: EXISTING ZONING: LEGAL DISCRIPTION 7-6-82 Sienna Corporation Variance to front yard setback from 30 feet to 20 feet on Lots 19 thru 26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition. R1 -PUD Lots 19 thru 26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition. REASON FOR VARIANCE: Petitioner requests variance for the following reasons: 1. to keep house and yard construction out of existing trees 2. provide a rear yard without taking out additional trees 3. provide flexibility in design and siting house and garage to provide maximum useable rear yard without tree removal 4. minimize cost to buyer 5. does not adversely affect adjacent properties. 45' 911.2 # # -_... .._._.. 9y�Jp0 ! I A 1 . ���ft♦J �\ _.._.._.__9=3.0 .� — � .� 2\ . I \\ I \ it � 1 �- �_ m _ 29. M I L G1 1 I R ! ,2 ~l 4 Ir 1 !Ff F144jO,,l- -sn9u= _ 939.aETU1G /G .'R R `'9S i - -s34.o /�. t 1 d N� xs 2� _ L • ! #, ig 9313 •SF #9 S.0 cc -----, r—'--� r-- 4-8 s ti c r -92p.0 0223 — -- - s1ss- Y - _ _ •` '� . A 7 j 15 P ST 1—B DENOTES SOIL TES 9/12/79 BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING - - ---lc* anff TFCT 2iB/BD BY SUBTERRANEAN ENGINEERING INC A 0 W-drAj R-1 R-1 OVER PF I Ani��� , OF. 0 W-drAj R-1 R-1 OVER WEDGWOOD 1ST ADDITION - SETBACK VARIANCE The public hearing regarding the application of Sienna Corporation for variance from front setback for Lots 19 through 26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition was next convened. Rod Hardy appeared for the applicant and re- quested a maximum 10 foot setback variance from the 30 foot front setback requirements for the lots mentioned above. John Hankinson also appeared for Sienna Corporation. Mr. Hardy noted that in order to fulfill FHA and VA requirements, it would be necessary to have no greater than 3 to 1 slope and also, that a significant number of trees would be removed in the back yards, which are very steep, if the application is not granted. It was noted also that there may be a request for an additional five lots but no action would be taken at the present time. It was also noted that trees and topographic reasons are the bases for the application, but that FHA may allow variances on a case to case basis, according to Mr. Hardy. There were concerns about uniformity in the front set back, but other lots in other subdivisions are not all at the same setbacks. Hardship appeared to be based on excessive site work and alterations, including substantial additional costs, and further, the FHA and VA requirements. McCrea moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recom- mend approval of the application to provide for up to 10 foot setback require- ments on Lots 19 through 26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition, subject to compliance with all ordinance requirements, in order to avoid removal of additional trees. All voted in favor except Mulrooney who voted no. EU Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Eighteen PRELIMINARY PLAT - ODELL ADDITION B. David R. & Patricia B. Odell for Preliminary Plat, Odell's Addition, consisting of Approximately One Acre and Containing Two Single Family Lots in Part of Lot 2, McCarthy Ridge Addition -- A public hearing was held at the last regular planning commission meeting held on August 24, 1982. The purpose of the public hearing was to consider an application submitted by David and Patricia Odell for preliminary plat entitled "Odell's Addition" consisting of approximately one acre and two (2) single family lots. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending denial of the preli- minary plat to the City Council. For additional information on this proposed plat, refer to the City Planner's report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages -�! 0 through S (o A letter was received from Daniel Beeson, attorney at law representing David and Patricia Odell, and a copy is enclosed on pages through 6 for your review. A petition from neighboring property owners was received Friday, September 21, 1982, entitled, "Petition in Opposition to Preliminary Plat Application for O'Dell's Addition" and a copy is enclosed on pages 6/ througho2, for your infor- mation. For information regarding—the action—twat was taken by the APC, refer to a copy of those minutes found on page 3 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to deny the preliminary plat entitled Odell's Addition. 29 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - ODELL'S ADDITION APPLICANT: DAVID R. & PATRICIA B. ODELL LOCATION: PART OF IAT 2, MCCARIHY RIDGE ADDITION, SECTION 9 EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 24, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: AUGUST 18, 1982 REPORTED BY: DALE C. Rm=, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED An application has been submitted requesting preliminary plat approval, Odell's Addition, which consists of approximately one acre and will contain 2 single family lots. As you may recall, on May 25, 1982, Mr. Odell submitted an application for wai- ver of plat in order to split Lot 2, McCarthy Ridge into 2 single family lots. At the Advisory Planning Comnission, there was a lot of neighborhood opposition and there were questions regarding restrictive covenants on the property. As a result of the citizen input, the Advisory Planning Conmission recommended denial of the waiver of plat. On June 15, 1982, the City Council also denied the wai- ver of plat request on the basis that there was not a hardship involved to the applicant to waive the platting requirements. However, the Council did indicate that the applicant had the option to submit an application for preliminary plat. The applicant has now submitted the application for preliminary plat, Odell's Addition, and is proposing to subdivide the property vs. splitting or waiving the subdivision regulations which he was originally denied. The application submitted is a preliminary plat request consisting of 2 single family lots. Lot 1 will contain 26,873 square feet; Lot 2 will contain 16,682 square feet. Both lots are in excess of the 12,000 square foot requirement in an R-1 District. The frontage is 130' on int 1 and 85' on Lot 2 which also meets subdivision regulations. It appears that all rights-of-way are dedicated for the preliminary plat. There is an existing house on Lot 1 which will remain. Lot 2 is the location Mr. Odell wishes to establish a second lot or a second hm esite on his proposed subdivision. Presently, there is an existing garage on Lot 2. If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following conditions: so CITY OF EAGAN PRELEADUM PIAT - ODELL'S ADDITION AUGUST 24, 1982 PAGE TM 1. The preliminary plat shall be subject to Minnesota Department of Transporta- tion's review and camient because the plat abuts State rights-of-way. 2. All easements shall be dedicated as requested by City staff. 3. Park dedication shall be required on Lot 2 for the newly -created lot. 4. The applicant shall be required to provide sewer and water service to the newly -created lot., DCR/jach ENGINEERING RE CMME ]DATICNS 5. The northerly extension of the existing T.H. 13 right-of-way shall be dedica- ted over the extreme northwest comer of this proposed plat. 6. Trunk area sanitary sewer and water assessments shall be required to be paid for the newly -created lot. In addition, trunk area storm sewer assessments shall be required to be paid for both lots of the newly -created plat. All assessments shall be in accordance with the rates in effect at the tire of final plat approval. -51 TO: THE ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PIMZMR FROM: THMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: AUGUST 19, 1982 RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT - ODELL'S ADDITION The Public Works DeparbTent has the following cacments to offer in consideration of the above -referenced proposed plat: UTILITIES Sanitary sewer and water main of sufficient size, depth and capacity to service the proposed newly -created lot is available and located adjacent to the east line Of this proposed plat. The two lots created by the plat will both have direct access to existing sanitary sewer and water laterals for individual sewer service connections. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The general topography of this plat provides for surface drainage in a westerly direction. It is not anticipated that any internal storm sewer facilities would be required as a result of this plat. STREWS Access to this proposed plat is provided by way of the existing in-place McCarthy Road. No additional streets are necessitated by this proposed plat. EASET12M AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY Sufficient right-of-way has been previously dedicated for McCarthy Road. 10' drainage and utility easements should be dedicated adjacent to all public right- of-way, centered over all cammn lot lines and adjacent to the boundaries of this plat. In addition, the "handle" in the extreme northwest corner of this proposed plat should be dedicated as public right-of-way to provide for the potential future continuation of a frontage road/service road for T.H. 13. ASSESSMEZM Mile trunk area sanitary sewer and water area assessments have previously been levied against all lots within the McCarthy Ridge Addition, they were levied on a per lot equivalent. Subsequently, with the creation of a new lot, additional per lot trunk area assessments should be paid at the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval as a condition of this plat approval. Current 1982 rates are $475 per lot for trunk area sanitary sewer and $475 per lot for trunk area water main. In addition, this development should accept its financial responsi- bility for trunk area storm sewer assessments in accordance with the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval. 1982 rates are $660 per lot. I will be available to discuss in further detail any aspect of this report at the Planning Commission nee ' g of August 24, 1982. TAC/7ach M') n•rrr O 9 'tea' -t Hl 2�b A 0 p }• 0 All-�sc �fit,QA \Ih ao� �a �a -L07 Z A c � 4 W yd q H ,ro 77/77 J/ / F. PRELIMINARY PLAT OF OD E L L �..•.•�...W .�.� ..�..•... ADDITIONR;mm:"= FOR: DAVID ODELL 3044 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY SR4iU/C SOLE 4524887 R GATE: ✓ULY ie, /Oet' LEGEND n SITE DATA 'rr J LOCATION .eW-..r- /♦.. A 4r— r4 Wb SR4iU/C SOLE /N FEET R q ♦ / I ' A /♦.. A 4r— r4 Wb MENDOTA \\HTS. F GB RB Ind. 7, Indy,COMMERCIA ei-MNED DEVELf v .......R IInd An l E p - ----- RUI '.4 ... 2-= R. Ai 7, Ind. . GB -'Rt- Ind, Ca Inc /All/ Ind. N13 R-111 H-111 R-11 p R-11 Fl� -p R-111 R R R-111 G IMMAIN R41 p 9.til l� I R'p I -II R-11 -B .3 V, N RB R-111 R -IIS' R-1 R RAI.. --R-n HS JI 24 R -I m fE P, UE R-11 R-11 R R-11 a —U-3CSC RS (]LB x P p R R-11 R-11 I PAR R-11 R-1 R-11 r p - ------- 71 •APPLE 'ALEY r-�_ ROSEMOUN�� " ; September 15, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Eagan City Council 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Odell's Addition Preliminary Plat Application of David R. & Patricia B. Odell Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: The applicants, David R. and Patricia B. Odell, are the owners of the single family residence on a 43,555 square foot lot located at 3044 Sibley Memorial Highway and within the McCarthy Ridge Addition. The area is zoned R-1 with single family residential uses permitted on minimum lots of 12,000 square feet. The Odells are proposing in their preliminary plat application to effect a single lot subdivision that would result in creation of a new lot (Lot 2) with 16,682 square feet. Tile remaining lot with the Odells' existing home (Lot 1) would contain 26,873 square feet. Both lots would, therefore, contain far in excess of the minimum lot size requirements. The frontage on Lot 1 would be 130 feet and 85 feet on Lot 2, which also meets the subdivision standards. The new Lot 2 would have direct access to McCarthy Road and, therefore, no private road easement would be required. The new lot would also be served by the utilities which are presently available from McCarthy Road. If approved, the applicants will comply with all of the staff recommended conditions, including: 1) Dedication of all necessary easements and right of way required by City staff. 2) Payment of park dedication fees. 3) Provision of sewer and water service to the new lot. 4) Payment of all sanitary sewer and water assessments for the new lot. In summary, no rezoning or variances are required for approval of the preliminary plat. The proposal meets all of the require- ments of the zoning and subdivision ordinances; and therefore, the Odells are merely proposing to use their property in a manner permitted under existing City ordinances. City staff ,57 LAW OFFICES HAROLD LEVANDER ARTHUR GILLEN LeVander Gillen Miller Anderson & Kuntz ROGER C. MILLER 7 � HAROLD LEVANDE R. JR. PAUL H. ANDERSON 402 DROVERS BANK BLDG. • 633 SOUTH CONCORD ST. • P.O. BOX 288 TIMOTHY J.'KUNTZ SOUTH ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 99076 • TELEPHONE 16121 4311831 DANIEL J. BEESON September 15, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Eagan City Council 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Odell's Addition Preliminary Plat Application of David R. & Patricia B. Odell Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: The applicants, David R. and Patricia B. Odell, are the owners of the single family residence on a 43,555 square foot lot located at 3044 Sibley Memorial Highway and within the McCarthy Ridge Addition. The area is zoned R-1 with single family residential uses permitted on minimum lots of 12,000 square feet. The Odells are proposing in their preliminary plat application to effect a single lot subdivision that would result in creation of a new lot (Lot 2) with 16,682 square feet. Tile remaining lot with the Odells' existing home (Lot 1) would contain 26,873 square feet. Both lots would, therefore, contain far in excess of the minimum lot size requirements. The frontage on Lot 1 would be 130 feet and 85 feet on Lot 2, which also meets the subdivision standards. The new Lot 2 would have direct access to McCarthy Road and, therefore, no private road easement would be required. The new lot would also be served by the utilities which are presently available from McCarthy Road. If approved, the applicants will comply with all of the staff recommended conditions, including: 1) Dedication of all necessary easements and right of way required by City staff. 2) Payment of park dedication fees. 3) Provision of sewer and water service to the new lot. 4) Payment of all sanitary sewer and water assessments for the new lot. In summary, no rezoning or variances are required for approval of the preliminary plat. The proposal meets all of the require- ments of the zoning and subdivision ordinances; and therefore, the Odells are merely proposing to use their property in a manner permitted under existing City ordinances. City staff ,57 Mayor and City Council Members Page Two September 15, 1982 further concurs with preliminary plat approval subject to compliance with the above stated conditions. This matter originally came before the Council on June 15, 1982, on the Odells' request for waiver of platting. Although a review of City records indicate that the Council has approved 18 or 18 applications for waiver of platting submitted within the past two years, the Odells' plat waiver application was denied by the Council. In taking this action the Council indicated that the waiver was denied because of insufficient showing of hardship by the Odells. However, the Mayor and other members of the Council expressly recognized that the applicants had an alternative remedy to pursue through the formal platting process. Therefore, the Odells are now before the Council seeking approval of their preliminary plat. Notwithstanding the fact that the applicants meet all of the subdivision and zoning ordinance requirements for plat approval, the Planning Commission on a split 4-1 vote recommended denial of the prelinary plat. The reasons given by the Planning Com- mission for its action are factually unfounded and are totally unrelated to the requirements of the subdivision and zoning ordinance. The only logical conclusion is that the recommendation of the Planning Commission to deny the single lot subdivision was based upon improper deference given to the general opposition voiced by surrounding neighbors. It is well established that where a zoning or subdivision ordinance specifies standards to be applied in determining whether to grant or deny a plat or zoning permit, and the applicant meets all of the specific requirements, the plat or permit must be approved. Public policy for the City of Eagan was established when the Council adopted City Ordinance No. 10 and the underlying zoning ordinance which permit the proposed use of the property. At the present time, the only appropriate inquiry for the City Council is whether the proposed plat meets all of the specific ordinance requirements. Since the Odell addition plat meets all of the specific requirements, the Council has no discretion to deny the plat. Since the Odells are proposing a use specifically permitted under the Eagan ordinances, the existing law must govern. The burden is upon the opposition to establish legitimate facts W Mayor and City Council Members Page Three September 15, 1982 compelling denial. To date, the neighborhood objectors have failed to cite a single instance in which the applicants have not met the specific standards and requirements of the subdi- vision ordinance. The mere fact that a majority or even all of the residents of the neighborhood may be opposed to the plat and voice vague objections is plainly insufficient to support denial of the plat. Neither the enabling statute nor the ordinance requires nor permits neighborhood consent as a precondition to plat approval. It is the Odells' adamant position that the' voiced "objections" to the preliminary plat are vague, totally unrelated and irrelevant to the specific ordinance requirements. First, the matter of the restrictive covenants is a non -issue. As a matter of law, the restrictive covenants automatically expired as of June 26, 1982, pursuant to Minnesota law. The covenants are no longer in force and cannot govern the use of the proper- ty. More importantly, the matter of the restrictive covenants is a private civil matter that has no relevance to the Council's final determination of plat approval. Second, the vague "aesthetic" concerns and objections voiced are likewise unrelated to the specific ordinance requirements. Ordinance No. 10 contains no specific standard upon which the Council may legally deny a plat on the basis of aesthetic concerns or objections, i.e. alleged obstruction of view, noise impact, jeopardizing the neighborhood integrity, etc. In absence of such a specific standard or requirement, the Council has no authority to deny the plat even if the alleged objections were well founded. A careful examination of the subject property and the surround- ing neighborhood leads to the compelling conclusion that any claim of adverse impact on the neighborhood and "property values" is unfounded and without basis in fact. Lloyd Krob was apparently the only member of the Planning Commission to personally view and investigate the subject property. His thorough review lead him to the inescapable conclusion that the single lot subdivision would have "no adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood." He further observed that the site was substantially sheltered by landscaping, as well as earthen berms. l He, therefore, supported the plat approval. 1Photographs taken of the Odell property (Exhibits A -J), as well as an aerial photograph (Exhibit K), will be submitted to the Council at hearing in further support of Mr. Krob's observations and conclusions. Sq Mayor and City Council Members Page Four September 15, 1982 It should also be noted that houses in the exclusive Timberline Addition adjacent to McCarthy Ridge to the east are built on substantially smaller lots with no apparent adverse impact on property values. Finally, it must again be emphasized that the single family residential use proposed by the Odells under the preliminary plat is specifically authorized within this R-1 zone on 12,000 square foot lots. A use expressly authorized under the ordinance cannot be deemed to be adverse to surrounding property owners. In summary, the Odells purchased their property within the past several years. They did so only after conferring with City staff to confirm that subdivision of the property was appropriate via either the waiver of plat or direct platting process. The purpose of the subdivision is simply to make the Odells' homestead purchase more affordable to them. If subdivision would not have been permissible, they would not have consumated the purchase. By requiring formal platting as opposed to waiver, the Odells have already been put to substantial financial burden and expense. Mr. and Mrs. Odell adjure the City Council to independently review their preliminary plat application. The singular inquiry before the Council is simply whether the proposed plat meets the specific requirements of Ordinance No. 10. As outlined to the Council herein, as well as by the City staff and Planning Commission member Rrob, the Odell Addition meets all of the requirements of the Ordinance. Irrespective of neighborhood opposition, fundamental fairness and equal a"lication of the City's ordinance compel that the Odells' plat appl}-�on be approved. Respectfu�4V submitted, DJB: cc: J. David and Patricia Odell .E -I �� �r%v.L^}N s:��:' �.+K.�yRi': �'�1� �!v�i �•':��'a5 PETITION IN OPPOSITION TO PRELIMINARY FLAT AP LCT ON FOR DELL DDT N The undersigned, being the owners of all lots in McCARTHY RIDGE (except that of applicant O'Dell's) hereby respectfully petition the City Council of the City of Eagan to deny approval of the preliminary plat for O'Dell's addition. Said action is requested based upon the following considerations: 1. McCARTHY RIDGE was platted in 1952 and has been virtually fully developed for some time. There is no need for additional platting or subdivision and to allow the same would destroy the presently existing homogenious character of this attractive and fully developed neighborhood. The present status of McCARTHY RIDGE is stable and orderly. To allow additional development from within would be an invitation to disorder and random and un- controlled development. 2. The McCARTHY RIDGE area is strategically placed on a ridge or bluff along Minnesota Highway 13 so as to take full advantage of the beautiful views afforded by the Minnesota River Valley. All homes are (pursuant to a restrictive covenant) located on one acre lots and are well placed so as to create a spacious park -like character taking full advantage of the natural geographic location of the property. To allow subdivision from within would destroy this attractive character of the neighborh000d. The subdivision ordinance of the City of Eapan (Ordinance No. 10) has as its.stated purpose: To promote an attractive and stable community". 3. Approval of O'Dell's application would set a precedent for future development of the area as nearly all lots and homes are presently situated and of sufficient size to allow their splitting in conformity with minimum re- quirements. The adverse effect of such random and un- controlled future subdivision is obvious. The increased density, traffic problems, noise, utility requirements; reduction of fire and police protection density, ob- structed view, can only serve to decrease the neighbor- hood integrity and diminish property values of all sur- rounding properties. This subdivision of ten homes could conceivably be developed into an area of twenty or more homes if a precedent is set allowing such subdivision. 4. There exists a Bona Fide legal dispute as to the continued existence and enforcement of a restrictive covenant placed upon the property at the time of the initial plattinC of McCARTHY RIDGE. The covenant requires homes to be built on lots at least one acre in size. All owners of property in MCCARTHY RIDGE, except O'Dells, claim that the covenant continues to be enforceable. This question may require a declaratory judgment proceeding in Dakota County District Court. GI Further, as pointed out by Planning Commission member Mulrooney, the covenants were created at the time of the original subdivision and my have permanent sig- nificance and property owners should have a right to expect that no revisions contrary to the obvious intent of the covenants would be made. 5. This is not a case of hardship for the O'Dells. They have admitted they purchased their property (approxi- mately two years ago) with full knowledge of the exist- ence of the covenant (and obviously of the character and integrity of the then existing neighborhood). The attempt of the O'Dells to split their lot is motivated only by the financial gain which they expect may flow therefrom. 6. The decision to be made by the City Council does not only affect the applicants, it affects the property rights of all of the owners of McCARTHY RIDGE and their rights to the beneficial use of their property, the right to maintain property values, and, above all, their right to the continued existence of their neighborhood in its present attractive and stable condition and the right to be protected from any decision which would set a pre- cedent for the undoubted future random and uncontrolled subdivisions which would flow therefrom. IN SUMMARY, the City Council dues have discretion and should exercise its discretion to protect the presently completed, stable, and orderly development that exists.in McCARTHY RIDGE. The fact that applicants may meet minimal ordinance requirements is certainly not controlling. McCARTHY RIDGE as it presently exists is certainly developed on maximum standards and those standards should be main- tained and not abandoned. ar ancce-W. Votel �Q- Karl 0. Kassulke Sus n S. Kassalke .,,/ 0 /r4a e � Frank C. Haas Burnet aas y 71 Martian Doheny 7 `- George E..Stevenson s /,L -y- �- Respectfully submitted, ar_ lene innegan`��` Dick Finnegan J "Neil Kveberte Pauline Kveberg Rosemary Stevenson APC Minutes August 24, 1982 ODELL•S ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT The public hearing regarding the application of David R. and Patricia B. Odell for preliminary plat approval of Odell's Addition as part of Lot 2, McCarthy Ridge Addition, was convened by the Chairman. Dan Beeson, attorney, appeared for the applicants, as did Mr. and Mrs. Odell. Mr. Beeson reviewed the history of the proposed lot split and indicated that in the Spring of 1982, the application had been submitted for waiver of plat under the hardship provision, that the Planning Commission recommended disapproval and the Council denied the application, noting no hardship was present and that the applicant was intending to split the lot for financial reasons only. Mr. Beeson stated that with the current application, all minimum requirements of the subdivision ordinance had been met and in his opinion the restrictive covenants covering the subdivision no longer are in effect. Mr. Terry Votel, a neighboring property owner, and other residents appeared in opposition to the application. He indicated that owners of all nine remaining lots opposed the application for reasons stated at the earlier Planning Commission and Council meetings. Also, a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Larry MoNurlin was read objecting to the application. Their concerns were that a precedent would be set because nearly all of the lots in the subdivision are large enough to split and could comply with the minimum requirements. There would be an increase in density, that the purpose of Ordinance 10 is to insure attractive and stable neighborhoods and that the understanding of the property owners was that the lots would not be split under the restrictive covenants. Additional noise and obstruction of view and other reasons were given by the neighboring property owners. Member Mulrooney stated that the property was platted at an earlier time and that the subdivision was approved under the conditions im- posed by the City that the lots would be maintained according to the dimen- sions and sizes submitted at the time of original plat approval. He stated further that if the covenants were included at the time of the original subdivision, that they may have permanent significance and that the people expected them to be a condition of existence of the plat and that no revisions would be made to the lots. The applicants were aware of the covenants when they purchased the property and also, it was noted there was an existing non- conforming garage on the parcel intended to be split off. After extended discussion, Mulrooney moved and Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend denial of the application including those reasons mentioned above, and further, that the owners had indicatd that the only reason for the split of the lot was economic and that no hardship existed; that there are legal and practical reasons to maintain the lots in this configuration that currently exist; that the configuration of the lots and sizes of lots were a part of the original approval of the plat by Eagan; that there was some uncertainty as to whether the private covenants applied to the lots at the present time and that a determination should be made as to their applicability; the integrity of the neighborhood would be jeopardi2ed and that other splits would undoubtedly occur if a precedent were allowed to be set by the City; that the covenants were originally set up as perpetual; and also, that all of the adjoining property owners in the subdivision object to the lot split. All members voted in favor, except Krob who voted no. 2 63 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Nineteen PRELIMINARY PLAT/SHEFFIELD ADDITION C. Gabbert Development, Inc., for a Preliminary Plat, Sheffield Addition -- A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting held on August 24, 1982 to consider the preliminary plat for Sheffield Addition. The appli- cation submitted by Gabbert Development for preliminary plat con- sists of approximately 11.36 acres and contains 44 small single family lots. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of the preliminary plat. For additional information, refer to a copy of the City Planner's report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages (o j through 74 . For a copy of the action that was taken by hie ETPC, refer to a copy of those minutes found on pages 7 through _7e, . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve the preliminary plat of Shef- field Addition. W9 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PREI,IPaNARY PI.4T _ S Z7 M ADDITIIN APPLICANT: GABBY D �� INC LOCATION: PART OF, ERTHE Fk OF THESFi', OF SECTION 26 EXISTING ZONING: R-2 (MI)CED RES DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: PS E �IT DIIt )-DINS Y 3-6 DWELLIM QTS AUGUST 24, 1982 LION SOUTHDATE OF RF.Pn4T. PLANNED DEVEZAPMED7T REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNELE _ V� APPLIcp,TION suamITIED ' CITY PLANNER An application has been s ulanitted requestin g pre Addition, consistin family lots locatedg of approximately 11.36 aha 'min4rY Plat o� on 26. small Sheffield ZONING , u Part of the Eh of the containing 44 small sin -----LAM USE Presently, 6 dwell- the parcel is zoned R-2 Of 0-3 � units acre Parceleng*on1South Planner a density between 3 and use denti guide designates thiunder dwelling units per gross a Per acre. The proposed Bevel lY Residential) a de land rent densityeois h er than whnd 4,65 at i g units Per net ane con With 3.8 dwelling =S approved in the L�cingttniS�thPlannedted n�� �9uide"b t is with_ cPrt. Since Wilderness has ess Run Road �� Road extension. Theme been extended roma ty �d and utilities have been in- woodAddition approval were Platst occur were occurringalongthe WildPlaanterbury For erness Rim which w to Wedg- of this Particular Oakwood ar ted by ba townhouse deveel bald Lagro has prest y in ary small singlegle Platted an Additions n ca north and east oo�ent which is dirlledectly north of the prelimi ly lots and twin home loNorthview Pea Oakwood Helghts, Sienna cor_ TO the south, of Iak at of Hills iOison Heights and Sheffield Additiwhion south of the older Yeast of Wedge mod Addition . residential developments in the Sheffield Addition est lot is bei size in Sheffield is 7,500 square f square feet. The applicantng Proposed as 44 small single family lots. which would be ssset and the largest lot c The small - Sheffield comparable to whtProposing Co Provide narrow single f onta. 19.800 widths in Northtv1ioeew1MeamFbsing an avlot erage am-lY lots rporation did in Nor lows. It is staff's understand -Ing that she�Pew � o 60, 6 S" CITY OF EAGAN SHEFFIELD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT AUGUST 24, 1982 PAGE TWD building plans for each of the lots where the homes constructed would meet setbacks and lot coverage for each of the particular lots. The access to Sheffield Addition will be a looped street tieing into Wilderness Run Road at two locations. 'Ilse westerly access is directly across from the westerly access of Oakwood Heights. The easterly access does not exactly line up with the easterly access of Oakwood Heights. As you can see by the exhibit, if the easterly road in Sheffield is slid further to the east and the easterly access to Oakwood Heights is slid slightly to the west, they will be able to get the two accesses in alignment. The circulation for Sheffield is provided by a looped street. The only concern regarding the looped street is some of the narrow frontages of the lots which appear on the curves in the street; the widths at some of these curves go down to 37' and 32' on the eyebrow. If two lots would be removed, the appli- cant would be able to obtain 50' lot widths throughout the entire subdivision. Through the planned development process, the City of Fagan has allowed smaller than 12,000 square foot single family lots in a planned development. This parti- cular parcel is in the Lexington South.Planned Development, therefore, the zon- ing would allow smaller lot sizes. However, the miniminn lot size has not been determined for a single family lot. Wedgwood Addition directly east has 70-75' lot widths and containsapproximately 9,000-10,000 square feet of area. North - view Meadows which is north and east of this proposed plat has 60' lot widths and lot area between 7,200-7,500 square feet for single family lots. The lot area in Sheffield, as mentioned above, ranges between 7,500 square feet to 19,000 square feet, but the lot width averages 50'. The lot widths for particular sub- divisions have been determined by building plans and to insure the City that single family hones can be constructed on the particular lot and still adhere to the setback requirements in accordance with Ordinance 52. It is staff's under- standing that the developer will provide this information at the public hearing to demonstrate that the house plans will meet the ordinance criteria. If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following oonditions: 1. A development agreement be completed prior to the final plat approval of Sheffield. 2. No Variances for side setbacks or lot coverage be approved unless related to trees or topographic hardship for the particular lot. The easterly access of the looped street be shifted westerly in order to obtain a 4 -way intersection with the access of Oakwood Heights. 4. No direct access should be allowed from Wilderness Run Road. 5. A blanket variance or deviation would be allowed to create the smaller single family and duplex lots in accordance with the planned development. DCR/jach 66 ENGINEERING REPORT SHEEFTFf,n ADDTTION AUGUST 24, 1982 PAGE THREE ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS 6. An 80' right-of-way for Wilderness Run Road shall be dedicated if not previous- ly dedicated under Oakwood Heights preliminary plat. 7. The east intersection at Wilderness Run Road shall be moved further east to facilitate lining up with the private drive for Oakwood Heights.. 8. This development shall accept all assessments levied and assigned to it. 9. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to final plat approval. 10. If installed privately, the utility layout and design shall be as approved by the City. 11. Necessary ponding easements must be dedicated along the easterly border of this development and also for the southwest corner of the development as a part of the final plat. 12. A 10' drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated adjacent to all public right-of-way, private property and centered over all internal lot lines, ex- cept for the proposed storm sewer locations which shall be 20' wide. RM/jack 67 TO: THE ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RU ME, CITY PLANNER FROM: RICHARD M. =I, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER A DATE: AUGUST 18, 1982 RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SHEFFIELD ADDITION The Public works Department has the following convents for consideration of the above -referenced plat. UTILITIES Existing utilities available for this plat are located within Wilderness Run Road and consist of trunk water main and trunk sanitary sewer. Both the trunk water main and trunk sanitary sewer were constructed under Project 241 "Wilder- ness Run Road Trunk Utilities" and accepted in July, 1980. Consequently, the existing sanitary sewer is of sufficient size, capacity and depth to handle this proposed development. Likewise, the existing water main incorporates sufficient pressure and capacity to support this proposed development. The general topography of this area consists of a large knoll with mild slopes falling away from the highpoint, located on Lots 7 and 8 of Block 1. This sloping provides for drainage to the east and Pond LP -61, to the north and Wild- erness Run Road and southwest to Pond LP -50. The proposed grading plan main- tains this general drainage pattern as can be seen from the attached maps. The proposed grading plan provides for filling Lots 1 and 2, 6-11, and 22-27, Block 2 and Lot 14 in Block 1 with material taken from the street right-of-way and ad- jacent areas along Lots 1-11 of Block 1 and Lots 12-20 and 28-30, Block 2. This grading will result in two low points in the proposed street which will require construction of a small amount of storm sewer to remove the run off collected at those points. Neither of these instances would pose any problems. EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY Utility easements between Lots 2 and 3 and Lots 26 and 27 of Block 2 would be required for the proposed storm sewer. The water main and sanitary sewer can be constructed within the dedicated street right-of-way, thus no additional ease- ments would be required. Furthermore, a condition of this plat should include dedicating either 40' or 80' of Wilderness Run Road for street and utility pur- poses depending upon the amount of right-of-way dedicated by the Oakwood Heights development. Ingress and egress will be provided for this development by means of a looped street connecting to Wilderness Run Road. One concern that arises here is that the easterly intersection at Wilderness Run Road is offset approximately 100' westerly of the proposed intersection of the private drive for the Oakwood Heights development. It would be desirable for these intersections to be direct- ly across from one another. This could probably be best acaamplished by shifting the easterly street in this development further east, and at the same time, shift 6�S Engineering Report - Sheffield Addition August 24, 1982 Page two the easterly street of the Oakwood Heights development further west so that the end result is that both streets line up across frau each other. Since this proposed street is not a collector street, no bike trails or sidewalks will be required. In addition, no sidewalk or bike trail will be required along Wilderness Run Road for the reason that a bike trail will be Constructed on the north side of Wilderness Run Road with the Oakwood Heights development. As a condition of. this preliminary plat approval, this development shall accept any assessments levied and assigned to it. I will be available to discuss any aspect of this report with the Planning Com- mission at their meeting on August 24, 1982. Respectfully submitted, Richard M. Hefti, E. Assistant City Engineer Mi/jack RE JP -19 J -p 0702 2 JP -30 0740 ezoe } Bezo j...Bz t tr. J '3( a., �J''' A JP -20 •tz L Li1383x5.°o j LS,17J� i po I a JP -2 oil i.o •^iI \ lLri 852 B90A-8163e JP -216 82A 84J4e P-3 00 ' { J-. JP i!6P1-A77q:. 1i PATRICK __.,111L`(.e�� ',f •II _82 1._0 B/9J3 AGAt..JY° - 2A , 8170. JP -29 •26 25.3 P 14 �,i�//•� •\' 0 804.D 940. y � �_:` 11 B/B.0 �.a• -,J J's4 696.0 JYusITDK 5116tlOwo r _ 890.8 855.0 J956.0 '^ A 968.0 / 9ADDcl hv A1LJE, L•Q1 .` ISI HORN ``�. 9730 o Z - J -ypc7 }.-•-'-i;F - LP -40 r _ I__. -y...-. ? 977.0 [G -�T - vcr,-- LP-4W..'i' 898.0-_..-.-. aggP' _ r I . eL/N 6840901.0; BB --_S._ .._ �9TB.0 r'. LP -5 2 „l LP-@4re�0D0. • LP -52 LP -46 r %� - :•�� �y.tte 900.0 879.2 LP -33 . `a. P=39:'"L�'� 850.0x^' LP=3I� J 8955�y�.1 v 666.2 9070S. ] R' LP -30 stra' i1 90910.V`�47 9/60 914.0 \3 e�� r / * �(�€P-51 g a• I-�LP-34 'f01 -�� 906.0 �.rn\ Ct l�I'-868.0 11%- I `ra 879.0 i ✓/'-�. 907,0 �u C ,� xs IN J BBJO LP -49 L �V \r✓1 nln `:x52 ir!FBTB.O �. LP -3T z4- \ 9160 -_ i� -1._-{^-/•, L5: 261 ?_:ff 8628 36 ``886__3.0 `�'• I I¢% ., e 8640 l_., 1.06 . �g 1 �J L 61 3 LP -435 / 9/30 O 8730 BB25 7 + 4 J,,I 1 26 �4'"�1 KOTA 926.0 / v.• a /�_ COUNTY 9025 91. y A. 4. U•�, PARK 6� -90400 LP -20 LP -27 ,__.883.22_. __ _ ;L o26,. iF 9160 .. 9/7! ' EXCEPTION 886.0 CZ? IILY-23ALUDED Lis 13 �J 9//.3 ._ -` 9204 LP -19 9120 900.2 K/L-3.0 L 22 23 out., f 92-f& _1q ' LP -15\ LP - 928.7 -/9040 I �� 926P 231 r I \ � ` '01 -, ROyEMOiJN ' LP -I6 !�©`928.3 / `\ 71` 911.0 �`JVot" t LAYOUT Ear .DDD 1. a 70 1/2 PILE IYILE Sonestm.Rosene•AnAerlik 6 Associates Consulting Engineers St Paul • Minnesota el.., q, ate 3/ To S�{E�a✓IELD ��1� =ri Lexington South �� 1 _ a�'y i•' 1'WII •rln:,f:nu •'•. lig y�-_ •NVuo .• ..1..... ....'..� 197 •19 :.�-xr••I:a �•i �.:. �-.:y..-_�.I a 80 Ilir ,�^,'�,�. a :�/r 14.��%`-�_� •il'•. 1�.1,'I � :� . .• � ;;',y'�:, ,,. at.� i 2'2A 1980.1903 Al : 1FbR1, I i 3 1903. 1905 - Py.,p' �,%�;•, 4 1985-1900 [ city. wi'j r SChOa R4`I R2 f- 'R2 7';. C$C .�6ts'rj�1'�l�Ju 7. Land Use Plan R7 .d. (0.2un,MQ R2 ml..naf7-OwvK) R7 m1a.r.b(0-12,nAW4 R4 mwllyb (12'un4&Q Le 11d. b... ae wM1w.. CSC a M-shmu c tr •w hIk WV Imll sil, ye..Irdl h1YN ..;: -,e_ ;Ic� � .-,� '•� I ,1d ,/• = .rte. . .oM 7 9� ✓ 1 Irl?tu `f ti '. a+u. �� Wa� T(y�i ' u •fir' ' f ► ',L t y - �•�.. ., ,,i !'j.'T tr,, ... , '`•�i..lr1. II "CIS F �� 1'x:11 =�C ty����;. } �' e � ,. � t�.E•�J . `� 1 �(•��.'rz'� 't� ��'�, ���,�;.:_,j'1��� -,fit/.,:t; ,,I... :; 1 LX, t! h.v ( J L W l)&F-v4boD QA.K!�Loo b woo 4. OUTLOT O N.POND 4 d Y a '9041) 2 al 501�b I A 30 nia!60 4 f 1 OUTLOT A "oft . If. Z!w; 6.81 6 Al a . . . . . . . POND_ 2 5 G .'LAX EWOOD H ILLS 2 • — AtNUUTL i t�- ll '// .. / ., , +wlflC[l/ 'I • ` Ind- •�, , . � +sxi en� pie � r� r Ind �COMMERCIAL r 7. ••+/i,'p�i —' PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - � .- -,' y > . J�r....r ...r � �I'•:. I rff iT lnd, I Ind ..».-...�,.-'- '�- k• __ � __ .tom,• vii � _�• '.L.� -_ .-•'•rt.l lh- P.:� R-III-� r-��e�e-r.,.'�I� •-� ueR-11 (_'! - \ -�! Ind •�. .",G R-11 e G . r :Rav '."_ Ind ! ,..� pi In ,�—RIII p _ NB • LB-' ( R -II - -• •R -II CSC-. R•10d .,q nd. p _� n RII �R�%C"�.''-O'F Cl.. 12 -II'— — ' la,u r ^' �e•� •' - �• _ is '_ O I, /� � —!- R•II --P RIII �.�,,; - .}. ✓ �. R -I _ w RU ,,. _ Ind R RII�v O _ RII .:.III - •.._.. I `•,;..,G'CRY .: ��-�' 14 P HALL R41 - J R -I R-11. ! RD L_ N F'-': RII 134 � I_- rsy 1P © �• I IV: -y ...: !s' �. R-111_ R -I\, -j•-- R -III R -II R -II •; { :j,lGy -� M u JLeCtT j :l R-111 RB , R -III '.:::,moi. �a-I;.i'�.M11, i-- - ••----I'- I R RIII R•1•`� -. R -III • - r�,`. R -III ....- -- RII a CT • R -II • �• . P - _ - R II R-11 R-IIp"" ..•r'•r i'�0 '. 1 - ® R -II' .c� B R0' `.:. i CSC R l ,y ,' ✓:<L LB ,R -I }�IIIII R - R' .,1 R -I �) R-1 i P GbLFaPnAA gR OP•,. R -II. itil! Q�'b Pene R.p A 12� ''✓�t R_I ; R-11 r7 P .. No R-11- - AROSEMOUNr •� V4LLE7 I ,. J (�, ..,..� .l r 73 AD T 10 PK Ln P K A .Rt 4 C.1 PF PF itA II Lu PD R -i .74-1 0 s u bi e,c t. Parce 0 A �6, PK R-1 APC Minutes August 24, 1982 SHEFFIELD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT The hearing regarding the application of Gabbert Development, Inc. for preliminary plat approval of Sheffield Addition in Lexington South Planned Development, north of Cliff Road, adjoining Wilderness Run Road, was opened by the Chairman. Wally Gabbert appeared for the applicant and noted that 11.36 acres were included containing 44 small single family lots. The parcel is currently zoned R-2 (Mixed Residential) with a density between 3 and 6 dwelling units per acre. The Land Use Guide designates parcel R-1 (Single Family Residential) with a density of 0 to 3 dwelling units per acre. The proposed development contains 3.8 dwelling units per gross acre and 4.65 dwelling units per net acre. Mr. Gabbert indicated the consumer prefers single family and that the lots generally are 50 feet in width at the front lot line except four larger lots. It was noted also that the eyebrow and the lots on the curve would be less than 50 feet at the street line. He displayed drawings of four proposed homes to be constructed on the lots and noted that certain lots could accommodate 45 foot frontages with the homes proposed. A number of neighboring residents from Lakewood Hills Addition appeared and had strong concerns about the pond to the north of their property and the possi- bility of development causing additional drainage with the resulting assess- ments to the Lakewood Hills owners. Mr. Colbert explained the City's pond and storm drainage policy and method of assessments for storm sewer purposes. Pam Lane stated she was concerned about lot widths and the impact of a greater number of people on schools, streets, etc. Mr. Gabbert stated the prices would be in the $60,000.00 range. He also compared lot widths and gross square footage in other subdivisions with smaller than minimum lot size re- quirements. All except four lots would contain about 7,500 square feet. Mr. Colbert was concerned about the 20 foot driveway widths in the eyebrow and only 10 feet between driveways, which would not be sufficient snow storage area. Mr. Krob stated he did not favor 50 foot width lots and 32 feet widths at the eyebrows. Mr. Gabbert indicated that it would be possible to narrow the width of certain lots to 45 feet and increase the widths adjoining the eyebrow. He also stated that he would agree to widen the access street with Oakwood Heights Addition. Member McCrea recommended reducing the lots to provide minimum 50 foot lot widths, including those adjoining the eyebrow. It was also recommended that staff study the minimum width of lots and minimum lot sizes with further review by the Planning Commission. It was noted that there was park land on the west and pond on the east. Krob then moved, McCrea seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application, subject to the following: 1. Reduction of the number of lots in the subdivision to provide mini- mum 50 foot lot widths at the street line on all lots. 2. A development agreement shall be executed prior to the final plat approval of Sheffield Addition. 3. No variances for side setbacks or lot coverage shall be approved unless related to trees or topographic hardship for the particular lot as determined by the City. 3 7S APC Minutes August 24, 1982 4. The easterly access of the looped street shall be shifted westerly in order to obtain a 4 -way intersection with the access of Oakwood Heights. 5. No direct access shall be allowed from Wilderness Run Road. 6. A blanket variance or deviation would be allowed to create the smaller single family lots in accordance with the planned development. 7. An 80 foot right-of-way for Wilderness Run Road shall be dedicated if not previously dedicated under Oakwood Heights preliminary plat. 8. The east intersection at Wilderness Run Road shall be relocated to provide proper allignment or separation with the private drive for Oakwood Heights. 9. This development shall accept all standard City assessments levied and assigned to it. 10. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to final plat approval. 11. If installed privately, the utility layout and design shall be as approved by the City. 12. Necessary ponding easements must be dedicatd along the easterly border of this development and also for the southwest corner of the develop- ment as a part of the final plat. 13. A 10 foot drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated adjacent to all public rights-of-way, private property and centered over all internal lot lines, except for the proposed storm sewer locations which shall be 20 feet wide. All voted in favor except Turnham who voted no. 76 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Twenty MUNICIPAL FINANCE BOND/SENIOR. CITIZEN HOUSING PROJECT D. Municipal Finance Bond for Joint Venture Senior Housing Project -- The Dakota County HRA has approached the City of Mendota Heights for assistance in providing a senior citizen condominium housing project. The City of Mendota Heights has met on several occasions with the Wilder Foundation in an effort to research various alterna- tives to doing a housing project for persons over the age of 55 within that community. One of the major concerns expressed by both the Wilder Foundation and City of Mendota Heights is a guaran- tee of occupancy if a condominium development was approved and constructed. Need for this type of housing is not issue. The problem lies with the ability to sell existing single family house- holds that are currently owned by senior citizens who would like to purchase a unit in a senior citizen condominium housing project. The HRA has become involved with the Wilder Foundation and the City of Mendota Heights to consider and propose a single family mortgage revenue bond program that would make lower interest mort- gage money available for home buyers seeking to purchase the senior citizens' homes. Since there are senior citizens in the Cities of Eagan and West St. Paul that could benefit by moving into a senior citizen condominium project in Mendota Heights, a single family mortgage revenue bond program can be developed and sold by the HRA and the lower interest rate mortgage monies would be available for all three (3) communities. The first step was for the City of Mendota Heights to consider and approve the program, which they did at their last regular City Council meeting on Septem- ber 7. This program was then presented by the HRA to the West St. Paul City Council and unanimously approved at their meeting on September 13, 1982. The program is being presented to the City of Eagan for consideration at this meeting. For more detailed background information, the City Administrator requested that the executive director of the HRA provide a memorandum that discusses the program, a copy of which is enclosed on pages -7g through Also, Ms. Schultz will be present at the meeting to present any further detail and/or answer questions that the City Council may have. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the adoption of an ordinance that would authorize the Dakota County HRA to exercise in behalf of the City of Eagan the powers conferred by Minnesota statute relating to planning and implementation of a single family mortgage revenue bond housing program. 77 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF DAKOTA COUNTY MEMORANDUM TO: Eagan Mayor and Council �1 FROM: Carol Schultz, Executive Director l 14) SUBJECT: SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND PROGRAM DATE: September 14, 1982 2496- 145th STREET WEST ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA 55068 612-423-4800 A few weeks ago, the Dakota County HRA was approached by the city of Mendota Heights for assistance in providing senior citizen condominium housing in their community. The city had earlier requested that the Wilder Foundation research the various alternatives to doing housing of this sort, and the Foundation had determined that an older adult (age 55 and over) condominium development of 100-120 units in Mendota Heights would be feasible. A major concern, however, is that senior citizen households wishing to purchase a condominium will likely need to sell their present home and that high interest rates and lack of mortgage money available have greatly reduced the number of qualified homebuyers. This has resulted in home sales being sluggish which would hence make it difficult for seniors who wanted to buy a condominium to sell their present homes. The Wilder Foundation also has d not come exclusively from Mendot West St. Paul and Eagan may also but would face the same problems Therefore, the Dakota County HRA Mortgage Revenue Band Program to available for homebuyers wishing =_termined that the market for the condos will 3 Heights. Seniors from the adjacent cities of be interested in the condominium development, in trying to sell their present homes. was requested to put together a Single Family make lower interest rate mortgage money to purchase the seniors' present homes. On August 25, 1982 a meeting of staff from the cities of Mendota Heights, West St. Paul, and Eagan, along with representatives from the Dakota County HRA, the Wilder Foundation, bond counsel (Holmes & Graven), and bond underwriter (Miller & Schroeder) met to discuss the concept, subject to formal approval being granted by the Mendota Heights City Council. 7$ "AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" On September 7, 1982, the Mendota Heights City Council granted approval of the program. The Dakota County HRA is now formally appearing before you to request approval of an ordinance allowing the Dakota County HRA to issue single family morgage revenue bonds in the name of the Dakota County HRA for use in the City of Eagan. (We appeared before the West Saint Paul City Council on September 13, 1982 for the same action.) According to federal tax law, 100% of the proceeds of tax-exempt mortgage reve- nue bonds must be for homebuyers whose incomes do not exceed the median income for the Twin Cities of $31,460. Additionally, 90% of the proceeds must be loaned to first-time homebuyers. The federal tax law also restrict the amount of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds which may be issued in each state. In Minnesota, the ceiling is set at $200 million, most of which is used by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for various programs state-wide and by the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Duluth who receive special set -asides. Therefore, the remaining funds available within this ceiling total only $27 million. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency will hold a special competition for the remaining funds on January 2, 1983. Since interest among various Minnesota cities usually exceeds the amount of funds available, the Minnesota State Housing Finance Agency has set review and ranking criteria which will give preference to applicants who are able to demonstrate that mortgage revenue funds will be used predominantly by homebuyers of moderate income (i.e., those whose incomes do not exceed $25,168). Therefore, in order to be competitive with other cities applications for these funds, the City of Mendota Heights has approved the Dakota County HRA creating a tax -increment district around the con- dominium development, the proceeds of which (approximately $90,000 per year) would be used to further reduce the interest rate for first-time homebuyers to a rate affordable by households with incomes not exceeding $25,168. This will help make the application very competitive. Also, 24% of the bond issue is needed in up -front "seed money", which has made it impossible for the Dakota County HRA to consider this type of bond issue in the past. In this case, however, the Wilder Foundation is willing to provide these funds. An additional federal requirement on tax-exempt bond issues of this type is that the purchase price of an existing home may not exceed $75,600 (the limit is higher for a newly constructed home). In order for a bond issue of this type to be economically feasible, it must be of a size of $6 to $10 million dollars. Since Mendota Heights would not have sufficient numbers of modest -cost proper- ties in its housing stock to utilize the total amount of funds, (and since it is expected that some seniors in the neighboring communities of Eagan and West St. Paul would also be interested in the older adult condominium development) the cities of Eagan and West St. Paul are being invited to participate in the program. Since more than one community is needed, it becomes necessary for Dakota HRA to participate on behalf of each city and submit the application to the State as one package. Therefore the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds (and the tax increment district, in Mendota Heights) would be in the name of Dakota County HRA, with specific approval and controls set by the participating cities. If Eagan agrees to participate, the ordinance attached to this memo must be approved Tuesday evening. As can be seen by the attached flow chart, the time schedule for meeting the various legal requirements is tight. These dates, however, may be changed slightly, but everything must be ready for submission to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency by January 2, 1983. It should also be mentioned that not all of the bond proceeds will be needed by by purchasers of seniors' homes who would be purchasing a condominium in the pro- posed Wilder development. Therefore, this rogram would also make lower - interest mortgaoe funds available to of er first Tge ome uvers in t e as we seiier. In summary, then, the major goal of the proposed program is to provide a con- dominium development in Mendota Heights for older adults 55 years of age and over and to allow moderate to middle income families who have not been able to purchase a home an opportunity to become homeowners in Mendota Heights, West St. Paul and Eagan. (Today's interest rates preclude over 88% of the area's poten- tial first-time homebuyers from even purchasing a modest home of $60,000.) In addition, households with incomes at or below $25,168 served by this program will count towards meeting each city's low and moderate housing goals in their respective Comprehensive Plans. Finally, Eagan and West St. Paul will also receive benefit from the tax increment generated by the condominium development even though the tax increment district will exist within the boundaries of the city of Mendota Heights. I will be present at your meeting Tuesday night along with a representative from our bond counsel to answer any questions you may have on an admittedly complex, but creative, proposal. I do believe Eagan is in a unique position to benefit greatly from this proposal. Attachments 79 SAMPLE Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE DAKOTA COUNTY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO EXERCISE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF , THE POWERS CONFERRED BY MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 462C.01 to 462C.08, RELATING TO PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND HOUSING PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") was created pursuant to Laws of Minnesota 1971, Chapter 333, as amended by Laws of Minnesota 1973, Chapter 534 (the "Enabling Statute"), and authorized pursuant thereto to exercise the powers of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462:411 to 462.711, as amended (the "Municipa�t"), wit the territorial boundaries of the County;,and WHEREAS, the Legislature has enacted Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Municipal Housing Finance Act") to regu ate the planning and implementation of single family housing programs and has provided for the financing of such programs pursuant to its terms only; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Housing Finance Act, a city is authorized to make or purchase mortgage loans to finance the acquisition of single family housing and to issue revenue bonds to provide funds therefor, such bonds to be issued after adoption of a housing plan and program and approval thereof; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Housing Finance Act, a city is authorized to delegate its powers pursuant thereto to the housing and redevelopment authority acting within the City; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF Section 1. The HRA is hereby authorized to exercise on behalf of the City of (the "City"), the powers conferred by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462C.0 to 462.08, including the power to issue and sell single fami y housing revenue bonds. Section 2. The HRA shall, upon request of the City Council, make periodic status reports to the City Council regarding the progress of the housing program and bond issue undertaken pursuant to the power conferred hereby. Section 3. The HRA shall submit the Housing Plan and Program for the City prepared by the HRA to the City Council for its approval, prior to submission of said Plan and Program to the Metropolitan Council and Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, respectively. 1 Y[ ACTIONS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW FOR SINGLE-FAMILY REVENUE BOND PROPOSALS: September 21, 1982 November 4, 1982 November 4, 1982 December 7, 1982 January 2, 1983 January 20, 1982 (.. tentative (tentative) Pub is hearing. .t. City ordinance City adopts C ty Counci Housing Plan and Minnesota Hous - delegates housin_ Housing Plan, ity ounce sets ` Program submit- ing Finance bond authority t r^ public hearing hearing and ted to Minnesota Agency allocates HRA and at east Metropolitan date for Housing at east adopts Housing Housing Finance Housing Bond qqAA Eagan Timetable 1983 Before December 31, 1983 HRAP asses Hous - 0c` ing Bond saleHousing Revenue Resolution. Bond Llosing. NOTES: 1. Between September and December, cities of Mendota Heights and West St. Paul follow same sequence of events, but at specific dates coinciding with their City Council meeting dates. 2. Dakota County HRA does preparation of Housing Plan and Housing Program for the cities. (Although Housing Plans may vary, Housing Program will be the same for each participating city.) 3. Only the City of Mendota Heights and HRA will be involved with Tax Increment Financing Program Process. ACTIONS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW FOR SINGLE-FAMILY REVENUE BOND PROPOSALS: September 21, 1982 November 4, 1982 November 4, 1982 December 7, 1982 January 2, 1983 January 20, 1982 tentative (tentative) Pub is hearing. City ordinance City adopts C ty Counci Housing Plan and Minnesota Hous - delegates housin_ Housing Plan, ity ounce sets holds public Program submit- ing Finance bond authority t Subnits to public hearing hearing and ted to Minnesota Agency allocates HRA and at east Metropolitan date for Housing at east adopts Housing Housing Finance Housing Bond authorizes use of 30 days Council for LTS02ram. 15 days Pro ram. Agency. Authorit . revenue bonds. from review and from Sets public published comment. published hearing date for notice) (Met. Council ha notice) Housing Plan. 45 -days for 1983 Before December 31, 1983 HRAP asses Hous - 0c` ing Bond saleHousing Revenue Resolution. Bond Llosing. NOTES: 1. Between September and December, cities of Mendota Heights and West St. Paul follow same sequence of events, but at specific dates coinciding with their City Council meeting dates. 2. Dakota County HRA does preparation of Housing Plan and Housing Program for the cities. (Although Housing Plans may vary, Housing Program will be the same for each participating city.) 3. Only the City of Mendota Heights and HRA will be involved with Tax Increment Financing Program Process. STANLEY E. KEHL Attorney at Law August 24, 1982 Mr. Jack Klepp AHW Corporation 1130 Northwestern National Bank Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Dear Jack: HOLMES & GRAVEN CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 35402 Telephone 6121338-1177 You have asked that I prepare a description of a senior citizen/first-time home buyer program for the City of Mendota Heights and surrounding cities for presentation to the City of Mendota Heights. In developing the specifics of the program described below, I have researched the various legal issues involved and have concluded that the program is legally permissable. Program Objective The goals of the program are (1) to provide 100-120 units of condominium type housing in the City of Mendota Heights for senior citizens living in Mendota Heights or surrounding communities and (2) to assist the purchasers of the senior citizens single family houses and other home purchasers. Senior Citizen Condominium Project The proposal is to construct a 100-120 unit condominium project on land located in Mendota Heights. The project will be composed of 1 and 2 bedroom units with an average sale price of $75,000. The project will be designed for occupancy by senior citizens. The developer would secure private construction financing and the purchasers of the units will, to the extent needed, secure private financing. Housing Bond Program The Dakota County HRA (the "HRA") would issue housing revenue bonds in an amount between $6,000,000 and $10,000,000 on behalf of the cities which wish to participate in the program. The proceeds of'the bonds would be loaned to the purchasers of housing units within the participating cities. There are several limitations imposed by state and federal laws on the implementation of this program. The limitations are as follows: (1) Income of purchasers must be less then $31,460 unless the home is in a targeted area. Adjustments to family income are allowed for dependents. (2) The purchase price of the existing house units may not exceed $75,600. l' Mr. Jack Klepp August 24, 1982 Page 2 (3) At least 90% of the loan amount must be loaned to first-time home buyers. In order for the HRA to issue the bonds, the following events must occur: (1) Each city must adopt a housing plan which has been reviewed by the Metropolitan Council. Thirty days published notice of a public hearing on the plan must be provided. (2) Each city must adopt a housing program for the housing bond issue. (3) The HRA must submit the housing program to the State Housing Finance Agency (the "Agency") on behalf of the cities on or before January 2, 1983. (4) The Agency must allocate a portion of Minnesota's housing mortgage bond ceiling for the program. Loans made under the program would be affordable to purchasers with different incomes depending upon the interest rate and the sale price of the house. The following chart shows the income necessary to purchase different priced housing units at various interest rates: Table I Income Necessary to Purchase Housing Unit Sale Price Assumed $60,000 $75;600 $83,000 Interest Rate 11% $21,563 $279163 $29,818 12% $232127 $299163 $32,000 13% $24,764 $31,163 $34,218 Interest Reduction Program As can be seen from the table above, the housing revenue bonds alone may not reduce interest rates adequately to allow low and moderate income families to purchase moderate priced houses. To solve this problem the HRA could establish a tax increment district which would include the senior citizen project and the HRA could also establish an interest reduction program to assist the first-time home buyer who purchase the houses sold by the senior citizens. The tax increment which would be generated by the senior citizen condominium and which is estimated to be $90,000 per year, would be used to reduce the interest on the loans for the first-time home buyers. The assistance can be provided either as a fixed amount for up to 25 years or as a declining amount each year. The following table shows the number of buyers which can be assisted at various income levels, purchase prices, and interest rates. In the tables below 80% of program income equals $25,168, 90% of program income equals $28,314 and the maximum program income equals $31,460 as stated above. no Air. Jack Klepp August 24, 1982 Page 3 Table H Number of Purchasers Assisted Assuming 11% Interest Rate* % of Program Income 80% , 90% Maximum Sale Price 60,000 -- -- -- $75,600 136 -- $83,000 58 182 -- Table III Number of Purchasers Assisted Assuming 12% Interest Rate* % of Program Income 80% 90% Maximum Sale Price $60,000 -- -- $75,600 68 326 -- $83,000 39 74 500 Table IV Number of Purchasers Assisted Assuming 13% Interest Rate* % of Program Income 80% 90% Maximum Sale Price 60,000 -- -- -- $75,600 45 96 -- $83,000 30 46 98 * Each table shows the number of purchasers assisted if all of the assistance was provided to one income group for one sale price housing unit. If the HRA wanted to write down the interest rates on a graduated payment basis where the payments would increase over each of the first three to five years so that at the end of the three to five years there would be no assistance, the HRA could help more people. The HRA would need to sell a tax increment bond and use the bond proceeds to write down the interest rates. The tax increment generated from the proejet would then be used to pay off the tax increment bonds. A plus for the HRA is that when each purchaser who received interest reduction assistance sells his or her house the HRA is entitled to receive a position of the appreciation in the house. The amount of the HRA's share is up to the HRA to determine at the time the assistance is provided. $4 ,'0: Mr. Jack Klepp August 24, 1982 Page 4 With these various parts of an overall program, the City, the Dakota County HRA and a developer should be able to put together a successful senior citizen first-time home buyer program. If you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, 'Stanley Y SEK:mj VS Table #1 Older Adults in Program Communities Community Population over 55 years of age 1970 1 1980 % change Population over 65 years of age 1970 1980 % change Mendota Heights 681 1145 +112% 285 511 79% Eagan 457 1184 +159% 180 442 *146% West St. Paul 3400 5260 +55% 1633 2933 -x8096 1Based on data from the 1970 and 1980 U.S. Census 96 Table #2 Percentage of Population over 55 and 65 years of age )mmunity 1970 of % of population population over over 55 65 1980 % of % of population population over over 55 65 % change in group between 1970-1980 as a % of population 55 65 '•Iendota Heights 1101 4.6% 19.8% 7% +8.8% +2.40.1 =agan 4.4;5 1.7% 5.7% 2.1% +1.3% +.4% :lest St. Paul 18.111 8.7% 28.4% 15.8% +10.3% +7.1% 1Based on data from the 1970 and 1980 U.S. census. Median value for owner occupied non -condominium housing units as of April 1980. Mendota Heights $87,700 Eagan $70,900 West St. Paul $62,100 47 Table #3 Value of Owner Occupied Non -Condominium Housing Units Community Dollar value of homes # of units in range 'endota Heights 1 -------------- ------------------------ agan Less than 10,000 2 -------------- ------------------------ est St. Paul 0 'endota Heights 0 -------------- ------------------------ agan 10,000 to 14,999 4 -------------- ------------------------ 'est St. Paul 5 'endota Heights 2 -------------- ------------------------ .agan 15,000 to 19,999 1 -------------- ------------------------ !est St. Paul 37 (endota Heights 2 -------------- :agan 20,000 ------------------------ to 24,999 6 -------------- :est St. Paul ------------------------ 62 lendota Heights 6 -------------- :agan 25,000 ------------------------ to 29,999 7 -------------- !est St. Paul ------------------------ 100 lendota Heights 19 --------------- :agan 30,000 ------------------------ to 34,999 15 --------------- lest St. Paul ------------------------ 157 lendota Heights 19 --------------- ------------------------ .agan 35,000 to 39,999 32 --------------- ------------------------ lest St. Paul 177 lendota 87 --------------- ------------------------ :agan 40,000 to 49,999 154 --------------- ------------------------ ;est St. Paul 620 W r� ' endota Heights -------------- agan -------------- est St. Paul 50,000 to 79,999 -2- 650 --------------------------- 2523 --------------------------- 1902 endota Heights 362 -------------- --------------------------- agan 80,000 to 99,999 640 -------------- --------------------------- est St. Paul 493 endota Heigh�s 452 . --------•------ --------------------------- 3gan 100,000 to 149,999 498 -------------- --------------------------- est St. Paul 249 andota Heights 251 -------------- --------------------------- 3gan 150,000 or more 79 -------------- --------------------------- s t St. Paul 50 87 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING GENERAL HOUSING PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the ,Mendota Heights City Council will meet in the City Hall at p.m., October 19, 1982, and conduct a public hearing pursuant to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.01, et sec., as it relates to adoption of a General Housing Plan. This plan will describe the housing needs of the City and will describe a plan to meet said needs and other matters required by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C. Persons desiring to be heard on the proposed plan may address the Council. Further information regarding the plan will be available at the office of the City Manager after October 11, 1982. City Clerk WE Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Twenty -One IK FINANCING TRANSFER FROM FEDERAL LAND COMPANY TO BASIC PROPERTIES E. IR Financing Transfer from Federal Land Company to Basic Pro- perties for Yankee Office Building IV -- A preliminary resolution for industrial revenue financing in the amount of $1,537,000 was approved at the July 6, 1982 City Council meeting for Federal Land Company to construct Yankee Square Office Buildings III and IV. As the City Council recalls, Yankee Square Office Building III is a 5,000 square foot building and Yankee Office Building IV is a 24,300 square foot office building. Since that meeting, Federal Land Company has negotiated with Basic Properties, a Minnesota partnership who are interested in purchasing the building. Basic Properties would like to continue pursuing commercial development revenue bonds in the amount of $1,192,000 for Yankee Square Office Building IV. The City Administrator raised some concerns: Will a new application and public hearing be required? 2. Financial information would be required on the new owners of Basic Properties. The approving attorney is Briggs & Morgan and the City Administrator has spoken several times with Michael Jeronimus regarding the ques- tion of a new public hearing. Apparently, there is no requirement that the City go through a new public hearing, realizing that the public hearing is basically whether the City should issue industrial revenue bond financing for an office building. The issue is not who the owner of the office building is for public hearing purposes. Who the owner is of the building does become an issue when it in- volves the financial background of the applicant; and, therefore, the City Administrator did request financial information on the applicants in addition a review and letter from Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. A copy of the financial information on the new owners is enclosed without a page number in your packets. A letter from Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc., is expected to arrive prior to the meeting on Tuesday. For additional information that explains the transaction, refer to a letter that was requested from Mr. Jeronimus by the City Administrator on pages 9 Z through ouncAgain, this type of a transaction is a first�r the City il, and if there are any questions or concerns that anyone has, please contact the City Administrator and additional research will be provided prior to the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny a trans- fer of the industrial revenue financing preliminary resolution approval from Federal Land Company to Basic Properties for the Yankee Square Office IV project. C..L.. W. B.... LAW OFFICES 13 RIGGS AND MORDANT PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIA'f1ON 2e00 FIRST NATIONAL DANK BUILDING SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Sf,101 2452 IDS CENTER MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55402 (612) 291-1215 September 15, 1982 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 OF COVN.CL R,.. E. K. S.U.L H. M.... F.LN. N. G.s REPLY TO Minneapolis Re: City of Eagan - $1,192,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Basic Properties Project) Dear Mr. Hedges: We have been advised by Basic Properties, a Minnesota partner- ship, that it has been negotiating with Federal Land Company to assume the developmental responsibilities for a portion of a Federal Land Company project which the City approved for industrial revenue bond financing in the amount of $1,537,000 by a preliminary resolu- tion adopted July 6, 1982 (the "Preliminary Resolution"). As you will recall, the Federal Land Company project consisted of the acquisition and construction in the City of two office buildings, one of approximately 24,300 square feet, and the other approximately 5,000 square feet. Basic Properties would like to develop the 24,300 square foot office building. Federal Land Company has advised that it wishes to terminate its request for industrial development revenue financing for the 5,000 square foot office building. To secure financing for the 24,300 square foot building, Basic Properties hopes to assume the position of Federal Land Company under the Preliminary Resolution as the approved party for industrial development revenue bond financing in the amount of $1,192,000, the 9Z BRIGGS AND MORGAN Mr. Thomas L. Hedges Page Two September 15, 1982 cost of the 24,300 square foot office building. If the City agrees that Basic Properties may assume the position of Federal Land Company as the approved party for industrial development bond financing of $1,192,000, it will be necessary to adopt a resolu- tion confirming its approval. Our office will submit a resolution which we feel accomplishes this objective. Inasmuch as the 24,300 square foot office building was a portion of the project originally approved by the City after a public hearing duly held on July 6, 1982, a new preliminary hearing will not be necessary. If you have any questions or comments concerning this proposal please contact me. Very truly yours, Michael H. Jeronimus MHJ/slt cc: Federal Land Company ATTN: Martin Colon Yankee Square Office III, Suite 202 3460 Washington Drive Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Basic Properties ATTN: Roy Utne 4521 Highway 7 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 73 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Twenty -Two EXTENSION OF TIME - LEXINGTON PLACE F. Extension of Time for Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place - The City has received a letter from Mr. Robert Carlson, representing Orrin Thompson Homes, requesting a one year extension on the pre- liminary plat approval for Lexington Place. A copy of that letter is enclosed on page C/ S for your review. The City has granted numerous extensionsof preliminary plats for the same reason Mr. Carlson is requesting an extension for Lexington Place. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny an extension for the preliminary plat of Lexington Place. y4 OrrinThompson Homes A Division of U.S. Home Corporation 1712 HOPKINS CROSSROAD MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55343 544-7333 September 13, 1982 City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minn, 55122 Attn: Mr. Tom Hedges, City Administrator Dear Tom: Our Lexington Place plat received preliminary plat approval on April 20th of this year and to comply with ordinance, should be final plat approved on October 20, 1982. We respectfully request a one year extension until October 20, 1983 of final plat approval because of the severely depressed housing market. If at all possible, please place this extension request on the September 21st Council agenda. Sincerely, R. M. Carlson Division Vice President ORRIN THOMPSON HOMES, a Division of RMC:ps U. S. Home Corporation 9S V .. Y. _ Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Pape Twenty -Three JOINT BURNSVILLE/EAGAN CABLE COMMISSION UPDATE A. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable TV Commission Update -- The last rc�,.lar meeting of the Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable TV Commission held on September 9, 1982 in the City of Eagan. The basic discus- sion was on the type of pricing schedule the commission wanted to include as a part of the RFP. A decision was not made at that meeting; however, a great deal of discussion regarding basic fee vs. a tiered fee schedule was discussed by all commission members. It is hopeful that the final decisions regarding the RFP can be made at the next meeting scheduled for September 23 and the com- mission can proceed with the request for proposal as soon as possi- ble. City Councilmember Smith and/or City Administrator Hedges will provide an update of the Joint Commission meeting. s/Thomas L. Hedges CityACministrator En '0Y ....spa r AGENDA REGULAR MEETING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL. EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 21, 1982 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:33 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. 6:35 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS 3 A. Fire Department a C. Park Department A.15 B. Police Department p 3 D. l Public Works Department IV. 6:55 - CONSENT ITEMS (One motion approves all items) A. Project #366, Order Feasibility Report (40 M.G. Safari Water Reservoir) A- B. Contract 82-4, Change Order #1 QQ.IY C. Contract 81-5, Change Order #3 V. 7:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS S A. 1983 General Fund Budget Q 5 B. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #327A (Killdeer Addition P Utilities) Final Assessment Hearing, Project #344 (Winkler Jackson Addition Sanitary Sewer) P.� D. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #323B (Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Streets) tl E. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #324B (Safari at Eagan Streets) P ,,F. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #336B (Tomark 1st Addition P' Streets) ISG. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #340A (Windcrest 2nd Addition Utilities) 11H. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #341A (Windtree 2nd Addition Utilities) p X91. Final Assessment Hearing, Project #359 (Park Cliff 1st Addition 1 Storm Sewer. Extension) VI. OLD BUSINESS ').11 A. Concepts for Land Use Changes to the Proposed Handicapped Facility Location in Meadow Land Addition (Betty Bassett) B - Agreement with Harry & Pearl Lemieux (Project 297) P?' C - Consideration of a Wind Energy Systems & Radio/TV Towers Ordinance Northwestern National Bank, Thomas R. HalLbauer, for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Drive Up Bank Machine in a CSC (Community Shopping Center District), CedarvaLe Shopping Center. Eagan City Council Agenda September 21, 1982 Page Two VII. NEW BUSINESS Ar2 A. Sienna Corporation, Rodney Hardy, for a Variance to Allow 20' Q Front Setback for Lots 19-26, Block 1, Wedgwood Addition q.� B. David R. & Patricia B. Odell for Preliminary Plat, Odell's P Addition, Consisting of Approximately One Acre & Containing 2 Single Family Lots in Part of Lot 2, McCarthy Ridge Addition, Section 9 6� C. Gabbert Development, Inc., for a Preliminary Plat, Sheffield Addition, Consisting of Approximately 11.36 Acres and Containing 44 Single Family Lots Located in Part of the E� of the SEk of Section 26 7 % D. Municipal Finance Bond for Joint Venture Senior Citizen Housing Project 9� E. I.R. Financing Transfer from Federal Land Company to Basic r Properties for Yankee Office Building IV qtr F. Extension of Time for Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place P' VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS pq 6 A. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable TV Commission Update IX. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (For those persons not on the agenda) X. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 1982 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of the September 7, 1982 regular City Council minutes and the September 21, 1982 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration: NATIONAL BUSINESSI WOMEN'S; WEEK, PROCLAMATION Mayor Blomquest has been requested by the Minnesota Valley Business and Professional Women's Club to proclaim the week of October 17- 23 as National Business Women's Week. The president of this organi- zation is planning to be present at the City Council meeting to accept the official proclamation from Mayor Blomquist. Enclosed on page %. is a copy of the National Business Women's Week proclamation. PROCLAMATION For National Business Women's Week Whereas working women constitute 46 million of the nation's working force, and are constantly striving to serve their communities, their states and their nation in civic and cultural programs, and Whereas major goals of business and professional women are to help create better conditions for business women through the study of social, educational, economic and political problems; to help them be of greater service to their community, to further friendship with women throughout the world, and Whereas all of us are proud of their leadership in these many fields of endeavor, NOW, THEREFORE, I Bea Blomquist MAYOR OF THE CITY OF EAGAN by the authority vested in me, do hereby proclaim October 1723, 1982, as NATIONAL BUSINESS WOMEN'S WEEK sponsored by The National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, Inc., and urge all citizens in the city of Eaganall civic and fraternal groups, all educational associations, all news media and other community organizatons to join in this salute to working women by encouraging and promoting the celebration of the achievements of all business and professional women as they contribute daily to our economic, civic and cultural purposes. Date September 21, 1982 By 0 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Two DEPARTMENT, 'HEAD B�'SINESSI FIRE DEPARTMENT A. Fire Department -- There are no items to be discussed for the Fire Department at this time. POLICE DEPARTMENT B. Police Department -- There are no items to be discussed for the Police Department at this time. PARK DEPARTMENT C. Park Department -- There are no items to be discussed for the Park Department at this time. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT D. Public Works Department -- There are no items to be discussed for the Public Works Department at.this time. • 1• There are three (3) 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 additional items unless the discussion required is brief. PROJECT #366 A. Project #366, Order Feasibility Report (4.0 M.G. Safari Water Reservoir) -- On Wednesday, September 8, 1982, the City Attorney and Public Works Director, through the efforts of Councilman Wachter, were able to obtain a purchase agreement from Ida Sieg for the acquisition of 2.09 acres of land for the required 4.0 M.G. water reservoir for the City's high pressure zone to be located just east of Safari Path adjacent to the Apple Valley corporate border. Now that the City has successfully located the site for the construction of this needed reservoir, it would be appropriate to prepare a feasibility report detailing cost estimates for con- struction. It would also• be beneficial to start the preparation of detailed plans and specifications with the intentions of awarding a contract yet this year. This would allow the installation of footings to take place before freeze up and would allow the fabri- cation of the necessary equipment and materials through the winter months to allow construction to begin early in 1983. 3 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Three ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To authorize the prepara- tion of a feasibility report for Project #366 (4.0 M.G. water reser- voir - Safari) and also authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications for contract 82-13. CONTRACT #82-4 - CHANGE ORDER B. Contract 82-4, Change Order #1 -- Additional funds were re- maining in a grant account and it was the decision of the Parks and Recreation Committee, Director of Parks and Recreation, and City Council that a 10 foot wide bituminous trail be constructed between Blackhawk Road and Woodgate Lane and also an eight foot wide bituminous trail along the north right-of-way of Wilderness Run Road commencing at Capricorn Court and terminating at a point easterly as staked in the field. The cost for the 10' bituminous trial is $9,890 and the 8' bituminous trail is $8,062.50. The total change order is $17,952.50. The contractor is Bituminous Roadways, Inc., for a project consisting of Twin View Manor 2nd Addition, Windcrest 2nd, Windtree 2nd and Cinnamon Ridge. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve Change Order #1 for Contract 82-4 for bituminous trail construction in the amount of $17,952.50. CONTRACT #82-5 - CHANGE ORDER C. Contract 82-5, Change Order #3 -- A change order has been pre- sented by the consulting engineering firm to provide some 10" resilient wedge gate valve and box and furnish and install hydrant bottom sections which is an addition to Project 337A in the amount of $2,372 and to provide the finished grading and repair damaged trash guard which amounts to $1,890.75 for Project 345A. The total change order is $4,262.75. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve Change Order #3 for Contract 82-5 to provide the additional work as outlined for Projects 337A and 345A. U Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Four 11 P'UBL'IC HEARINGS 1983 GENERAL FUND BUDGET A. 1983 General Fund Budget -- Traditionally, the City holds a public hearing during the development of the next year's calendar budget. The purpose for holding a public hearing is to allow public input as it may relate to recommended increases or reductions in certain departmental operations. The up to date results of the budgetary process and a to date estimated 1983 budget will be pre- sented and discussed by the City Administrator at the meeting on Tuesday. There is no action required regarding adoption of the 1983 budget; however, action may be desirable for certain parts of the budget if there is public input. It would be suggested that this action be more a referral and consideration in the final development of the 1983 budget. PROJECT #327A B. Project #327 A, Final Assessment Hearing (Killdeer Addition Utilities) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #327A was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compare to those 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, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roil for Project #327A, Killdeer Addi- tion Utilities, and authorize certification to the County for col- lection of assessments spread over five years at 12.5% interest. S FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 327A SUBDIVISION/AREA: KILLDEER ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES 0 Area SF $1147.42 $1520.00 Laterals DP $573.71 $760.00 Q Service $7dt nn $884.00 n Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM rl Area _ SF $789.80 $98$98 Q Laterals DP $.UL.9A 8492.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: iA NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: RATE OF. INTEREST: FINAL F.R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area SF TTT7T.-= $18330 © Laterals DP $560.41 $916.00 ® Service $245.00 $884.00T, Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS ac Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: 568.709 11 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS:__ April 7. 1981 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: m SF $1688.46 $1057.00 DP $844.23 $528.00_;v Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Five PROJECT #344 C. Project #344, Final Assessment Hearing (Winkler Jackson Addition Sanitary Sewer) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #344 was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page $ is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as comparecT—To those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 18, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #344, Winkler Jackson Addition Sanitary Sewer, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments spread over ten years at 12.5% interest. 7 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 344 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Section 31 (proposed Winkler - Jackson Addition) FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER FINAL F. R. U Lat. Benefit/Trunk 10 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM rl Area Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 1 STREETS E] Gravel Base MSurfacing Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: jf /O RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $114,680.12 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-15 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 18, 1981 V RATES RATES SANITARY RATES RATES 0 Area Area Q Laterals Qx Laterals $114,680.12 $118,294.00 IM E] Service U Lat. Benefit/Trunk 10 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM rl Area Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 1 STREETS E] Gravel Base MSurfacing Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: jf /O RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $114,680.12 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-15 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 18, 1981 V Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Six PROJECT #323B D. Project #323B, Final Assessment Hearing (Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Streets) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #323B was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page /p is a summary tabulation of the final assess- ment rates as compare to those 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, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #323B, Coachman Land Company 1st Addition Streets, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments spread 'over five years at 12.5% interest. 9 FINAL ASSESSMENT }FEARING PROJECT NO: 3238 SUBDIVISION/AREA: COACHMAN LAND CO. IST ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES 0 Area QLaterals 0 Service 0 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: .34 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: . S FINAL F. R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base ® Surfacing Res. Equiv. RATE OF. INTEREST: 12.50 TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $60.333.57 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: -April 7. 1981 10 $754.17 $1163.00 _. Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Seven PROJECT #324B E. Project 324B, Final Assessment Hearing (Safari at Eagan Streets) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #324B was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page I'.is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compared to those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on March 17, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has received one objection to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #324B, Safari at Eagan Streets, and authorize certification to the County for col- lection of assessments spread over five years at 12.5% interest. FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT N0: 3248 SUBDIVISION/AREA: SAFARI AT EAGAN FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES QArea QLaterals 0 Service _ 0 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM ri Area Laterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 5 FINAL SANITARY RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base Q Surfacing Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $70,766.77 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81.10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: March 17 1981 IL F.R. RATES $70.766.77 $87.490.00 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Eight PROJECT 336B F. Project 336B, Final Assessment Hearing (Tomark 1st Addition Streets) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #336B was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as comparo those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on June 16, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent, to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close approve the final assessment roll for Project Addition Streets, and authorize certification collection of assessments spread over five years 13 the public hearing, 336B, Tomark 1st to the County for at 12.5% interest. FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 336B SUBDIVISION/AREA: TOMARK IST ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: Septemner 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES Area Laterals Service ❑ Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM 11 Area OLaterals NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: FINAL F. R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS 0 Gravel Base DSurfacing Res. Equiv. $31,020.88 $29,890.00 73 ( 1 outlot and 72 units at $215.42 per unit) NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 years RATE OF INTEREST: 12.5 % TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $31,020.88 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 16, 1981 14 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Nine PROJECT #340A G. Project #340A, Final Assessment Hearing (Windcrest 2nd Addition Utilities) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #340A was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compare to those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 4, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #340A, Windcrest 2nd Addition Utilities, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments 'spread over five years at 12.5% in- terest. is FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 340A SUBDIVISION/AREA: WINDCREST 2ND ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES Q Area $97.78 $770.80 Ac o' Laterals $410.58 $623.00 . D Service $97.00 $239.00 E] Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area ( 0468¢) 97SR A7 $266,00 - Laterals PS1?� $522.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: cc NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 0 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS - IJ Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. RATE OF INTEREST: 12 S% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: @q8 67017 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-13 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 4, 1981 Ra $242.86 $243.00 FINAL F.R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area Q Laterals $344.83 $575.00 Q Service $97.00 $239.00 0 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS - IJ Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. RATE OF INTEREST: 12 S% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: @q8 67017 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-13 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 4, 1981 Ra $242.86 $243.00 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Ten PROJECT #341A H. Project #341A, Final Assessment Hearing (Windtree 2nd Addition Utilities) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #341A was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page ($ is a summary tabulation of the final assessment rates as compare T to those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on August 4, 1981. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #341A, Windtree 2nd Addition Utilities, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments spread over five years at 12.5% interest. 17 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING .r. PROJECT NO: 341A SUBDIVISION/AREA: WINDTREE 2ND ADDITION FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 STORM . ® Area © Laterals (.03740$894.78- $892.00 . 136.01 $185.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: RATE OF INTEREST: 27 Lots 5 12.5% STREETS E] Gravel Base E] Surfacing MRes. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $121,210.00 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-13 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 4, 1981 I$ $711.37 $762.00 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. Feasibility Report FINAL HATER RATES F.R. RATES SANITARY FINAL RATES F.R. RATES Area - El Area ix� Laterals $1396.45 $1895.00 ® Laterals $1821.43 $2655.00 Q Service $212.00 $404.00 © Service $212.00 $404.00 Q Lat. Benefit/Trunk$302.00 $12.90 FF Lat. Benefit/Trunk $218.27 $14730 `FF STORM . ® Area © Laterals (.03740$894.78- $892.00 . 136.01 $185.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: RATE OF INTEREST: 27 Lots 5 12.5% STREETS E] Gravel Base E] Surfacing MRes. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $121,210.00 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 81-13 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 4, 1981 I$ $711.37 $762.00 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Eleven PROJECT #359 I. Project 359, Final Assessment Hearing (Park Cliff 1st Addition Storm Sewer Extension) -- On August 17, 1982, the final assessment roll for Project #359 was presented to the City Council with the final assessment hearing being scheduled for September 21, 1982. Enclosed on page— 7,0 is a summary tabulation of the final assess- ment rates as compare to those quoted in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on July 6, 1982. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to the affected property owners. As of this date, the staff has not received any objections to these proposed final assessments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing, approve the final assessment roll for Project #359, Park Cliff 1st Addition Storm Sewer Extension, and authorize certification to the County for collection of assessments spread over five years at 12.5% interest. Iq FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 359 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Section 34, (Park Cliff Development) FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: September 21, 1982 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES QArea Gravel Base Laterals Surfacing Service E] Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area OX Laterals $13,614.81 $13,220.00 NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 2 FINAL F. R. SANITARY RATES RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base Surfacing Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 5 RATE OF INTEREST: 12% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $13,614.81 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: PUBLIC HEARING DATE: July 6. 1982 rM 81-13 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Twelve LAND USE CHANGES - BETTY BASSETT A. Concepts for Land Use Changes to the Proposed Handicapped Facility Location in the Meadowland Addition (Betty Bassett) -- At the last two regular City Council meetings, there has been dis- cussion between the City Council and Betty Bassett, who is the current owner of property described as lots within the Meadowland Addition. There has been discussion regarding the history of the zoning at both meetings and the amount of facts presented to dates raised several questions in many of the City Councilmembers' minds about the real status of the underlying zoning of Betty Bassett's property. In in effort to provide the most detailed zoning report, the administrative intern, Mike Johnson, was asked to madOOM research all minutes and records to provide a chronology of zoning that has been approved for that property. Also, a more concise history of what has happened with the approvals for the Eagle's Nest Home was researched to provide a more precise report for review by the City Council. The following is that information: Eagle's Nest Home Chronology 3-23-76 -- Eagle's Nest Home informal meeting with the Advisory Planning Commission. The minutes indicate that the PD may need revision. 4-27-76 -- Representatives of the Eagle's Nest Home and Unisource appeared for approval of preliminary sketch plan. It appeared that rezoning was not required. The concept was approved subject to final plans being returned to APC for review. 5-5-76 -- Eagle's Nest Home appeared for approval of preliminary sketch plan. Concept plan approved subject to granting of a 50 foot right-of-way easement for future sanitary sewer and final building plans being submitted for APC review. 5-27-76 -- Mrs. Bassett and a person from the Minnesota Commission for the Handicapped, Department of Welfare, discussed the proposed home.,,*6 There was discussion concerning the appropriate zoning. Mrs.V1Was to review the matter with John Voss per recommendation of the APC as to appropriate zoning for the home. 7-27-76 -- Public hearing on Eagle's Nest Home - Unisource Corpora- tion. There were objections by neighboring owners. An additional 17 foot right-of-way on Rahn Road and an 80 right-of-way on the proposed south street were recommended by the engineer. The APC recommended approval. This application covered a part of the Mission Hills PD. Zl Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Thirteen 8-3-76 -- City Council approved preliminary plat subject to the condition that if there are any changes in use or state licensing, City Council approval was required. 9-7-76 -- Eagle's Nest agreement was approved and signed. Zoning History The zoning history has been researched and is documented in the following chronology: 1959 - Agricultural 1961 - Agricultural 1964 - Agricultural 0 1967 - Agricultural 1968 - Agricultural 1969 - Residential Multiple or Residential Urban 1970 - Residential Urban 1971 - Residential Urban 1972 - Residential Urban 1973 - Residential Urban 1974 - (11-26-74) R-1, Residential Single District 1975 - R-1, Residential Single District 1976 - PD, Planned Development District 1977 - PD, Planned Development District 1978 - PD, Planned Development District 1981 - PD, Planned Development District 1982 - PD, Planned Development District ZZ Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Fourteen According to the most recent zoning which is pre -planned development district, the property is zoned R-1, Residential Single District, which becomes the underlying zoning if the planned development agreement should expire and the property would revert back to an R-1 zoning district. The zoning map which refers to R-1 is Resi- dential Urban for the year 1970 is enclosed for your review on page #t ft . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny current land use and zoning for purposes of considering a new concept for the land use of Betty Bassett's property. 3.3 rur j v f91 G I ct Q LEBANON/TWRp � 191 O ZONING LEGEND mwwmu' t - c -i o Ebb 0 EAGAN T( I [ J O I -x C -x . r -__________ 29' ZONING of N 0' 1* TYPES OF ZO •-i—Mom[xnu Y x-x—x[no[xruL o M-[—x[Lo[xmL n x-. y[sm[xruL r. e-f—RmoxxruL M x-e—x[Lo[xneL x WNSH I P —LGIr VDU.E.: C•t —x[.Yr Cpb[x [ • � —UpT reusr: t-[ —xxrvr IMUST:, MAP eeo —i C F —. [.CRS.Ll ' —uLruv.L IC Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Fifteen PROJECT #297 (HARRY & PEARL LEMIEUX) B. Continued Public Hearing (Harry & Pearl Lemieux - Project #297) -- At the September 7, 1982 Council meeting, there was a verbal agreement reached between Mr. and Mrs. Lemieux and the City per- taining to the assessments relating to Project #297 (Blackhawk Lake Trunk Storm Sewer Outlet). The reduction to Mr. and Mrs. Lemieux' assessment was subject to satisfactory execution to be prepared through the City Attorney's office. It is anticipated that this executed agreement will be available for the September 21st Council meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: If the agreement has been executed, close the public hearing and approve the revised assess- ment to Parcel 10-01600-010-05 (Harry & Pearl Leieux). as Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Sixteen WIND ENERGY SYSTEM & RADIO TV TOWER ORDINANCE C. Consideration of a Wind Energy Systems & Radio/TV Tower Ordi- nance -- At the last regular meeting of the City Council held on 9-7-82, there were several questions raised regarding requirements for an engineer's certification as it relates to the structural stability of the towers and the interpretation of the uniform building code. To date, information regarding the interpretation of the uniform building code is available; however, the various suppliers that were contacted by the City to solicit information helpful to determining the final language in the ordinance for the engineer's certification has not been received. If the informa- tion is received late Friday or early Monday, a special memorandum will be delivered on Monday evening providing the additional infor- mation for final consideration of the wind energy/radio TV tower ordinance. Assuming the information is not available, the City Administrator would ask for a continuance until the October 5, 1982 meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To consider approval or denial of the wind energy system and radio/tv tower ordinance or if information is not available a continuance until the October 5, 1982 meeting. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK B. Northwestern National Bank, Thomas R. Hallbauer, for a Condi- tional Use Permit to Allow a Drive Up Bank Machine in a CSC, Cedar - vale Shopping Center -- At the July 20, 1982 City Council meeting, application submitted by Northwestern National Bank for an instant cash machine to be located in the Cedarvale Shopping Center area adjacent to the detatched Brown Photo drive -up facility was denied. The City staff, City Planner Dale Runkle, has studied the comments and reasons for denial by the City Council, has met with the de- veloper, and reviewed the Cedarvale Shopping Center parking lot to consider alternate locations. For recommendation and review of the City Planner's comments and findings, please refer to a memorandum enclosed on pages 1Z through 34 Also enclosed is a letter from the property manager for t e e arvale Shopping Center complex which is enclosed on page 140 For a copy of the minutes of the action that was taken by the City Council at the July 20, 1982 meeting, refer to page 41 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the drive -up instant cash machine as requested by Northwestern National Bank. z(o TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FFM: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: SEPTEMBER 17, 1982 RE: NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK INSTANT CASH MACHINE On July 20, 1982, the City Council recommended to deny the application of Northwestern National Bank for an instant cash machine to be located in the Cedarvale Shopping Center area. It is staff's understanding that the reason for denial was not objecting to the instant cash machine but rather the location the instant cash machine was to be located in the Cedarvale Shopping Center area. Since the July 20, 1982 City Council meeting, staff has had a chance to re-examine the parking areas to the west and north of the Cedarvale Shop- ping Center. In the staff review per Council direction of July 20th, staff has tried to re-examine the parking area around Cedarvale to determine where the best location would be for Northwestern National Bank's instant cash machine. In this review, staff has examined all locations and has de- termined that the best location for the instant cash machine is in the gen- eral location which was submitted for the July 20, 1982 City Council review. The reasons staff feels this is the best location is that: 1. There is already a freestanding Photamat building in this general location and another freestanding facility could tend, to change traffic patterns and congest traffic patterns if placed in the cen- ter of the existing parking area. One time when staff was review- ing locations, there was a carnival being set up in the parking lot between the Shopping Center and the old Jerry Lewis Theater. In placing another freestanding building in between the Shopping Center and the Jerry Lewis Theater could not allow this type of use to occur once the second freestanding building is placed in the parking lot. 2. Another freestanding building would remove a great deal of parking stalls where the building would be located and also for establishing traffic patterns to provide access to this machine. Aesthetically, another freestanding building could make the parking area look con- gested and crowded by placing another machine or box in this general location. 3. In reviewing the proposed location, staff feels that this machine could be placed in or adjacent to the landscaped area to allow the machine to function and serve the general public without having an intrusive effect on the Cedarvale area. Also, the traffic patterns established for this location would allow only the people using this machine to exit the parking lot in the traffic pattern designated to drive from the parking lot to the access road. Although the machine and drive would penetrate the landscaped area provided by the Cedarvale Shopping Center, additional landscaping could be required which would make the machine the least visible of D.-7 - Northwestern National Hank Machine Thomas L. Hedges September 17, 1982 Page two any of the locations which could be proposed within the parking lot area. Enclosed is a copy of the site plan for the Cedarvale area so City Council can review the site plan of the parking lot area. Also enclosed are two site plans submitted by Northwestern National Bank in which one is the origi- nal submission and the second is a revised location in the same proximity for City Council to re -review and possibly reconsider the motion granted on July 20, 1982. If this is approved, the conditional use should be subject to the following conditions: A detailed landscape plan shall be required designating the size, quantity and species of additional landscaping to be provided. Also, a landscape bond of an adequate amount shall also be submitted and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. DCR/jack E19 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK - THOMAS HALLBAUER LOCATION: CEDARVALE SHOPPING CENTER EXISTING ZONING: CSC (COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 22, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 15, 1982 REPORTED BY: DAVID M. OSBERG, PLANNING ASSISTANT An application has been submitted for a conditional use permit to allow a drive up bank machine in a Community Shopping Center District located in part of the Cedarvale Shopping Center. •:iia The applicant is proposing to construct a drive up bank machine which would be used to get cash instantly without having to leave the car. A drive up bank machine in a Community Shopping Center District is allowed as a conditional use. The machine will be located in the boulevard separating the parking area of the Cedarvale Shopping Center and the service road. The applicant has submitted a site plan of the area and also a more detailed site plan of the drive up bank machine area. Staff has provided an aerial photograph of the Cedarvale Shopping Center area to give a better understanding of the potential impact the drive up bank machine will have on the area. Staff would like to point out that this drive up bank machine will be used only to provide "instant cash" and there will be no employees at the facility. Park- ing will not be necessary at the site with stacking spaces for cars provided in the drive up lane. This is not a conventional full serivoe bank that provides employment opportunities for people in the City of Eagan. If approved, the conditional use permit shall be subject to the following condi- tion: 1. A detailed landscape plan as submitted by the applicant shall be approved and a landscape bond shall be submitted and not released until one year after the landscaping has been completed. DMO/jack 19 74 .14 L OilAll 4 GX VZ: TH' a, pp POW- Z, Y hV. 00, fir S., 4 14 lie, t Nc�m� 0 SE�F,VI-F FlaNr--.) jG> GEPAP�VAL.E �. Vo PlHiON -3iI I 54 -rim V)PI/yial-ix IHI: 9 lri gj-4TI A4,01-* W1'9 V 7 -3nr2i J Ory 0. �� r7jy11�iU(3 +t 12104 If 8E I -i -i i � r u -c - a] UPPER MIDWEST MANAGEMENT CORP P. O. BOX 834 507-359-2004 NEW ULM, MINNESOTA 56073 August 10, 1982 Mr. Tom Hedges, City Manager City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Tom: I am writing to you seeking your support and also the support of the City Council in granting the Northwestern National Bank of Minneapolis the necessary permit to construct an Automatic Teller Machine at Cedarvale. The location, which was turned down by the City Council once, was determined by us to be the best location possible for Cedarvale. It would not cause any obstacles on the lot for proper maintenance. It would not remove any parking stalls from the Center. After. Mr. Tom Hallbauer from Northwestern National Bank met with your City Planner, it was determined, in looking at several alterna- tive sites, that this location is still the best possible location. I am asking that when this matter is reconsidered by the City Council that the original location be approved. Thank you for your help. Sinceergly, � Dave Brown, Property Manager UPPER MIDWEST MANAGEMENT CORP. DB:at cc: Tom Hallbauer Enclosure CE Council Minutes July 20, 1982 NATIONAL BANK DRIVE -OP BANK MACHINE The application of Northwestern National Bank for conditional use permit for an instant cash machine at the Cedarvale Shopping Center was then con- sidered by the City Council. The Advisory Planning Commission at its June 22, 1982 public hearing recommended approval, subject to certain conditions. Thomas Hallbauer appeared for the applicant. He stated that the machine would be automatic without a staff person; that it would be 10 feet high and that it is located within an existing berm in the Cedarvale Center. Councilman Smith objected to the location within a berm which had been required by the City Council some years ago, and intended for landscaping purposes. He suggested that another location within the Shopping Center parking lot be designated for the drive up machine. Smith moved, Egan seconded the motion to deny the application because of the location within the berm and the fact that the current landscaped area is requested to be used for the machine locations. All voted yea. NORTRVIEW MEADOWS PRELIMINARY PLAT The application of Sienna Corporation for rezoning from R-3 Planned Development to allow 65 single family lots and 84 duplex lots and preliminary plat approval of Northview Meadows was then considered by the Council. The Planning Commission had recommended approval at its June 22, 1982 meeting subject to numerous conditions. Rod Hardy of Sienna Corporation, Mr. Brzinski of Suburban Engineering and Marshall Oaks of Ruscom Homes were present. Mr. Hardy indicated that the revised proposal would include 104 single family units and 64 duplex units on the 52 acre parcel. The duplex units would be 6,000 square foot minimum with the single family approximately 7,000 square foot minimums, noting the reduction in the current zoned requirements. The net density would be 4.9 units per acre with a gross density of 3.9 units per acre. A storm water runoff proposal has been prepared and the request was that the City construct the trunks but the developer would construct the street and utilities on the site privately. The northwest pond would be used temporarily for ponding purposes and possibly could be eliminated in the future, depending on the City's requirements. Mr. Oaks explained on behalf of the proposed developer, the current need is for single family homes of a smaller variety. He stated that the average size would be 850 square feet per unit with a minimum of 800 and a maximum of 1,000 square feet per unit. Mr. Wachter suggested that all storm ponds be made permanent to recharge the ground table. There was discussion concerning cul de sacs on the north end and a revision would provide for only one cul de sac. It was recommended the eyebrow be eliminated on Trenton Trail and that the City Council allow front yard variances to accomodate the elimination or the eyebrow. Cary King, a neighboring owner and several other owners were present and asked if precedent would be involved if lot sizes are cut down. Mr. Hardy stated that this provides for a reduction in density and that the property is zoned for R-3 use. There would be provision for double driveway and double attached garage and all units would have basements. After discussion, Thomas moved, Smith seconded the motion to approve the application as revised with the following conditions: 13 4l Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Seventeen VARIANCE - SIENNA CORP. FOR WEDGEWOOD ADDITION A Sienna Corporation (Rodney Hardy) for a Variance to Allow 20 Foot Front Setback for Lots 19 through 26, Block 1, Wedgewood Addi- tion -- A public hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting held on August 24, 1982. The purpose of the public hearing was to consider an application submitted by the Sienna Corporation requesting a ten foot setback variance from the thirty foot setback requirement for Lots 19 through 26, Block 1, Wedgewood 1st Addition. The APC is recom- mending approval of the variances. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's report enclosed on pages through 7 For additional information on the action t at was taken by the*Advisory Planning Commission, refer to those minutes found on page _44 -- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve a variance for Sienna Corpora- tion on Lots 19 through 26, Wedgewood Addition. 4Z CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE FROM THE FROM SETBACK APPLICANT: SIENNA CORPORATION - RODNEY HARDY LOCATION: Lar 19-26, BLOCK 1, WEDGIOOD 1ST ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: Ti -1 UNDER A PLANNED DEVELOP14ENT DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 24, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: AUGUST 17, 1982 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER � 4aftojMw An application has been submitted requesting a 10' setback variance from the 30' front setback requirement for Lots 19-26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition. COMMENTS In November, 1980, the City Council approved the preliminary plat, Wedgwood lst Addition. At that time, staff had listed as a condition that no variances be allowed on the 85 small single family lots unless trees or topographic conditions prevail on the site. Lots 19-26 are fairly flat on the front portion of the lots or the westerly por- tion of the lots and slope drastically to the ponding area encompassed on the back lot line. Therefore, staff can see why the applicant is making the request to only have a 20' front setback vs. the 30' setback requirement. This would al- low some backyard to be constructed with a walk out and have some useable space as rear yard prior to getting into the ponding area. Also, there are some trees backing the lots which may have to be taken down if the houses were made to sit back the 30' as required under Ordinance 52. In reviewing the setback request, Wedgwood Drive would only lots fronting on Wedgwood Drive on the east side where the variances are being requested. on the west side of Wedgwood Drive, lots ap- pear to have access taken from Wedgwood Lane North or Wedgwood Lane South. How- ever, the 30' side setback requirement should be met of the west side of Wedgwood Drive. In reviewing the application for the variances, it appears the only other place the applicant may request the front setback to be reduced are on Lots 12-18, Block 1 or the lots fronting on the west side of Waterford Drive West. There appears to be the same type of situation on Lots 12-18 that appear on Lots 19-26. Attached is a letter from Sienna Corporation stating the reasons for the variance request for Lots 19-26, Block 1, Wedgwood Addition. 43 ,CITYOF EAGAN SIENNA CORPORATION; - VARIANCE, FOR MEDGWOOD 'AUGUST 24; 1982 `PAGE TWO If'approved, the''varianoa should be subject to; the following conditions: 1., All other ordinance requirements should bemmet. DCR/jach 4y- , I WEDGWOOD 1ST ADDITION EAGAN, MN PETITIONER: REQUEST: EXISTING ZONING: LEGAL DISCRIPTION 7-6-82 Sienna Corporation Variance to front yard setback from 30 feet to 20 feet on Lots 19 thru 26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition. R1 -PUD Lots 19 thru 26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition. REASON FOR VARIANCE: Petitioner requests variance for the following reasons: 1. to keep house and yard construction out of existing trees 2. provide a rear yard without taking out additional trees 3. provide flexibility in design and siting house and garage to provide maximum useable rear yard without tree removal 4. minimize cost to buyer 5. does not adversely affect adjacent properties. 45' 911.2 # # -_... .._._.. 9y�Jp0 ! I A 1 . ���ft♦J �\ _.._.._.__9=3.0 .� — � .� 2\ . I \\ I \ it � 1 �- �_ m _ 29. M I L G1 1 I R ! ,2 ~l 4 Ir 1 !Ff F144jO,,l- -sn9u= _ 939.aETU1G /G .'R R `'9S i - -s34.o /�. t 1 d N� xs 2� _ L • ! #, ig 9313 •SF #9 S.0 cc -----, r—'--� r-- 4-8 s ti c r -92p.0 0223 — -- - s1ss- Y - _ _ •` '� . A 7 j 15 P ST 1—B DENOTES SOIL TES 9/12/79 BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING - - ---lc* anff TFCT 2iB/BD BY SUBTERRANEAN ENGINEERING INC A 0 W-drAj R-1 R-1 OVER PF I Ani��� , OF. 0 W-drAj R-1 R-1 OVER WEDGWOOD 1ST ADDITION - SETBACK VARIANCE The public hearing regarding the application of Sienna Corporation for variance from front setback for Lots 19 through 26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition was next convened. Rod Hardy appeared for the applicant and re- quested a maximum 10 foot setback variance from the 30 foot front setback requirements for the lots mentioned above. John Hankinson also appeared for Sienna Corporation. Mr. Hardy noted that in order to fulfill FHA and VA requirements, it would be necessary to have no greater than 3 to 1 slope and also, that a significant number of trees would be removed in the back yards, which are very steep, if the application is not granted. It was noted also that there may be a request for an additional five lots but no action would be taken at the present time. It was also noted that trees and topographic reasons are the bases for the application, but that FHA may allow variances on a case to case basis, according to Mr. Hardy. There were concerns about uniformity in the front set back, but other lots in other subdivisions are not all at the same setbacks. Hardship appeared to be based on excessive site work and alterations, including substantial additional costs, and further, the FHA and VA requirements. McCrea moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recom- mend approval of the application to provide for up to 10 foot setback require- ments on Lots 19 through 26, Block 1, Wedgwood 1st Addition, subject to compliance with all ordinance requirements, in order to avoid removal of additional trees. All voted in favor except Mulrooney who voted no. EU Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Eighteen PRELIMINARY PLAT - ODELL ADDITION B. David R. & Patricia B. Odell for Preliminary Plat, Odell's Addition, consisting of Approximately One Acre and Containing Two Single Family Lots in Part of Lot 2, McCarthy Ridge Addition -- A public hearing was held at the last regular planning commission meeting held on August 24, 1982. The purpose of the public hearing was to consider an application submitted by David and Patricia Odell for preliminary plat entitled "Odell's Addition" consisting of approximately one acre and two (2) single family lots. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending denial of the preli- minary plat to the City Council. For additional information on this proposed plat, refer to the City Planner's report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages -�! 0 through S (o A letter was received from Daniel Beeson, attorney at law representing David and Patricia Odell, and a copy is enclosed on pages through 6 for your review. A petition from neighboring property owners was received Friday, September 21, 1982, entitled, "Petition in Opposition to Preliminary Plat Application for O'Dell's Addition" and a copy is enclosed on pages 6/ througho2, for your infor- mation. For information regarding—the action—twat was taken by the APC, refer to a copy of those minutes found on page 3 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to deny the preliminary plat entitled Odell's Addition. 29 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - ODELL'S ADDITION APPLICANT: DAVID R. & PATRICIA B. ODELL LOCATION: PART OF IAT 2, MCCARIHY RIDGE ADDITION, SECTION 9 EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 24, 1982 DATE OF REPORT: AUGUST 18, 1982 REPORTED BY: DALE C. Rm=, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED An application has been submitted requesting preliminary plat approval, Odell's Addition, which consists of approximately one acre and will contain 2 single family lots. As you may recall, on May 25, 1982, Mr. Odell submitted an application for wai- ver of plat in order to split Lot 2, McCarthy Ridge into 2 single family lots. At the Advisory Planning Comnission, there was a lot of neighborhood opposition and there were questions regarding restrictive covenants on the property. As a result of the citizen input, the Advisory Planning Conmission recommended denial of the waiver of plat. On June 15, 1982, the City Council also denied the wai- ver of plat request on the basis that there was not a hardship involved to the applicant to waive the platting requirements. However, the Council did indicate that the applicant had the option to submit an application for preliminary plat. The applicant has now submitted the application for preliminary plat, Odell's Addition, and is proposing to subdivide the property vs. splitting or waiving the subdivision regulations which he was originally denied. The application submitted is a preliminary plat request consisting of 2 single family lots. Lot 1 will contain 26,873 square feet; Lot 2 will contain 16,682 square feet. Both lots are in excess of the 12,000 square foot requirement in an R-1 District. The frontage is 130' on int 1 and 85' on Lot 2 which also meets subdivision regulations. It appears that all rights-of-way are dedicated for the preliminary plat. There is an existing house on Lot 1 which will remain. Lot 2 is the location Mr. Odell wishes to establish a second lot or a second hm esite on his proposed subdivision. Presently, there is an existing garage on Lot 2. If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following conditions: so CITY OF EAGAN PRELEADUM PIAT - ODELL'S ADDITION AUGUST 24, 1982 PAGE TM 1. The preliminary plat shall be subject to Minnesota Department of Transporta- tion's review and camient because the plat abuts State rights-of-way. 2. All easements shall be dedicated as requested by City staff. 3. Park dedication shall be required on Lot 2 for the newly -created lot. 4. The applicant shall be required to provide sewer and water service to the newly -created lot., DCR/jach ENGINEERING RE CMME ]DATICNS 5. The northerly extension of the existing T.H. 13 right-of-way shall be dedica- ted over the extreme northwest comer of this proposed plat. 6. Trunk area sanitary sewer and water assessments shall be required to be paid for the newly -created lot. In addition, trunk area storm sewer assessments shall be required to be paid for both lots of the newly -created plat. All assessments shall be in accordance with the rates in effect at the tire of final plat approval. -51 TO: THE ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PIMZMR FROM: THMAS A. COLBERT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: AUGUST 19, 1982 RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT - ODELL'S ADDITION The Public Works DeparbTent has the following cacments to offer in consideration of the above -referenced proposed plat: UTILITIES Sanitary sewer and water main of sufficient size, depth and capacity to service the proposed newly -created lot is available and located adjacent to the east line Of this proposed plat. The two lots created by the plat will both have direct access to existing sanitary sewer and water laterals for individual sewer service connections. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The general topography of this plat provides for surface drainage in a westerly direction. It is not anticipated that any internal storm sewer facilities would be required as a result of this plat. STREWS Access to this proposed plat is provided by way of the existing in-place McCarthy Road. No additional streets are necessitated by this proposed plat. EASET12M AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY Sufficient right-of-way has been previously dedicated for McCarthy Road. 10' drainage and utility easements should be dedicated adjacent to all public right- of-way, centered over all cammn lot lines and adjacent to the boundaries of this plat. In addition, the "handle" in the extreme northwest corner of this proposed plat should be dedicated as public right-of-way to provide for the potential future continuation of a frontage road/service road for T.H. 13. ASSESSMEZM Mile trunk area sanitary sewer and water area assessments have previously been levied against all lots within the McCarthy Ridge Addition, they were levied on a per lot equivalent. Subsequently, with the creation of a new lot, additional per lot trunk area assessments should be paid at the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval as a condition of this plat approval. Current 1982 rates are $475 per lot for trunk area sanitary sewer and $475 per lot for trunk area water main. In addition, this development should accept its financial responsi- bility for trunk area storm sewer assessments in accordance with the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval. 1982 rates are $660 per lot. I will be available to discuss in further detail any aspect of this report at the Planning Commission nee ' g of August 24, 1982. TAC/7ach M') n•rrr O 9 'tea' -t Hl 2�b A 0 p }• 0 All-�sc �fit,QA \Ih ao� �a �a -L07 Z A c � 4 W yd q H ,ro 77/77 J/ / F. PRELIMINARY PLAT OF OD E L L �..•.•�...W .�.� ..�..•... ADDITIONR;mm:"= FOR: DAVID ODELL 3044 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY SR4iU/C SOLE 4524887 R GATE: ✓ULY ie, /Oet' LEGEND n SITE DATA 'rr J LOCATION .eW-..r- /♦.. A 4r— r4 Wb SR4iU/C SOLE /N FEET R q ♦ / I ' A /♦.. A 4r— r4 Wb MENDOTA \\HTS. F GB RB Ind. 7, Indy,COMMERCIA ei-MNED DEVELf v .......R IInd An l E p - ----- RUI '.4 ... 2-= R. Ai 7, Ind. . GB -'Rt- Ind, Ca Inc /All/ Ind. N13 R-111 H-111 R-11 p R-11 Fl� -p R-111 R R R-111 G IMMAIN R41 p 9.til l� I R'p I -II R-11 -B .3 V, N RB R-111 R -IIS' R-1 R RAI.. --R-n HS JI 24 R -I m fE P, UE R-11 R-11 R R-11 a —U-3CSC RS (]LB x P p R R-11 R-11 I PAR R-11 R-1 R-11 r p - ------- 71 •APPLE 'ALEY r-�_ ROSEMOUN�� " ; September 15, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Eagan City Council 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Odell's Addition Preliminary Plat Application of David R. & Patricia B. Odell Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: The applicants, David R. and Patricia B. Odell, are the owners of the single family residence on a 43,555 square foot lot located at 3044 Sibley Memorial Highway and within the McCarthy Ridge Addition. The area is zoned R-1 with single family residential uses permitted on minimum lots of 12,000 square feet. The Odells are proposing in their preliminary plat application to effect a single lot subdivision that would result in creation of a new lot (Lot 2) with 16,682 square feet. Tile remaining lot with the Odells' existing home (Lot 1) would contain 26,873 square feet. Both lots would, therefore, contain far in excess of the minimum lot size requirements. The frontage on Lot 1 would be 130 feet and 85 feet on Lot 2, which also meets the subdivision standards. The new Lot 2 would have direct access to McCarthy Road and, therefore, no private road easement would be required. The new lot would also be served by the utilities which are presently available from McCarthy Road. If approved, the applicants will comply with all of the staff recommended conditions, including: 1) Dedication of all necessary easements and right of way required by City staff. 2) Payment of park dedication fees. 3) Provision of sewer and water service to the new lot. 4) Payment of all sanitary sewer and water assessments for the new lot. In summary, no rezoning or variances are required for approval of the preliminary plat. The proposal meets all of the require- ments of the zoning and subdivision ordinances; and therefore, the Odells are merely proposing to use their property in a manner permitted under existing City ordinances. City staff ,57 LAW OFFICES HAROLD LEVANDER ARTHUR GILLEN LeVander Gillen Miller Anderson & Kuntz ROGER C. MILLER 7 � HAROLD LEVANDE R. JR. PAUL H. ANDERSON 402 DROVERS BANK BLDG. • 633 SOUTH CONCORD ST. • P.O. BOX 288 TIMOTHY J.'KUNTZ SOUTH ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 99076 • TELEPHONE 16121 4311831 DANIEL J. BEESON September 15, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the Eagan City Council 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Odell's Addition Preliminary Plat Application of David R. & Patricia B. Odell Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: The applicants, David R. and Patricia B. Odell, are the owners of the single family residence on a 43,555 square foot lot located at 3044 Sibley Memorial Highway and within the McCarthy Ridge Addition. The area is zoned R-1 with single family residential uses permitted on minimum lots of 12,000 square feet. The Odells are proposing in their preliminary plat application to effect a single lot subdivision that would result in creation of a new lot (Lot 2) with 16,682 square feet. Tile remaining lot with the Odells' existing home (Lot 1) would contain 26,873 square feet. Both lots would, therefore, contain far in excess of the minimum lot size requirements. The frontage on Lot 1 would be 130 feet and 85 feet on Lot 2, which also meets the subdivision standards. The new Lot 2 would have direct access to McCarthy Road and, therefore, no private road easement would be required. The new lot would also be served by the utilities which are presently available from McCarthy Road. If approved, the applicants will comply with all of the staff recommended conditions, including: 1) Dedication of all necessary easements and right of way required by City staff. 2) Payment of park dedication fees. 3) Provision of sewer and water service to the new lot. 4) Payment of all sanitary sewer and water assessments for the new lot. In summary, no rezoning or variances are required for approval of the preliminary plat. The proposal meets all of the require- ments of the zoning and subdivision ordinances; and therefore, the Odells are merely proposing to use their property in a manner permitted under existing City ordinances. City staff ,57 Mayor and City Council Members Page Two September 15, 1982 further concurs with preliminary plat approval subject to compliance with the above stated conditions. This matter originally came before the Council on June 15, 1982, on the Odells' request for waiver of platting. Although a review of City records indicate that the Council has approved 18 or 18 applications for waiver of platting submitted within the past two years, the Odells' plat waiver application was denied by the Council. In taking this action the Council indicated that the waiver was denied because of insufficient showing of hardship by the Odells. However, the Mayor and other members of the Council expressly recognized that the applicants had an alternative remedy to pursue through the formal platting process. Therefore, the Odells are now before the Council seeking approval of their preliminary plat. Notwithstanding the fact that the applicants meet all of the subdivision and zoning ordinance requirements for plat approval, the Planning Commission on a split 4-1 vote recommended denial of the prelinary plat. The reasons given by the Planning Com- mission for its action are factually unfounded and are totally unrelated to the requirements of the subdivision and zoning ordinance. The only logical conclusion is that the recommendation of the Planning Commission to deny the single lot subdivision was based upon improper deference given to the general opposition voiced by surrounding neighbors. It is well established that where a zoning or subdivision ordinance specifies standards to be applied in determining whether to grant or deny a plat or zoning permit, and the applicant meets all of the specific requirements, the plat or permit must be approved. Public policy for the City of Eagan was established when the Council adopted City Ordinance No. 10 and the underlying zoning ordinance which permit the proposed use of the property. At the present time, the only appropriate inquiry for the City Council is whether the proposed plat meets all of the specific ordinance requirements. Since the Odell addition plat meets all of the specific requirements, the Council has no discretion to deny the plat. Since the Odells are proposing a use specifically permitted under the Eagan ordinances, the existing law must govern. The burden is upon the opposition to establish legitimate facts W Mayor and City Council Members Page Three September 15, 1982 compelling denial. To date, the neighborhood objectors have failed to cite a single instance in which the applicants have not met the specific standards and requirements of the subdi- vision ordinance. The mere fact that a majority or even all of the residents of the neighborhood may be opposed to the plat and voice vague objections is plainly insufficient to support denial of the plat. Neither the enabling statute nor the ordinance requires nor permits neighborhood consent as a precondition to plat approval. It is the Odells' adamant position that the' voiced "objections" to the preliminary plat are vague, totally unrelated and irrelevant to the specific ordinance requirements. First, the matter of the restrictive covenants is a non -issue. As a matter of law, the restrictive covenants automatically expired as of June 26, 1982, pursuant to Minnesota law. The covenants are no longer in force and cannot govern the use of the proper- ty. More importantly, the matter of the restrictive covenants is a private civil matter that has no relevance to the Council's final determination of plat approval. Second, the vague "aesthetic" concerns and objections voiced are likewise unrelated to the specific ordinance requirements. Ordinance No. 10 contains no specific standard upon which the Council may legally deny a plat on the basis of aesthetic concerns or objections, i.e. alleged obstruction of view, noise impact, jeopardizing the neighborhood integrity, etc. In absence of such a specific standard or requirement, the Council has no authority to deny the plat even if the alleged objections were well founded. A careful examination of the subject property and the surround- ing neighborhood leads to the compelling conclusion that any claim of adverse impact on the neighborhood and "property values" is unfounded and without basis in fact. Lloyd Krob was apparently the only member of the Planning Commission to personally view and investigate the subject property. His thorough review lead him to the inescapable conclusion that the single lot subdivision would have "no adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood." He further observed that the site was substantially sheltered by landscaping, as well as earthen berms. l He, therefore, supported the plat approval. 1Photographs taken of the Odell property (Exhibits A -J), as well as an aerial photograph (Exhibit K), will be submitted to the Council at hearing in further support of Mr. Krob's observations and conclusions. Sq Mayor and City Council Members Page Four September 15, 1982 It should also be noted that houses in the exclusive Timberline Addition adjacent to McCarthy Ridge to the east are built on substantially smaller lots with no apparent adverse impact on property values. Finally, it must again be emphasized that the single family residential use proposed by the Odells under the preliminary plat is specifically authorized within this R-1 zone on 12,000 square foot lots. A use expressly authorized under the ordinance cannot be deemed to be adverse to surrounding property owners. In summary, the Odells purchased their property within the past several years. They did so only after conferring with City staff to confirm that subdivision of the property was appropriate via either the waiver of plat or direct platting process. The purpose of the subdivision is simply to make the Odells' homestead purchase more affordable to them. If subdivision would not have been permissible, they would not have consumated the purchase. By requiring formal platting as opposed to waiver, the Odells have already been put to substantial financial burden and expense. Mr. and Mrs. Odell adjure the City Council to independently review their preliminary plat application. The singular inquiry before the Council is simply whether the proposed plat meets the specific requirements of Ordinance No. 10. As outlined to the Council herein, as well as by the City staff and Planning Commission member Rrob, the Odell Addition meets all of the requirements of the Ordinance. Irrespective of neighborhood opposition, fundamental fairness and equal a"lication of the City's ordinance compel that the Odells' plat appl}-�on be approved. Respectfu�4V submitted, DJB: cc: J. David and Patricia Odell .E -I �� �r%v.L^}N s:��:' �.+K.�yRi': �'�1� �!v�i �•':��'a5 PETITION IN OPPOSITION TO PRELIMINARY FLAT AP LCT ON FOR DELL DDT N The undersigned, being the owners of all lots in McCARTHY RIDGE (except that of applicant O'Dell's) hereby respectfully petition the City Council of the City of Eagan to deny approval of the preliminary plat for O'Dell's addition. Said action is requested based upon the following considerations: 1. McCARTHY RIDGE was platted in 1952 and has been virtually fully developed for some time. There is no need for additional platting or subdivision and to allow the same would destroy the presently existing homogenious character of this attractive and fully developed neighborhood. The present status of McCARTHY RIDGE is stable and orderly. To allow additional development from within would be an invitation to disorder and random and un- controlled development. 2. The McCARTHY RIDGE area is strategically placed on a ridge or bluff along Minnesota Highway 13 so as to take full advantage of the beautiful views afforded by the Minnesota River Valley. All homes are (pursuant to a restrictive covenant) located on one acre lots and are well placed so as to create a spacious park -like character taking full advantage of the natural geographic location of the property. To allow subdivision from within would destroy this attractive character of the neighborh000d. The subdivision ordinance of the City of Eapan (Ordinance No. 10) has as its.stated purpose: To promote an attractive and stable community". 3. Approval of O'Dell's application would set a precedent for future development of the area as nearly all lots and homes are presently situated and of sufficient size to allow their splitting in conformity with minimum re- quirements. The adverse effect of such random and un- controlled future subdivision is obvious. The increased density, traffic problems, noise, utility requirements; reduction of fire and police protection density, ob- structed view, can only serve to decrease the neighbor- hood integrity and diminish property values of all sur- rounding properties. This subdivision of ten homes could conceivably be developed into an area of twenty or more homes if a precedent is set allowing such subdivision. 4. There exists a Bona Fide legal dispute as to the continued existence and enforcement of a restrictive covenant placed upon the property at the time of the initial plattinC of McCARTHY RIDGE. The covenant requires homes to be built on lots at least one acre in size. All owners of property in MCCARTHY RIDGE, except O'Dells, claim that the covenant continues to be enforceable. This question may require a declaratory judgment proceeding in Dakota County District Court. GI Further, as pointed out by Planning Commission member Mulrooney, the covenants were created at the time of the original subdivision and my have permanent sig- nificance and property owners should have a right to expect that no revisions contrary to the obvious intent of the covenants would be made. 5. This is not a case of hardship for the O'Dells. They have admitted they purchased their property (approxi- mately two years ago) with full knowledge of the exist- ence of the covenant (and obviously of the character and integrity of the then existing neighborhood). The attempt of the O'Dells to split their lot is motivated only by the financial gain which they expect may flow therefrom. 6. The decision to be made by the City Council does not only affect the applicants, it affects the property rights of all of the owners of McCARTHY RIDGE and their rights to the beneficial use of their property, the right to maintain property values, and, above all, their right to the continued existence of their neighborhood in its present attractive and stable condition and the right to be protected from any decision which would set a pre- cedent for the undoubted future random and uncontrolled subdivisions which would flow therefrom. IN SUMMARY, the City Council dues have discretion and should exercise its discretion to protect the presently completed, stable, and orderly development that exists.in McCARTHY RIDGE. The fact that applicants may meet minimal ordinance requirements is certainly not controlling. McCARTHY RIDGE as it presently exists is certainly developed on maximum standards and those standards should be main- tained and not abandoned. ar ancce-W. Votel �Q- Karl 0. Kassulke Sus n S. Kassalke .,,/ 0 /r4a e � Frank C. Haas Burnet aas y 71 Martian Doheny 7 `- George E..Stevenson s /,L -y- �- Respectfully submitted, ar_ lene innegan`��` Dick Finnegan J "Neil Kveberte Pauline Kveberg Rosemary Stevenson APC Minutes August 24, 1982 ODELL•S ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT The public hearing regarding the application of David R. and Patricia B. Odell for preliminary plat approval of Odell's Addition as part of Lot 2, McCarthy Ridge Addition, was convened by the Chairman. Dan Beeson, attorney, appeared for the applicants, as did Mr. and Mrs. Odell. Mr. Beeson reviewed the history of the proposed lot split and indicated that in the Spring of 1982, the application had been submitted for waiver of plat under the hardship provision, that the Planning Commission recommended disapproval and the Council denied the application, noting no hardship was present and that the applicant was intending to split the lot for financial reasons only. Mr. Beeson stated that with the current application, all minimum requirements of the subdivision ordinance had been met and in his opinion the restrictive covenants covering the subdivision no longer are in effect. Mr. Terry Votel, a neighboring property owner, and other residents appeared in opposition to the application. He indicated that owners of all nine remaining lots opposed the application for reasons stated at the earlier Planning Commission and Council meetings. Also, a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Larry MoNurlin was read objecting to the application. Their concerns were that a precedent would be set because nearly all of the lots in the subdivision are large enough to split and could comply with the minimum requirements. There would be an increase in density, that the purpose of Ordinance 10 is to insure attractive and stable neighborhoods and that the understanding of the property owners was that the lots would not be split under the restrictive covenants. Additional noise and obstruction of view and other reasons were given by the neighboring property owners. Member Mulrooney stated that the property was platted at an earlier time and that the subdivision was approved under the conditions im- posed by the City that the lots would be maintained according to the dimen- sions and sizes submitted at the time of original plat approval. He stated further that if the covenants were included at the time of the original subdivision, that they may have permanent significance and that the people expected them to be a condition of existence of the plat and that no revisions would be made to the lots. The applicants were aware of the covenants when they purchased the property and also, it was noted there was an existing non- conforming garage on the parcel intended to be split off. After extended discussion, Mulrooney moved and Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend denial of the application including those reasons mentioned above, and further, that the owners had indicatd that the only reason for the split of the lot was economic and that no hardship existed; that there are legal and practical reasons to maintain the lots in this configuration that currently exist; that the configuration of the lots and sizes of lots were a part of the original approval of the plat by Eagan; that there was some uncertainty as to whether the private covenants applied to the lots at the present time and that a determination should be made as to their applicability; the integrity of the neighborhood would be jeopardi2ed and that other splits would undoubtedly occur if a precedent were allowed to be set by the City; that the covenants were originally set up as perpetual; and also, that all of the adjoining property owners in the subdivision object to the lot split. All members voted in favor, except Krob who voted no. 2 63 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Nineteen PRELIMINARY PLAT/SHEFFIELD ADDITION C. Gabbert Development, Inc., for a Preliminary Plat, Sheffield Addition -- A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at their last regular meeting held on August 24, 1982 to consider the preliminary plat for Sheffield Addition. The appli- cation submitted by Gabbert Development for preliminary plat con- sists of approximately 11.36 acres and contains 44 small single family lots. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of the preliminary plat. For additional information, refer to a copy of the City Planner's report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages (o j through 74 . For a copy of the action that was taken by hie ETPC, refer to a copy of those minutes found on pages 7 through _7e, . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the recommendation of the APC to approve the preliminary plat of Shef- field Addition. W9 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PREI,IPaNARY PI.4T _ S Z7 M ADDITIIN APPLICANT: GABBY D �� INC LOCATION: PART OF, ERTHE Fk OF THESFi', OF SECTION 26 EXISTING ZONING: R-2 (MI)CED RES DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: PS E �IT DIIt )-DINS Y 3-6 DWELLIM QTS AUGUST 24, 1982 LION SOUTHDATE OF RF.Pn4T. PLANNED DEVEZAPMED7T REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNELE _ V� APPLIcp,TION suamITIED ' CITY PLANNER An application has been s ulanitted requestin g pre Addition, consistin family lots locatedg of approximately 11.36 aha 'min4rY Plat o� on 26. small Sheffield ZONING , u Part of the Eh of the containing 44 small sin -----LAM USE Presently, 6 dwell- the parcel is zoned R-2 Of 0-3 � units acre Parceleng*on1South Planner a density between 3 and use denti guide designates thiunder dwelling units per gross a Per acre. The proposed Bevel lY Residential) a de land rent densityeois h er than whnd 4,65 at i g units Per net ane con With 3.8 dwelling =S approved in the L�cingttniS�thPlannedted n�� �9uide"b t is with_ cPrt. Since Wilderness has ess Run Road �� Road extension. Theme been extended roma ty �d and utilities have been in- woodAddition approval were Platst occur were occurringalongthe WildPlaanterbury For erness Rim which w to Wedg- of this Particular Oakwood ar ted by ba townhouse deveel bald Lagro has prest y in ary small singlegle Platted an Additions n ca north and east oo�ent which is dirlledectly north of the prelimi ly lots and twin home loNorthview Pea Oakwood Helghts, Sienna cor_ TO the south, of Iak at of Hills iOison Heights and Sheffield Additiwhion south of the older Yeast of Wedge mod Addition . residential developments in the Sheffield Addition est lot is bei size in Sheffield is 7,500 square f square feet. The applicantng Proposed as 44 small single family lots. which would be ssset and the largest lot c The small - Sheffield comparable to whtProposing Co Provide narrow single f onta. 19.800 widths in Northtv1ioeew1MeamFbsing an avlot erage am-lY lots rporation did in Nor lows. It is staff's understand -Ing that she�Pew � o 60, 6 S" CITY OF EAGAN SHEFFIELD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT AUGUST 24, 1982 PAGE TWD building plans for each of the lots where the homes constructed would meet setbacks and lot coverage for each of the particular lots. The access to Sheffield Addition will be a looped street tieing into Wilderness Run Road at two locations. 'Ilse westerly access is directly across from the westerly access of Oakwood Heights. The easterly access does not exactly line up with the easterly access of Oakwood Heights. As you can see by the exhibit, if the easterly road in Sheffield is slid further to the east and the easterly access to Oakwood Heights is slid slightly to the west, they will be able to get the two accesses in alignment. The circulation for Sheffield is provided by a looped street. The only concern regarding the looped street is some of the narrow frontages of the lots which appear on the curves in the street; the widths at some of these curves go down to 37' and 32' on the eyebrow. If two lots would be removed, the appli- cant would be able to obtain 50' lot widths throughout the entire subdivision. Through the planned development process, the City of Fagan has allowed smaller than 12,000 square foot single family lots in a planned development. This parti- cular parcel is in the Lexington South.Planned Development, therefore, the zon- ing would allow smaller lot sizes. However, the miniminn lot size has not been determined for a single family lot. Wedgwood Addition directly east has 70-75' lot widths and containsapproximately 9,000-10,000 square feet of area. North - view Meadows which is north and east of this proposed plat has 60' lot widths and lot area between 7,200-7,500 square feet for single family lots. The lot area in Sheffield, as mentioned above, ranges between 7,500 square feet to 19,000 square feet, but the lot width averages 50'. The lot widths for particular sub- divisions have been determined by building plans and to insure the City that single family hones can be constructed on the particular lot and still adhere to the setback requirements in accordance with Ordinance 52. It is staff's under- standing that the developer will provide this information at the public hearing to demonstrate that the house plans will meet the ordinance criteria. If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following oonditions: 1. A development agreement be completed prior to the final plat approval of Sheffield. 2. No Variances for side setbacks or lot coverage be approved unless related to trees or topographic hardship for the particular lot. The easterly access of the looped street be shifted westerly in order to obtain a 4 -way intersection with the access of Oakwood Heights. 4. No direct access should be allowed from Wilderness Run Road. 5. A blanket variance or deviation would be allowed to create the smaller single family and duplex lots in accordance with the planned development. DCR/jach 66 ENGINEERING REPORT SHEEFTFf,n ADDTTION AUGUST 24, 1982 PAGE THREE ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS 6. An 80' right-of-way for Wilderness Run Road shall be dedicated if not previous- ly dedicated under Oakwood Heights preliminary plat. 7. The east intersection at Wilderness Run Road shall be moved further east to facilitate lining up with the private drive for Oakwood Heights.. 8. This development shall accept all assessments levied and assigned to it. 9. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to final plat approval. 10. If installed privately, the utility layout and design shall be as approved by the City. 11. Necessary ponding easements must be dedicated along the easterly border of this development and also for the southwest corner of the development as a part of the final plat. 12. A 10' drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated adjacent to all public right-of-way, private property and centered over all internal lot lines, ex- cept for the proposed storm sewer locations which shall be 20' wide. RM/jack 67 TO: THE ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RU ME, CITY PLANNER FROM: RICHARD M. =I, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER A DATE: AUGUST 18, 1982 RE: PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SHEFFIELD ADDITION The Public works Department has the following convents for consideration of the above -referenced plat. UTILITIES Existing utilities available for this plat are located within Wilderness Run Road and consist of trunk water main and trunk sanitary sewer. Both the trunk water main and trunk sanitary sewer were constructed under Project 241 "Wilder- ness Run Road Trunk Utilities" and accepted in July, 1980. Consequently, the existing sanitary sewer is of sufficient size, capacity and depth to handle this proposed development. Likewise, the existing water main incorporates sufficient pressure and capacity to support this proposed development. The general topography of this area consists of a large knoll with mild slopes falling away from the highpoint, located on Lots 7 and 8 of Block 1. This sloping provides for drainage to the east and Pond LP -61, to the north and Wild- erness Run Road and southwest to Pond LP -50. The proposed grading plan main- tains this general drainage pattern as can be seen from the attached maps. The proposed grading plan provides for filling Lots 1 and 2, 6-11, and 22-27, Block 2 and Lot 14 in Block 1 with material taken from the street right-of-way and ad- jacent areas along Lots 1-11 of Block 1 and Lots 12-20 and 28-30, Block 2. This grading will result in two low points in the proposed street which will require construction of a small amount of storm sewer to remove the run off collected at those points. Neither of these instances would pose any problems. EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY Utility easements between Lots 2 and 3 and Lots 26 and 27 of Block 2 would be required for the proposed storm sewer. The water main and sanitary sewer can be constructed within the dedicated street right-of-way, thus no additional ease- ments would be required. Furthermore, a condition of this plat should include dedicating either 40' or 80' of Wilderness Run Road for street and utility pur- poses depending upon the amount of right-of-way dedicated by the Oakwood Heights development. Ingress and egress will be provided for this development by means of a looped street connecting to Wilderness Run Road. One concern that arises here is that the easterly intersection at Wilderness Run Road is offset approximately 100' westerly of the proposed intersection of the private drive for the Oakwood Heights development. It would be desirable for these intersections to be direct- ly across from one another. This could probably be best acaamplished by shifting the easterly street in this development further east, and at the same time, shift 6�S Engineering Report - Sheffield Addition August 24, 1982 Page two the easterly street of the Oakwood Heights development further west so that the end result is that both streets line up across frau each other. Since this proposed street is not a collector street, no bike trails or sidewalks will be required. In addition, no sidewalk or bike trail will be required along Wilderness Run Road for the reason that a bike trail will be Constructed on the north side of Wilderness Run Road with the Oakwood Heights development. As a condition of. this preliminary plat approval, this development shall accept any assessments levied and assigned to it. I will be available to discuss any aspect of this report with the Planning Com- mission at their meeting on August 24, 1982. Respectfully submitted, Richard M. Hefti, E. Assistant City Engineer Mi/jack RE JP -19 J -p 0702 2 JP -30 0740 ezoe } Bezo j...Bz t tr. J '3( a., �J''' A JP -20 •tz L Li1383x5.°o j LS,17J� i po I a JP -2 oil i.o •^iI \ lLri 852 B90A-8163e JP -216 82A 84J4e P-3 00 ' { J-. JP i!6P1-A77q:. 1i PATRICK __.,111L`(.e�� ',f •II _82 1._0 B/9J3 AGAt..JY° - 2A , 8170. JP -29 •26 25.3 P 14 �,i�//•� •\' 0 804.D 940. y � �_:` 11 B/B.0 �.a• -,J J's4 696.0 JYusITDK 5116tlOwo r _ 890.8 855.0 J956.0 '^ A 968.0 / 9ADDcl hv A1LJE, L•Q1 .` ISI HORN ``�. 9730 o Z - J -ypc7 }.-•-'-i;F - LP -40 r _ I__. -y...-. ? 977.0 [G -�T - vcr,-- LP-4W..'i' 898.0-_..-.-. aggP' _ r I . eL/N 6840901.0; BB --_S._ .._ �9TB.0 r'. LP -5 2 „l LP-@4re�0D0. • LP -52 LP -46 r %� - :•�� �y.tte 900.0 879.2 LP -33 . `a. P=39:'"L�'� 850.0x^' LP=3I� J 8955�y�.1 v 666.2 9070S. ] R' LP -30 stra' i1 90910.V`�47 9/60 914.0 \3 e�� r / * �(�€P-51 g a• I-�LP-34 'f01 -�� 906.0 �.rn\ Ct l�I'-868.0 11%- I `ra 879.0 i ✓/'-�. 907,0 �u C ,� xs IN J BBJO LP -49 L �V \r✓1 nln `:x52 ir!FBTB.O �. LP -3T z4- \ 9160 -_ i� -1._-{^-/•, L5: 261 ?_:ff 8628 36 ``886__3.0 `�'• I I¢% ., e 8640 l_., 1.06 . �g 1 �J L 61 3 LP -435 / 9/30 O 8730 BB25 7 + 4 J,,I 1 26 �4'"�1 KOTA 926.0 / v.• a /�_ COUNTY 9025 91. y A. 4. U•�, PARK 6� -90400 LP -20 LP -27 ,__.883.22_. __ _ ;L o26,. iF 9160 .. 9/7! ' EXCEPTION 886.0 CZ? IILY-23ALUDED Lis 13 �J 9//.3 ._ -` 9204 LP -19 9120 900.2 K/L-3.0 L 22 23 out., f 92-f& _1q ' LP -15\ LP - 928.7 -/9040 I �� 926P 231 r I \ � ` '01 -, ROyEMOiJN ' LP -I6 !�©`928.3 / `\ 71` 911.0 �`JVot" t LAYOUT Ear .DDD 1. a 70 1/2 PILE IYILE Sonestm.Rosene•AnAerlik 6 Associates Consulting Engineers St Paul • Minnesota el.., q, ate 3/ To S�{E�a✓IELD ��1� =ri Lexington South �� 1 _ a�'y i•' 1'WII •rln:,f:nu •'•. lig y�-_ •NVuo .• ..1..... ....'..� 197 •19 :.�-xr••I:a �•i �.:. �-.:y..-_�.I a 80 Ilir ,�^,'�,�. a :�/r 14.��%`-�_� •il'•. 1�.1,'I � :� . .• � ;;',y'�:, ,,. at.� i 2'2A 1980.1903 Al : 1FbR1, I i 3 1903. 1905 - Py.,p' �,%�;•, 4 1985-1900 [ city. wi'j r SChOa R4`I R2 f- 'R2 7';. C$C .�6ts'rj�1'�l�Ju 7. Land Use Plan R7 .d. (0.2un,MQ R2 ml..naf7-OwvK) R7 m1a.r.b(0-12,nAW4 R4 mwllyb (12'un4&Q Le 11d. b... ae wM1w.. CSC a M-shmu c tr •w hIk WV Imll sil, ye..Irdl h1YN ..;: -,e_ ;Ic� � .-,� '•� I ,1d ,/• = .rte. . .oM 7 9� ✓ 1 Irl?tu `f ti '. a+u. �� Wa� T(y�i ' u •fir' ' f ► ',L t y - �•�.. ., ,,i !'j.'T tr,, ... , '`•�i..lr1. II "CIS F �� 1'x:11 =�C ty����;. } �' e � ,. � t�.E•�J . `� 1 �(•��.'rz'� 't� ��'�, ���,�;.:_,j'1��� -,fit/.,:t; ,,I... :; 1 LX, t! h.v ( J L W l)&F-v4boD QA.K!�Loo b woo 4. OUTLOT O N.POND 4 d Y a '9041) 2 al 501�b I A 30 nia!60 4 f 1 OUTLOT A "oft . If. Z!w; 6.81 6 Al a . . . . . . . POND_ 2 5 G .'LAX EWOOD H ILLS 2 • — AtNUUTL i t�- ll '// .. / ., , +wlflC[l/ 'I • ` Ind- •�, , . � +sxi en� pie � r� r Ind �COMMERCIAL r 7. ••+/i,'p�i —' PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - � .- -,' y > . J�r....r ...r � �I'•:. I rff iT lnd, I Ind ..».-...�,.-'- '�- k• __ � __ .tom,• vii � _�• '.L.� -_ .-•'•rt.l lh- P.:� R-III-� r-��e�e-r.,.'�I� •-� ueR-11 (_'! - \ -�! Ind •�. .",G R-11 e G . r :Rav '."_ Ind ! ,..� pi In ,�—RIII p _ NB • LB-' ( R -II - -• •R -II CSC-. R•10d .,q nd. p _� n RII �R�%C"�.''-O'F Cl.. 12 -II'— — ' la,u r ^' �e•� •' - �• _ is '_ O I, /� � —!- R•II --P RIII �.�,,; - .}. ✓ �. R -I _ w RU ,,. _ Ind R RII�v O _ RII .:.III - •.._.. I `•,;..,G'CRY .: ��-�' 14 P HALL R41 - J R -I R-11. ! RD L_ N F'-': RII 134 � I_- rsy 1P © �• I IV: -y ...: !s' �. R-111_ R -I\, -j•-- R -III R -II R -II •; { :j,lGy -� M u JLeCtT j :l R-111 RB , R -III '.:::,moi. �a-I;.i'�.M11, i-- - ••----I'- I R RIII R•1•`� -. R -III • - r�,`. R -III ....- -- RII a CT • R -II • �• . P - _ - R II R-11 R-IIp"" ..•r'•r i'�0 '. 1 - ® R -II' .c� B R0' `.:. i CSC R l ,y ,' ✓:<L LB ,R -I }�IIIII R - R' .,1 R -I �) R-1 i P GbLFaPnAA gR OP•,. R -II. itil! Q�'b Pene R.p A 12� ''✓�t R_I ; R-11 r7 P .. No R-11- - AROSEMOUNr •� V4LLE7 I ,. J (�, ..,..� .l r 73 AD T 10 PK Ln P K A .Rt 4 C.1 PF PF itA II Lu PD R -i .74-1 0 s u bi e,c t. Parce 0 A �6, PK R-1 APC Minutes August 24, 1982 SHEFFIELD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT The hearing regarding the application of Gabbert Development, Inc. for preliminary plat approval of Sheffield Addition in Lexington South Planned Development, north of Cliff Road, adjoining Wilderness Run Road, was opened by the Chairman. Wally Gabbert appeared for the applicant and noted that 11.36 acres were included containing 44 small single family lots. The parcel is currently zoned R-2 (Mixed Residential) with a density between 3 and 6 dwelling units per acre. The Land Use Guide designates parcel R-1 (Single Family Residential) with a density of 0 to 3 dwelling units per acre. The proposed development contains 3.8 dwelling units per gross acre and 4.65 dwelling units per net acre. Mr. Gabbert indicated the consumer prefers single family and that the lots generally are 50 feet in width at the front lot line except four larger lots. It was noted also that the eyebrow and the lots on the curve would be less than 50 feet at the street line. He displayed drawings of four proposed homes to be constructed on the lots and noted that certain lots could accommodate 45 foot frontages with the homes proposed. A number of neighboring residents from Lakewood Hills Addition appeared and had strong concerns about the pond to the north of their property and the possi- bility of development causing additional drainage with the resulting assess- ments to the Lakewood Hills owners. Mr. Colbert explained the City's pond and storm drainage policy and method of assessments for storm sewer purposes. Pam Lane stated she was concerned about lot widths and the impact of a greater number of people on schools, streets, etc. Mr. Gabbert stated the prices would be in the $60,000.00 range. He also compared lot widths and gross square footage in other subdivisions with smaller than minimum lot size re- quirements. All except four lots would contain about 7,500 square feet. Mr. Colbert was concerned about the 20 foot driveway widths in the eyebrow and only 10 feet between driveways, which would not be sufficient snow storage area. Mr. Krob stated he did not favor 50 foot width lots and 32 feet widths at the eyebrows. Mr. Gabbert indicated that it would be possible to narrow the width of certain lots to 45 feet and increase the widths adjoining the eyebrow. He also stated that he would agree to widen the access street with Oakwood Heights Addition. Member McCrea recommended reducing the lots to provide minimum 50 foot lot widths, including those adjoining the eyebrow. It was also recommended that staff study the minimum width of lots and minimum lot sizes with further review by the Planning Commission. It was noted that there was park land on the west and pond on the east. Krob then moved, McCrea seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application, subject to the following: 1. Reduction of the number of lots in the subdivision to provide mini- mum 50 foot lot widths at the street line on all lots. 2. A development agreement shall be executed prior to the final plat approval of Sheffield Addition. 3. No variances for side setbacks or lot coverage shall be approved unless related to trees or topographic hardship for the particular lot as determined by the City. 3 7S APC Minutes August 24, 1982 4. The easterly access of the looped street shall be shifted westerly in order to obtain a 4 -way intersection with the access of Oakwood Heights. 5. No direct access shall be allowed from Wilderness Run Road. 6. A blanket variance or deviation would be allowed to create the smaller single family lots in accordance with the planned development. 7. An 80 foot right-of-way for Wilderness Run Road shall be dedicated if not previously dedicated under Oakwood Heights preliminary plat. 8. The east intersection at Wilderness Run Road shall be relocated to provide proper allignment or separation with the private drive for Oakwood Heights. 9. This development shall accept all standard City assessments levied and assigned to it. 10. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to final plat approval. 11. If installed privately, the utility layout and design shall be as approved by the City. 12. Necessary ponding easements must be dedicatd along the easterly border of this development and also for the southwest corner of the develop- ment as a part of the final plat. 13. A 10 foot drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated adjacent to all public rights-of-way, private property and centered over all internal lot lines, except for the proposed storm sewer locations which shall be 20 feet wide. All voted in favor except Turnham who voted no. 76 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Twenty MUNICIPAL FINANCE BOND/SENIOR. CITIZEN HOUSING PROJECT D. Municipal Finance Bond for Joint Venture Senior Housing Project -- The Dakota County HRA has approached the City of Mendota Heights for assistance in providing a senior citizen condominium housing project. The City of Mendota Heights has met on several occasions with the Wilder Foundation in an effort to research various alterna- tives to doing a housing project for persons over the age of 55 within that community. One of the major concerns expressed by both the Wilder Foundation and City of Mendota Heights is a guaran- tee of occupancy if a condominium development was approved and constructed. Need for this type of housing is not issue. The problem lies with the ability to sell existing single family house- holds that are currently owned by senior citizens who would like to purchase a unit in a senior citizen condominium housing project. The HRA has become involved with the Wilder Foundation and the City of Mendota Heights to consider and propose a single family mortgage revenue bond program that would make lower interest mort- gage money available for home buyers seeking to purchase the senior citizens' homes. Since there are senior citizens in the Cities of Eagan and West St. Paul that could benefit by moving into a senior citizen condominium project in Mendota Heights, a single family mortgage revenue bond program can be developed and sold by the HRA and the lower interest rate mortgage monies would be available for all three (3) communities. The first step was for the City of Mendota Heights to consider and approve the program, which they did at their last regular City Council meeting on Septem- ber 7. This program was then presented by the HRA to the West St. Paul City Council and unanimously approved at their meeting on September 13, 1982. The program is being presented to the City of Eagan for consideration at this meeting. For more detailed background information, the City Administrator requested that the executive director of the HRA provide a memorandum that discusses the program, a copy of which is enclosed on pages -7g through Also, Ms. Schultz will be present at the meeting to present any further detail and/or answer questions that the City Council may have. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny the adoption of an ordinance that would authorize the Dakota County HRA to exercise in behalf of the City of Eagan the powers conferred by Minnesota statute relating to planning and implementation of a single family mortgage revenue bond housing program. 77 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF DAKOTA COUNTY MEMORANDUM TO: Eagan Mayor and Council �1 FROM: Carol Schultz, Executive Director l 14) SUBJECT: SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND PROGRAM DATE: September 14, 1982 2496- 145th STREET WEST ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA 55068 612-423-4800 A few weeks ago, the Dakota County HRA was approached by the city of Mendota Heights for assistance in providing senior citizen condominium housing in their community. The city had earlier requested that the Wilder Foundation research the various alternatives to doing housing of this sort, and the Foundation had determined that an older adult (age 55 and over) condominium development of 100-120 units in Mendota Heights would be feasible. A major concern, however, is that senior citizen households wishing to purchase a condominium will likely need to sell their present home and that high interest rates and lack of mortgage money available have greatly reduced the number of qualified homebuyers. This has resulted in home sales being sluggish which would hence make it difficult for seniors who wanted to buy a condominium to sell their present homes. The Wilder Foundation also has d not come exclusively from Mendot West St. Paul and Eagan may also but would face the same problems Therefore, the Dakota County HRA Mortgage Revenue Band Program to available for homebuyers wishing =_termined that the market for the condos will 3 Heights. Seniors from the adjacent cities of be interested in the condominium development, in trying to sell their present homes. was requested to put together a Single Family make lower interest rate mortgage money to purchase the seniors' present homes. On August 25, 1982 a meeting of staff from the cities of Mendota Heights, West St. Paul, and Eagan, along with representatives from the Dakota County HRA, the Wilder Foundation, bond counsel (Holmes & Graven), and bond underwriter (Miller & Schroeder) met to discuss the concept, subject to formal approval being granted by the Mendota Heights City Council. 7$ "AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" On September 7, 1982, the Mendota Heights City Council granted approval of the program. The Dakota County HRA is now formally appearing before you to request approval of an ordinance allowing the Dakota County HRA to issue single family morgage revenue bonds in the name of the Dakota County HRA for use in the City of Eagan. (We appeared before the West Saint Paul City Council on September 13, 1982 for the same action.) According to federal tax law, 100% of the proceeds of tax-exempt mortgage reve- nue bonds must be for homebuyers whose incomes do not exceed the median income for the Twin Cities of $31,460. Additionally, 90% of the proceeds must be loaned to first-time homebuyers. The federal tax law also restrict the amount of tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds which may be issued in each state. In Minnesota, the ceiling is set at $200 million, most of which is used by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for various programs state-wide and by the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Duluth who receive special set -asides. Therefore, the remaining funds available within this ceiling total only $27 million. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency will hold a special competition for the remaining funds on January 2, 1983. Since interest among various Minnesota cities usually exceeds the amount of funds available, the Minnesota State Housing Finance Agency has set review and ranking criteria which will give preference to applicants who are able to demonstrate that mortgage revenue funds will be used predominantly by homebuyers of moderate income (i.e., those whose incomes do not exceed $25,168). Therefore, in order to be competitive with other cities applications for these funds, the City of Mendota Heights has approved the Dakota County HRA creating a tax -increment district around the con- dominium development, the proceeds of which (approximately $90,000 per year) would be used to further reduce the interest rate for first-time homebuyers to a rate affordable by households with incomes not exceeding $25,168. This will help make the application very competitive. Also, 24% of the bond issue is needed in up -front "seed money", which has made it impossible for the Dakota County HRA to consider this type of bond issue in the past. In this case, however, the Wilder Foundation is willing to provide these funds. An additional federal requirement on tax-exempt bond issues of this type is that the purchase price of an existing home may not exceed $75,600 (the limit is higher for a newly constructed home). In order for a bond issue of this type to be economically feasible, it must be of a size of $6 to $10 million dollars. Since Mendota Heights would not have sufficient numbers of modest -cost proper- ties in its housing stock to utilize the total amount of funds, (and since it is expected that some seniors in the neighboring communities of Eagan and West St. Paul would also be interested in the older adult condominium development) the cities of Eagan and West St. Paul are being invited to participate in the program. Since more than one community is needed, it becomes necessary for Dakota HRA to participate on behalf of each city and submit the application to the State as one package. Therefore the tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds (and the tax increment district, in Mendota Heights) would be in the name of Dakota County HRA, with specific approval and controls set by the participating cities. If Eagan agrees to participate, the ordinance attached to this memo must be approved Tuesday evening. As can be seen by the attached flow chart, the time schedule for meeting the various legal requirements is tight. These dates, however, may be changed slightly, but everything must be ready for submission to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency by January 2, 1983. It should also be mentioned that not all of the bond proceeds will be needed by by purchasers of seniors' homes who would be purchasing a condominium in the pro- posed Wilder development. Therefore, this rogram would also make lower - interest mortgaoe funds available to of er first Tge ome uvers in t e as we seiier. In summary, then, the major goal of the proposed program is to provide a con- dominium development in Mendota Heights for older adults 55 years of age and over and to allow moderate to middle income families who have not been able to purchase a home an opportunity to become homeowners in Mendota Heights, West St. Paul and Eagan. (Today's interest rates preclude over 88% of the area's poten- tial first-time homebuyers from even purchasing a modest home of $60,000.) In addition, households with incomes at or below $25,168 served by this program will count towards meeting each city's low and moderate housing goals in their respective Comprehensive Plans. Finally, Eagan and West St. Paul will also receive benefit from the tax increment generated by the condominium development even though the tax increment district will exist within the boundaries of the city of Mendota Heights. I will be present at your meeting Tuesday night along with a representative from our bond counsel to answer any questions you may have on an admittedly complex, but creative, proposal. I do believe Eagan is in a unique position to benefit greatly from this proposal. Attachments 79 SAMPLE Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE DAKOTA COUNTY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO EXERCISE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF , THE POWERS CONFERRED BY MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 462C.01 to 462C.08, RELATING TO PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND HOUSING PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") was created pursuant to Laws of Minnesota 1971, Chapter 333, as amended by Laws of Minnesota 1973, Chapter 534 (the "Enabling Statute"), and authorized pursuant thereto to exercise the powers of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462:411 to 462.711, as amended (the "Municipa�t"), wit the territorial boundaries of the County;,and WHEREAS, the Legislature has enacted Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Municipal Housing Finance Act") to regu ate the planning and implementation of single family housing programs and has provided for the financing of such programs pursuant to its terms only; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Housing Finance Act, a city is authorized to make or purchase mortgage loans to finance the acquisition of single family housing and to issue revenue bonds to provide funds therefor, such bonds to be issued after adoption of a housing plan and program and approval thereof; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Housing Finance Act, a city is authorized to delegate its powers pursuant thereto to the housing and redevelopment authority acting within the City; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF Section 1. The HRA is hereby authorized to exercise on behalf of the City of (the "City"), the powers conferred by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462C.0 to 462.08, including the power to issue and sell single fami y housing revenue bonds. Section 2. The HRA shall, upon request of the City Council, make periodic status reports to the City Council regarding the progress of the housing program and bond issue undertaken pursuant to the power conferred hereby. Section 3. The HRA shall submit the Housing Plan and Program for the City prepared by the HRA to the City Council for its approval, prior to submission of said Plan and Program to the Metropolitan Council and Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, respectively. 1 Y[ ACTIONS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW FOR SINGLE-FAMILY REVENUE BOND PROPOSALS: September 21, 1982 November 4, 1982 November 4, 1982 December 7, 1982 January 2, 1983 January 20, 1982 (.. tentative (tentative) Pub is hearing. .t. City ordinance City adopts C ty Counci Housing Plan and Minnesota Hous - delegates housin_ Housing Plan, ity ounce sets ` Program submit- ing Finance bond authority t r^ public hearing hearing and ted to Minnesota Agency allocates HRA and at east Metropolitan date for Housing at east adopts Housing Housing Finance Housing Bond qqAA Eagan Timetable 1983 Before December 31, 1983 HRAP asses Hous - 0c` ing Bond saleHousing Revenue Resolution. Bond Llosing. NOTES: 1. Between September and December, cities of Mendota Heights and West St. Paul follow same sequence of events, but at specific dates coinciding with their City Council meeting dates. 2. Dakota County HRA does preparation of Housing Plan and Housing Program for the cities. (Although Housing Plans may vary, Housing Program will be the same for each participating city.) 3. Only the City of Mendota Heights and HRA will be involved with Tax Increment Financing Program Process. ACTIONS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW FOR SINGLE-FAMILY REVENUE BOND PROPOSALS: September 21, 1982 November 4, 1982 November 4, 1982 December 7, 1982 January 2, 1983 January 20, 1982 tentative (tentative) Pub is hearing. City ordinance City adopts C ty Counci Housing Plan and Minnesota Hous - delegates housin_ Housing Plan, ity ounce sets holds public Program submit- ing Finance bond authority t Subnits to public hearing hearing and ted to Minnesota Agency allocates HRA and at east Metropolitan date for Housing at east adopts Housing Housing Finance Housing Bond authorizes use of 30 days Council for LTS02ram. 15 days Pro ram. Agency. Authorit . revenue bonds. from review and from Sets public published comment. published hearing date for notice) (Met. Council ha notice) Housing Plan. 45 -days for 1983 Before December 31, 1983 HRAP asses Hous - 0c` ing Bond saleHousing Revenue Resolution. Bond Llosing. NOTES: 1. Between September and December, cities of Mendota Heights and West St. Paul follow same sequence of events, but at specific dates coinciding with their City Council meeting dates. 2. Dakota County HRA does preparation of Housing Plan and Housing Program for the cities. (Although Housing Plans may vary, Housing Program will be the same for each participating city.) 3. Only the City of Mendota Heights and HRA will be involved with Tax Increment Financing Program Process. STANLEY E. KEHL Attorney at Law August 24, 1982 Mr. Jack Klepp AHW Corporation 1130 Northwestern National Bank Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Dear Jack: HOLMES & GRAVEN CHARTERED 470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 35402 Telephone 6121338-1177 You have asked that I prepare a description of a senior citizen/first-time home buyer program for the City of Mendota Heights and surrounding cities for presentation to the City of Mendota Heights. In developing the specifics of the program described below, I have researched the various legal issues involved and have concluded that the program is legally permissable. Program Objective The goals of the program are (1) to provide 100-120 units of condominium type housing in the City of Mendota Heights for senior citizens living in Mendota Heights or surrounding communities and (2) to assist the purchasers of the senior citizens single family houses and other home purchasers. Senior Citizen Condominium Project The proposal is to construct a 100-120 unit condominium project on land located in Mendota Heights. The project will be composed of 1 and 2 bedroom units with an average sale price of $75,000. The project will be designed for occupancy by senior citizens. The developer would secure private construction financing and the purchasers of the units will, to the extent needed, secure private financing. Housing Bond Program The Dakota County HRA (the "HRA") would issue housing revenue bonds in an amount between $6,000,000 and $10,000,000 on behalf of the cities which wish to participate in the program. The proceeds of'the bonds would be loaned to the purchasers of housing units within the participating cities. There are several limitations imposed by state and federal laws on the implementation of this program. The limitations are as follows: (1) Income of purchasers must be less then $31,460 unless the home is in a targeted area. Adjustments to family income are allowed for dependents. (2) The purchase price of the existing house units may not exceed $75,600. l' Mr. Jack Klepp August 24, 1982 Page 2 (3) At least 90% of the loan amount must be loaned to first-time home buyers. In order for the HRA to issue the bonds, the following events must occur: (1) Each city must adopt a housing plan which has been reviewed by the Metropolitan Council. Thirty days published notice of a public hearing on the plan must be provided. (2) Each city must adopt a housing program for the housing bond issue. (3) The HRA must submit the housing program to the State Housing Finance Agency (the "Agency") on behalf of the cities on or before January 2, 1983. (4) The Agency must allocate a portion of Minnesota's housing mortgage bond ceiling for the program. Loans made under the program would be affordable to purchasers with different incomes depending upon the interest rate and the sale price of the house. The following chart shows the income necessary to purchase different priced housing units at various interest rates: Table I Income Necessary to Purchase Housing Unit Sale Price Assumed $60,000 $75;600 $83,000 Interest Rate 11% $21,563 $279163 $29,818 12% $232127 $299163 $32,000 13% $24,764 $31,163 $34,218 Interest Reduction Program As can be seen from the table above, the housing revenue bonds alone may not reduce interest rates adequately to allow low and moderate income families to purchase moderate priced houses. To solve this problem the HRA could establish a tax increment district which would include the senior citizen project and the HRA could also establish an interest reduction program to assist the first-time home buyer who purchase the houses sold by the senior citizens. The tax increment which would be generated by the senior citizen condominium and which is estimated to be $90,000 per year, would be used to reduce the interest on the loans for the first-time home buyers. The assistance can be provided either as a fixed amount for up to 25 years or as a declining amount each year. The following table shows the number of buyers which can be assisted at various income levels, purchase prices, and interest rates. In the tables below 80% of program income equals $25,168, 90% of program income equals $28,314 and the maximum program income equals $31,460 as stated above. no Air. Jack Klepp August 24, 1982 Page 3 Table H Number of Purchasers Assisted Assuming 11% Interest Rate* % of Program Income 80% , 90% Maximum Sale Price 60,000 -- -- -- $75,600 136 -- $83,000 58 182 -- Table III Number of Purchasers Assisted Assuming 12% Interest Rate* % of Program Income 80% 90% Maximum Sale Price $60,000 -- -- $75,600 68 326 -- $83,000 39 74 500 Table IV Number of Purchasers Assisted Assuming 13% Interest Rate* % of Program Income 80% 90% Maximum Sale Price 60,000 -- -- -- $75,600 45 96 -- $83,000 30 46 98 * Each table shows the number of purchasers assisted if all of the assistance was provided to one income group for one sale price housing unit. If the HRA wanted to write down the interest rates on a graduated payment basis where the payments would increase over each of the first three to five years so that at the end of the three to five years there would be no assistance, the HRA could help more people. The HRA would need to sell a tax increment bond and use the bond proceeds to write down the interest rates. The tax increment generated from the proejet would then be used to pay off the tax increment bonds. A plus for the HRA is that when each purchaser who received interest reduction assistance sells his or her house the HRA is entitled to receive a position of the appreciation in the house. The amount of the HRA's share is up to the HRA to determine at the time the assistance is provided. $4 ,'0: Mr. Jack Klepp August 24, 1982 Page 4 With these various parts of an overall program, the City, the Dakota County HRA and a developer should be able to put together a successful senior citizen first-time home buyer program. If you have any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, 'Stanley Y SEK:mj VS Table #1 Older Adults in Program Communities Community Population over 55 years of age 1970 1 1980 % change Population over 65 years of age 1970 1980 % change Mendota Heights 681 1145 +112% 285 511 79% Eagan 457 1184 +159% 180 442 *146% West St. Paul 3400 5260 +55% 1633 2933 -x8096 1Based on data from the 1970 and 1980 U.S. Census 96 Table #2 Percentage of Population over 55 and 65 years of age )mmunity 1970 of % of population population over over 55 65 1980 % of % of population population over over 55 65 % change in group between 1970-1980 as a % of population 55 65 '•Iendota Heights 1101 4.6% 19.8% 7% +8.8% +2.40.1 =agan 4.4;5 1.7% 5.7% 2.1% +1.3% +.4% :lest St. Paul 18.111 8.7% 28.4% 15.8% +10.3% +7.1% 1Based on data from the 1970 and 1980 U.S. census. Median value for owner occupied non -condominium housing units as of April 1980. Mendota Heights $87,700 Eagan $70,900 West St. Paul $62,100 47 Table #3 Value of Owner Occupied Non -Condominium Housing Units Community Dollar value of homes # of units in range 'endota Heights 1 -------------- ------------------------ agan Less than 10,000 2 -------------- ------------------------ est St. Paul 0 'endota Heights 0 -------------- ------------------------ agan 10,000 to 14,999 4 -------------- ------------------------ 'est St. Paul 5 'endota Heights 2 -------------- ------------------------ .agan 15,000 to 19,999 1 -------------- ------------------------ !est St. Paul 37 (endota Heights 2 -------------- :agan 20,000 ------------------------ to 24,999 6 -------------- :est St. Paul ------------------------ 62 lendota Heights 6 -------------- :agan 25,000 ------------------------ to 29,999 7 -------------- !est St. Paul ------------------------ 100 lendota Heights 19 --------------- :agan 30,000 ------------------------ to 34,999 15 --------------- lest St. Paul ------------------------ 157 lendota Heights 19 --------------- ------------------------ .agan 35,000 to 39,999 32 --------------- ------------------------ lest St. Paul 177 lendota 87 --------------- ------------------------ :agan 40,000 to 49,999 154 --------------- ------------------------ ;est St. Paul 620 W r� ' endota Heights -------------- agan -------------- est St. Paul 50,000 to 79,999 -2- 650 --------------------------- 2523 --------------------------- 1902 endota Heights 362 -------------- --------------------------- agan 80,000 to 99,999 640 -------------- --------------------------- est St. Paul 493 endota Heigh�s 452 . --------•------ --------------------------- 3gan 100,000 to 149,999 498 -------------- --------------------------- est St. Paul 249 andota Heights 251 -------------- --------------------------- 3gan 150,000 or more 79 -------------- --------------------------- s t St. Paul 50 87 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING GENERAL HOUSING PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the ,Mendota Heights City Council will meet in the City Hall at p.m., October 19, 1982, and conduct a public hearing pursuant to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.01, et sec., as it relates to adoption of a General Housing Plan. This plan will describe the housing needs of the City and will describe a plan to meet said needs and other matters required by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C. Persons desiring to be heard on the proposed plan may address the Council. Further information regarding the plan will be available at the office of the City Manager after October 11, 1982. City Clerk WE Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Twenty -One IK FINANCING TRANSFER FROM FEDERAL LAND COMPANY TO BASIC PROPERTIES E. IR Financing Transfer from Federal Land Company to Basic Pro- perties for Yankee Office Building IV -- A preliminary resolution for industrial revenue financing in the amount of $1,537,000 was approved at the July 6, 1982 City Council meeting for Federal Land Company to construct Yankee Square Office Buildings III and IV. As the City Council recalls, Yankee Square Office Building III is a 5,000 square foot building and Yankee Office Building IV is a 24,300 square foot office building. Since that meeting, Federal Land Company has negotiated with Basic Properties, a Minnesota partnership who are interested in purchasing the building. Basic Properties would like to continue pursuing commercial development revenue bonds in the amount of $1,192,000 for Yankee Square Office Building IV. The City Administrator raised some concerns: Will a new application and public hearing be required? 2. Financial information would be required on the new owners of Basic Properties. The approving attorney is Briggs & Morgan and the City Administrator has spoken several times with Michael Jeronimus regarding the ques- tion of a new public hearing. Apparently, there is no requirement that the City go through a new public hearing, realizing that the public hearing is basically whether the City should issue industrial revenue bond financing for an office building. The issue is not who the owner of the office building is for public hearing purposes. Who the owner is of the building does become an issue when it in- volves the financial background of the applicant; and, therefore, the City Administrator did request financial information on the applicants in addition a review and letter from Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. A copy of the financial information on the new owners is enclosed without a page number in your packets. A letter from Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc., is expected to arrive prior to the meeting on Tuesday. For additional information that explains the transaction, refer to a letter that was requested from Mr. Jeronimus by the City Administrator on pages 9 Z through ouncAgain, this type of a transaction is a first�r the City il, and if there are any questions or concerns that anyone has, please contact the City Administrator and additional research will be provided prior to the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny a trans- fer of the industrial revenue financing preliminary resolution approval from Federal Land Company to Basic Properties for the Yankee Square Office IV project. C..L.. W. B.... LAW OFFICES 13 RIGGS AND MORDANT PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIA'f1ON 2e00 FIRST NATIONAL DANK BUILDING SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Sf,101 2452 IDS CENTER MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 55402 (612) 291-1215 September 15, 1982 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 OF COVN.CL R,.. E. K. S.U.L H. M.... F.LN. N. G.s REPLY TO Minneapolis Re: City of Eagan - $1,192,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Basic Properties Project) Dear Mr. Hedges: We have been advised by Basic Properties, a Minnesota partner- ship, that it has been negotiating with Federal Land Company to assume the developmental responsibilities for a portion of a Federal Land Company project which the City approved for industrial revenue bond financing in the amount of $1,537,000 by a preliminary resolu- tion adopted July 6, 1982 (the "Preliminary Resolution"). As you will recall, the Federal Land Company project consisted of the acquisition and construction in the City of two office buildings, one of approximately 24,300 square feet, and the other approximately 5,000 square feet. Basic Properties would like to develop the 24,300 square foot office building. Federal Land Company has advised that it wishes to terminate its request for industrial development revenue financing for the 5,000 square foot office building. To secure financing for the 24,300 square foot building, Basic Properties hopes to assume the position of Federal Land Company under the Preliminary Resolution as the approved party for industrial development revenue bond financing in the amount of $1,192,000, the 9Z BRIGGS AND MORGAN Mr. Thomas L. Hedges Page Two September 15, 1982 cost of the 24,300 square foot office building. If the City agrees that Basic Properties may assume the position of Federal Land Company as the approved party for industrial development bond financing of $1,192,000, it will be necessary to adopt a resolu- tion confirming its approval. Our office will submit a resolution which we feel accomplishes this objective. Inasmuch as the 24,300 square foot office building was a portion of the project originally approved by the City after a public hearing duly held on July 6, 1982, a new preliminary hearing will not be necessary. If you have any questions or comments concerning this proposal please contact me. Very truly yours, Michael H. Jeronimus MHJ/slt cc: Federal Land Company ATTN: Martin Colon Yankee Square Office III, Suite 202 3460 Washington Drive Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Basic Properties ATTN: Roy Utne 4521 Highway 7 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 73 Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Page Twenty -Two EXTENSION OF TIME - LEXINGTON PLACE F. Extension of Time for Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place - The City has received a letter from Mr. Robert Carlson, representing Orrin Thompson Homes, requesting a one year extension on the pre- liminary plat approval for Lexington Place. A copy of that letter is enclosed on page C/ S for your review. The City has granted numerous extensionsof preliminary plats for the same reason Mr. Carlson is requesting an extension for Lexington Place. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To approve or deny an extension for the preliminary plat of Lexington Place. y4 OrrinThompson Homes A Division of U.S. Home Corporation 1712 HOPKINS CROSSROAD MINNETONKA, MINNESOTA 55343 544-7333 September 13, 1982 City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minn, 55122 Attn: Mr. Tom Hedges, City Administrator Dear Tom: Our Lexington Place plat received preliminary plat approval on April 20th of this year and to comply with ordinance, should be final plat approved on October 20, 1982. We respectfully request a one year extension until October 20, 1983 of final plat approval because of the severely depressed housing market. If at all possible, please place this extension request on the September 21st Council agenda. Sincerely, R. M. Carlson Division Vice President ORRIN THOMPSON HOMES, a Division of RMC:ps U. S. Home Corporation 9S V .. Y. _ Agenda Information Memo September 21, 1982 Pape Twenty -Three JOINT BURNSVILLE/EAGAN CABLE COMMISSION UPDATE A. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable TV Commission Update -- The last rc�,.lar meeting of the Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable TV Commission held on September 9, 1982 in the City of Eagan. The basic discus- sion was on the type of pricing schedule the commission wanted to include as a part of the RFP. A decision was not made at that meeting; however, a great deal of discussion regarding basic fee vs. a tiered fee schedule was discussed by all commission members. It is hopeful that the final decisions regarding the RFP can be made at the next meeting scheduled for September 23 and the com- mission can proceed with the request for proposal as soon as possi- ble. City Councilmember Smith and/or City Administrator Hedges will provide an update of the Joint Commission meeting. s/Thomas L. Hedges CityACministrator En '0Y ....spa r